Are we screwed?
Just out of curiosity - why didn’t you (and the other Mason) claim at the end there? I don’t see how it could possibly have hurt, and one never knows how it might have helped. Now, the last Mason is worthless; he or she can claim until blue in the face but there’s no reason to believe it.
Well, there are three players left in the game and one is a recruit. So we’re not screwed yet. If that recruit can be found today and killed off, town wins. If not, scum wins since a townie is killed off today and the recruit gets the free kill of the other at Night.
The way I see it, there was no way that Hal could have known if the other mason was the recruit or not at that point nor would the other one know if Hal was or not.
Well, I can’t speak for anyone else, but I was going for the Mason win the entire time.
For this night, the remaining scum had one chance left – kill a Mason. If vanilla town was killed, the Masons would win. If a Mason was killed, it’s anyone’s game.
Yes, if we both role-claimed, we could have set up the easy town win, but at least for my part, I was playing greedy. 
Now then, I’m only partially done reading through the thread, but I have a couple of etiquette questions:
1: How freely are we speaking here? Can I openly talk about who the other Mason is? Spoiler box? Or just keep my yap shut?
2: On a similar note, I’d been keeping a bit of a journal on the game since Day 6. Cool to post now, or wait until the end (obviously, the only unknown detail in there is the identity of the third Mason)?
And yes, Millit we’re screwed (assuming you mean the Masons). There is no longer any chance for a Mason win…town still has a shot, though.
Without giving anything away, it IS in our favor now, statistically speaking. If it comes to random.org, that’s a 2/3 chance, and if there’s no logic to follow, or bad logic, that’s 2/3 to us as well.
I’m absolutely baffled why the two Masons who were left didn’t claim before lynching tirial. Even without a lead (and I was pretty sure our recruit knew at least one of the Masons), there was still a 2/3 chance of getting one of them out of chance. I think it would have been worth the risk to claim and know for sure that you’ll have a trusted person the next day and reduce the game to essentially a coin flip. If either of the two non-masons thought that the two masons left are nesta and Cookies (like tirial did), then if either of them actually is and tries to claim, the other would be just as believable, putting the whole game in the hands of the third person. OTOH, if the remaining Mason claims and is believed, then the whole game rights in their hands to pick between the other two …wow.
I hope the town speed lynches someone. Then we can have closure.
Though I’m sure many of us are certain who the third Mason is, because it’s clear (or was clear) that not everyone in the game knows, it might be a good idea to keep discussion of that veiled. However, your journal might be neat to see if you can avoid specific references to the remaining mason. If not now, it’d still be nice to see it at the game’s completion.
Hmmm…I’ll just hold off. I could remove mention of the Mason’s name, but I’d also have to remove all mentions of every *non-*Mason’s name when I’m musing about who is scum, who is town, etc…
Now then…no, wait…this deserves its own post, 'cause there is some 'splaining to do…
…Crap! Never mind…there’s a bit of info I found in here that is blowing me away, but I can’t fully talk about it without naming the other Mason. Never mind.
Whoops. I didn’t realize the thread flipped a page. My terse comment was due to my thinking interest in the actual game had waned.
I’m surprised to read that Hal was playing for a mason only win from the start. Honestly, when I read the set up, I thought the only way a mason win could even be feasible would be if there were 4 or more masons from the start. A minimum of two masons are required for a mason only win. That’s not a whole lot of leeway.
That in this game the masons avoided needing to roleclaim and night kills until night 9 was a very improbable. I wonder why you (Hal) thought a mason win was feasible, especially after Millit was gone? Before Millit, I can see the reasoning, but after? not so much. And certainly not from the beginning of the game.
Bwuh? tirial banned? Looks like that was more of a flameout than I thought. Shame…he (she? My notes say “M”, but I notice a lot of people saying “her”) was extremely knowledgeable when it comes to gaming.
Anyway, something that I’ve been dying to ask for ages – hey Millit! Did you appreciate Post #529? 
It was voluntary and at her request, her title just needs to be changed by an Admin.
Well, ok…I guess I can’t say I was playing for a Mason win the entire time, but even in the beginning, it was a goal I set for myself.
There are a couple of times I mention in my journal how unlikely a Mason win would be, but I would keep hoping for it. I guess it was around Day 7 that I started actively playing for it. I was quite sure that SCL was town, but at that point…well, heck, let me paste in that journal entry. This is the morning after CaerieD was murdered:
Dawn, Day #7
Woohoo! We lost another townie! Errr…I man…damn! We lost another townie! No, wait…ahhh, it’s kinda tricky being semi-scummy. Well, that leaves us at three scum, eight townies. Still a long way to go. We have to have no more than two (non-Mason) townies when the last of the mob swings, and that’s assuming all three of us are there at the end. Not gonna be easy.
Well, let’s help speed things along, shall we? As I said yesterday, SCL is a perfect patsy – almost certainly town, but with just enough eau de scum to make her nicely lynchable.
My apology in Post #1821 is sincere, however. Just because I’m playing this in such a Machiavellian fashion doesn’t mean I relish lynching the innocent. <sigh>…Such is the cost of world domination.
Things were still a longshot after we lynched SCL, but the big break came the next morning. After the double-night-kill knocked two more townies out of it, I knew we had a very good shot at a Mason win.
Really, it comes down to scum picking us off at the perfect time. If they didn’t kill Millit when they did, the Masons would’ve won. And if they didn’t kill me or the other Mason last night, the Masons would’ve won.
Damn.
Ahhh, understood.
Well, tirial, if you ever happen across this, I hope you’d reconsider. It was good playing with you.
I think perhaps there were too many ‘new’ things in this game. Recruitment and wacky win conditions made for a slightly unstable game. Masons are supposed to be pro-town. I felt that recruitment neutralized mason effectiveness, but now it appears that the wacky win condition made the masons (Hal at least) a bit more anti-town. That’s gotta mess up game balance.
“Wacky” win conditions?
Wait 'til you get a load of the rules I’m planning to use. 
Wacky is not necessarily bad. But yeah, those win conditions turned out to be pretty wacky don’t you think?
I’m fine with wacky! But you have to admit that these additions created situations that are highly unconventional. Like the discussion we had last week about masons colluding with a mafia-mason to assure a mason win (Blaster Master didn’t like that one). Or Masons being anti-town (Hal surprised me with this one, but apparently it happened). Or town **needing **to lynch masons in order to win (Didn’t actually happen, but could have). I submit these situations, made possible by the win conditions are wacky.