Evil Dead Mafia II - Teaser and Sign-Ups [Game On!]

[Oy]

Hal, is your detection between Scum and non-Scum, or Demon and non-Demon?

[Oy]

Upon going back, I find that you know Scum-directed death from non-Scum-directed death. Which means Cookies is a third party.

[TexCat]

Hal Briston, did you investigate any deaths last night?

I have been looking at the deaths so far…
Night 1:
Chipacabra – killed by Telecontar – per masons
MHaye – killed by deadite – per Hal

Night2:
Omi No Kami – killed by Cookies, per masons; killed by non-deadite, per Hal
Idle – martyr
Rysto – killed by deadite, per Hal
Astral – killed by Guiri/Tom Scud per Tom Scud

Night 4:
Ed – killed by Tom Scud per Tom Scud
NAF – ??? do we know anything about this?

Night 5:
None.

Night 1: 2 deaths by scum (could this be where Ed used his power?)
Night 2: 1 death by scum, 2 deaths by non-deadites(Tom & cookies), 1 martyr
Night 4: 1 death by ?, 1 death by Tom

I do wonder what Cookies has been doing. Only 1 death apparantly due to her. It certainly looks like she can’t kill every night, or has been investigating or doing something besides killing.

[Mrs_McGinty]

@Natlaw

Mrs. McGinty did you actually ask if you can Day kill and if yes whether it resolves at Dusk or immediately (like Romanic’s power)?

Yes, I just got the answer: “All powers resolve at the Dusk or Dawn, respectively, of the Day or Night on which they are used.”

[TexCat]

NETA: NVM I see now that Hal already reported NAF’s death due to a deadite.

I just went back to look at Hal’s claim. His PM says,

POWERS:

1. Once per Day, you may investigate the body of any player who has (previously) died by any means other than a lynch. At Dusk, you will be informed whether that player was killed by Scum. Any Scum-directed death will qualify; deaths occuring by any other means will not be distinguishable from one another, as all will be reported as simply “non-Scum.”

But all of his results have been killed by deadite/demon or not deadite/demon. Does that imply that all of the scum are deadites??

And I didn’t notice the first time that his list of power***s *** only contains 1 item.

[Hal_Briston]

@TexCat

Hal Briston, did you investigate any deaths last night?

Mine is a Day action, not a Night one.

@TexCat

NAF – ??? do we know anything about this?

We certainly do: NAF1138 was definitely killed by a Demon/Deadite.

[Hal_Briston]

@TexCat

But all of his results have been killed by deadite/demon or not deadite/demon. Does that imply that all of the scum are deadites??

That’s my assumption.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

The time of year is right. Just to be festive, I can dress up for the shooting.

[Drain_Bead]

So since Cookies is not a Deadite, I think McGinty should definitely kill her, and we should find someone else to lynch, with the knowledge that we take out McGinty if she doesn’t live up to her end of the bargain. She needs to say in the thread that she’s submitted Cookies as a DK target, and at that point we can all switch our votes. Sound like a plan?

[One_And_Only_Wanderers]

@Drain_Bead

So since Cookies is not a Deadite, I think McGinty should definitely kill her, and we should find someone else to lynch, with the knowledge that we take out McGinty if she doesn’t live up to her end of the bargain. She needs to say in the thread that she’s submitted Cookies as a DK target, and at that point we can all switch our votes. Sound like a plan?

OK by me assuming a final vote can be rescinded

[Stanislaus]

It can’t.

By my count, we’ve got 6 final votes. That means there are 11 votes left over and we need a 7-vote consensus to not end up lynching Cookies anyway.

[brewha]

And what? two days to do it? If we’re going to let McGinty take care of Cookies today, we really need to come to a consensus on who the next scummiest is.

By now, do we have all the night actions claimed? Based on what I know, I’d be inclined to lynch Texcat. All I really know for sure about last night is that I blocked her and that no one died. It is possible that our protectors protected the right roles and that my block was worthless, but that’s the only thing I got.

Though, I really would like to get McGinty confirmed and keep her as a protection role for our many outed power roles.

So, I propose that we string up Cookies today. Normal can now investigate Mcginty tonight now that he has the number. Someone need to protect Normal so we can get that info in the morning.

Until we can trust McGinty, I don’t trust him to shoot cookies. If we are being played and McGinty and Cookies are both anti town, I don’t want them living through another night.

We’ve got a bird in the hand - I say we squish it.

[Oy]

I agree with brewha. In fact, he said better what I’ve been saying all along.

[Stanislaus]

I think brewha is probably right about the timing now.

In terms of who comes out suspicious from the no-kill Night:

1. McG: Seen taking an aggressive action against a protected player. The most straightforward explanation for a no-kill Night.

2. TexCat: A claimed vanilla blocked on the same Night there were no kills. Superficially plausible, but the presence of protective roles confounds the issue. Certainly, there’s no conflict between TexCat being blocked and McG being the killer, for example.
   Another person to be suspicous of is Hal. He hasn’t given any information that Scum wouldn’t automatically have. (And just 'cos he was the first person to point it out doesn’t mean it’s not true).

[Hal_Briston]

brewha Johnson is right!

@Stanislaus

Another person to be suspicous of is Hal. He hasn’t given any information that Scum wouldn’t automatically have. (And just 'cos he was the first person to point it out doesn’t mean it’s not true).

Indeed, I’ve been surprised that I haven’t been rode a little harder about this.

Truth be told, I was kinda hoping to wake up dead this morning – the usefulness of my power is winding down, so I was wondering if scum (or perhaps 3rd party) were going to take a crack at me figuring I would be unprotected. But hey, I’ll certainly take “no death” over “my death”.

[Oy]

@Hal_Briston

brewha Johnson is right!

Rrbba!

[Mrs_McGinty]

@Stanislaus

McG: Seen taking an aggressive action against a protected player. The most straightforward explanation for a no-kill Night.

That’s not quite accurate. I was seen targeting Normal Phase, and taking an action that could be described as aggressive. The wording of OAOW’s result PM defines the action very precisely, in such a way that it fits with the action I actually took (ie. setting a trap for anybody trying to kill Normal Phase).

Now, if you want to assume that I actually tried to kill Normal Phase, then you have to account for both (a) the wording of OAOW’s result, and (b) my claimed ability fitting so perfectly with that result. Of course, under the circumstances, I’m bound to be a suspect, regardless of the exact wording. But it’s important to make sure the evidence is neither overstated or misrepresented.

Right now, the sensible decision is to finish Cookies immediately, giving me a chance to send my orders after seeing the result of the lynch (rather than before as I did last week). Thus…

**Final Vote Cookies **

[Natlaw]

@Mrs_McGinty

Now, if you want to assume that I actually tried to kill Normal Phase, then you have to account for both (a) the wording of OAOW’s result, and (b) my claimed ability fitting so perfectly with that result. Of course, under the circumstances, I’m bound to be a suspect, regardless of the exact wording. But it’s important to make sure the evidence is neither overstated or misrepresented.

Of course your claim fits perfectly since you claimed after those facts were put out in the open.
Probably a null tell is the fact that powers very similar to yours were part of a cover role in the original Evil Dead. Oy! link please?

@Mrs_McGinty

1A - To protect yourself or another by firing a warning shot at anyone who approaches your target. This will also prevent your target from being acted on by any other power. Will use one shell, even if no one actually targets your target.

I used up one shell trying to protect Idle on Night 2, when he was killed by his own ability. On the other nights, I set traps on Oy!, special ed, Normal Phase, and Normal Phase again last night. (Thus, I still have two shells remaining.)

I protected Idle Thoughts Night Two and used up a Talisman doing it. Night Three when the Night didn’t happen I didn’t lose a Talisman while I did target NAF.

As far as I know I was not prevented from taking an action Night Two:

@storyteller0910

You used one of your talismans in an effort to protect Idle Thoughts. Unfortunately, it could not save him from whatever caused his death. You have (X - 1) talismans remaining.

There is some abiguity if I would a lose a Talisman in an indirect block like McGinty claims, checking that out now. But my read of the rules is that McGinty is lying.
Another problem is that it doesn’t fit with a PFK Cookies since if MCGinty scum then scum had two kills both N1 and N2.

[Hal_Briston]

@Hal_Briston

…do we have any unknown deaths other than Chipacabra and Rysto?

And here’s where I show my inability to read once again. Right above that quote, I tell how I investigated Rysto’s death. Duh on me.

So then, since the masons got their reading on Chipacabra, are there any unknown deaths out there for me to look at toDay?

[Natlaw]

Also** Mrs McGinty** I like some more motivation for protecting special ed (N3) and Normal Phase (N4). Especially why switch from one to the other.

Another point is the ‘powers don’t make much sense as Day powers’ but now claiming to be able to Day kill.