In his first post, he says “I"m really at a loss who to block tonight. I could block Texcat again” then in the very next post he mentions suspicion of McGinty and OaOW. I guess I assumed he would be blocking one of the players he thinks are scum. In fact, I would think it was unusual if he suspected McGinty and OaOW and then blocked someone else. Unless he thought that there were three remaining scum (McGinty, OaOW, and TexCat) or that TexCat was a third party.
As I see it, there was no block on you, but rather a block of actions on Idle.
I imagine that any limited-use abilities would be wasted if used on someone I was protecting. On the other hand, those same abilities would be preserved if the ability-user himself was blocked.
Obviously, I have no means by which to convince you of that, and I’m not even 100% certain that this is how it works. But I can’t think of any other explanation right now.
Yeah, as I said, it’d be uncharitable to think it really was a deliberate nudge. For one thing, it came awfully late in the day. For another, it strikes me as rather ham-fisted if that was the true intention.
Always worth mentioning these things, though. Scum have been brought down by less.
Vote Texcat
My reasons, from strongest to weakest:
-
Twice it seems he’s been blocked, twice there have been no kills.
-
His role admits no cross-checking.
-
He’s behaved in roughly the same manner as I’d want to behave were I scum in this game: head down, avoid confrontation. (His reaction to being blocked the first time, for example, was cool, short, and matter-of-fact, with a half-joke to round it off: “I am vanilla. I did not try to do anything last night. And I succeeded in doing nothing quite well, thank you.”)
-
He was one of the people who pushed for me to use up my powers killing Cookie, which surely would have appealed to the mafia.
I can’t do much about being blocked or being vanilla, but…
That’s a real mischaracterization of my post:
I don’t think this was pushing you to use up your powers. I was bringing it up as a point of discussion, and I think I brought up more reasons against it than for it.
Fair enough. Pushing was too strong a word. It was more like nudging.
I am beginning to believe that I am being set up by a scummy brewha, perhaps with his scummy partner OAOW.
It’s odd how little actual blocking he has done. N1, he claims he was suspicious of peeker, but didn’t block him. N2, he claims he blocked OAOW, and OAOW claims he was blocked, but can’t confirm who blocked him. N3 was cancelled. N4 he failed to submit a block. N5 and N6, he claims he blocked me, a vanilla. I suspect he is not a role-blocker, and doesn’t want to be caught. I will note for the record that had he wanted to be confirmed, he could have blocked our coroner whose power is mostly going to waste these days with no deaths. This would have the added benefit of somewhat confirming Hal.
I suspect the scum are targeting a protected player, and using me as a scapegoat. I bet if someone had been killed last night, brewha would have claimed to have roleblocked OAOW or McGinty.
N2 he claims he blocked OAOW, but didn’t voice any suspicion of him in thread. In fact, I could find no mention of OAOW until this where he is leaning town:
and then the complete turnaround last night:[spoiler]
[/spoiler]
I am going to repeat my last vote of brewha:
And to put my finger on my suspicions:
I never think about whether I am playing a “scummy” game or not, unless I am scum. As a vanilla town, I think about whether I am playing a good game or not. Nor do I have to point out the honesty of my answers:
vote: brewha
Looks like I got some splaining to do. And I need to do it quick, so I apologize if I leave anything out.
Last Night, I cooked up a plan. I had a sneaking suspicion that Hal could be scum. His power of telling whether or not the dead were killed by deadite or non deadite could a pro town power or it could simply be deadite common knowledge.
I assumed that last Night, Hal would investigate a death if he were town. So, last night I blocked him - not Texcat. Of course, I didn’t want to admit that I’d blocked him so I could set my trap.
Today, I’d ask him if he had gotten any new kill results. If he had, I’d know he’s scum since he would be lying. If he’d said that he’d been blocked, the only way he’d know that is if he actually tried to use his power.
However, there is one teeny tiny glaring flaw to my idea. One that I didn’t realize til my recent re-read. Hal has already said that his is a day power. Which means my night block was once again worthless. Well, unless of course, Hal is scum and tried to kill last night. He does seem uncharacteristically quiet for a game like this - but that’s the only real scum tell I have on him.
Oh and fearing that when this post came out I’d be called for backpedaling, I snuck a little breadcrumb in the post where I’d lied. Sorry Hal, I couldn’t think of any other way to do it but to add an unnecessary Baa Baa.
I figured it was a win/win. If Hal were scum, I could catch him in a lie and it may very well be game over. If he were town, he could at least verify that I had indeed blocked him. I really didn’t want to risk blocking McGinty or OAOW since they may be town, and doing so would have a very anti town outcome. And, if we can believe that there is no more PFKs, Hal’s power has pretty much worthless now anyway.
More to follow regarding Texcat’s analysis on me, but I really don’t have time tonight. I’ll get to it in the morning.
HA HA HA. I missed this part on my first read through your post. Great minds apparently think alike - even if the thoughts are really ill conceived.
This is just way too odd. If you wanted to confirm yourself, brewha, you could have co-ordinated the block with Hal. Hal has no one to investigate, but he could have investigated a known death if you had co-ordinated with him. The lack of co-ordination definitely looks suspicious to me. I suspect you again of claiming to block someone who wasn’t doing anything. The only reason not to talk to Hal, would be because you were suspicious of him. But I don’t remember you voicing suspicions of him before.
Not to mention the lying about blocking me. I still subscibe to lynch all liars.
Oh yeah, I really want to hear what OaOW and MrsMcGinty did Last Night.
I was using my coroner contact on Cookies, to find out what the deal was there
Interesting no?
On the brewha thing. I can see where what he just tried to pull is odd as hell, but I know I was blocked, and no one else has claimed that ability so I have to believe brewha is a RB. We already killed one scum RB, so I am leaning town on brewha.
Are you skimming or something? How could I have possibly coordinated a night time block of Hal’s day time power?
Did you read my plan at all? I had hoped to either catch Hal in a lie - if he were scum or confirm him if he were town. Had I coordinated with him, and explained my plans, what would that had done.
Let’s pretend that his was a night power - which it is not - and I had coordinated with him.
A scum hal, who had no powers just scum knowledge, would have come back and said, yup, he blocked me. Consider me town. A town Hal, who had powers, would have said, yup he blocked me, consider me town. How does that help?
As for your case against me, it’s just the same one you had before. Your post is pretty entertaining. You express your amazement for how little I’ve blocked, then you quote your previous post on how you express your amazement on how little I’ve blocked. Yes, I get it. You are amazed.
The rest of your case basically boils down to me not playing like you would play and therefore I am scum. Well maybe I just suck at Mafia. Maybe you just suck at Mafia. But, just because I didn’t do what you would have done, does not make me scum.
Oh, and I’m really not that hell bent on confirming myself. I know I had said that I would like to use my power to do so if possible. But, I’m not sure how that got construed to mean that I absolutely had to confirm myself above everything else.
What I am trying to do is catch scum. A pro town night time role blocker seems to be a pretty worthless role. I dont’ know what to do with it to help the without the possibility of hurting the town. I thought my plan was a good one and a good use of my power. IF anyone has a better idea, I’m all ears.
Well, it looks like #3 is what got Stanislaus.
From that description, I can’t tell if Cookies could create more than one Spawn at a time. It sure seems like she should have been able to, based on her wincon, but it’s not explicitly stated. Also, the last sentence of #3 is confusing. Any idea what that means? Does it mean that any remaining Spawn that are out there will kill their hosts four days after they were implanted, even though Cookies is dead?
If so, the non-Cookies voters should be worried (and that looks like Nanook and Mrs. McGinty according to TexCat’s unofficial tally). #3 makes it sound as if anyone who was voting for her and had a spawn in them should be dead now. Since only Stanislaus died (and as an aside, I had to correct myself calling him Telcontar twice in this post–I have no idea why I get the two of them confused), either she only had one spawn out there (strange, given her wincon) or she had them in one or both of those two.
I set a trap on you.
I voted to lynch Cookies.
OAOW,
Can you use your powers only once? I remember Tom Scud asking about this, but I don’t remember your answer. Your PM does not indicate that you can use them only once, but your play seems to indicate it. IIRC, you’ve used all of them now. Does that make you essentially a vanilla now?
Uh, bufftabby needs more people in the game over on Idle. Sign up at the link below, folks:
OK, there’s something wrong with this, although at this point I don’t know if the wrongness is on the part of OAOW or storyteller.
Item 2 says that cookies had to create a spawn on Night One, and that that player would have indigestion the next Day. But nobody, not even stanislaus, reported indigestion on Day Two, and I can’t see any reason why a player would not have, unless either storyteller forgot to tell them or they somehow magically knew what indigestion meant (that they were now a Host and would have to Die).
Later in Item 2, it says “Should your Spawn’s Host be killed by any means, your Spawn will die, and the world at large will see evidence of its life and death. If this happens, your primary imperative – to reproduce – will again take over. You may choose another target and produce another Spawn on any Night following the death of a Host. Until you do, you may not kill.”
Now I read “If this happens,…[y]ou may choose another target and produce another Spawn on any Night following the Death of a Host” as an example of an exception proving a rule, if anybody remembers the Master’s column on this topic. That is to say, if a sign says “Parking permitted between 9AM and 2PM Mon-Fri,” it means that parking is not permitted any other time. If cookies could produce a Spawn on any Night following the Death of a Host, that should mean that she could not produce one any other time.
Yet the final statement: “Cookies would have won if she and the bearer(s) of her Spawn were a majority of those left alive.” strongly suggests that there could be more than one Spawn active at a given time.
Also, this activation business described in Item 3: “Remaining Spawn will take over theor hosts when reaching maturity, 4 Nights after implantation.” I’m not sure what Day toDay is, but I’m pretty sure that it is is Day 6 or 7. If stanislaus was implanted on Night One, he should have been fully Spawn yestereday, yet he pushed for Cookies’ lynch, plus the color showed the Spawn bursting out of his chest when he died. I don’t think Stanislaus was fully Spawn yesterDay.
What I’m driving at here is that this whole Cookies description is self-contradictory and very confusing. The fact that Stanislaus never reported indigestion is strange, especially when he did complain of indigestion in the color just prior to his death. So I’m wondering, is this description of Cookies’ powers real, or made up by OAOW? If it’s real (but confusing and somewhat inconsistent), then we need to take a serious look at Nanook and Total Lost, one or both of whom is now almost certainly active Spawn, because they seem to be the only ones who didn’t vote for Cookies to be lynched, if TexCat’s tally is to be believed (she herself Final Voted Cookies in post 2843).
Also, according to OAOW’s role claim in post 2612:
There was nothing in Wanderer’s post indicating how Cookies used her powers the Day she died. Again, I don’t know if this is Wanderer’s strangeness or storyteller’s.
The whole thing is rather suspicious.