Mafia: Conspiracy 2: The Cabal Strikes Back! [Game Over]

The Game Room
481

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I think my earlier unwillingness to discuss any secret role I may or may not have was a mistake now. Obviously people aren’t going to be willing to just let it go, so let me clear something up. I do not have a hidden secret power. My “slip” was not based on projecting something I have to everyone else, it was based on projecting from the last game to this one, combined with sloppy wording.
[/QUOTE]

so, you don’t have a secret power, but made a post saying that all roles had a secret power? OK you say you couldn’t access the rules, but your own role pm was surely available. This makes no sense. My vote stays

482

[QUOTE=Redwing]

I’m rather confused by your comments about role-fishing, you don’t like it that people are suspicious of role fishing, or you don’t like it that they are calling Cat on it? You acknowldge that he is role fishing, so I take that role fishing is ok with you?

[/quote]

Yeah, I don’t think I explained myself real well on that. My problem, chiefly, was with pedescribe, and it really exists independent of my opinion on “role-fishing” (which is, by the way, that everyone does it, Town and Scum, I have done it, as Town and Scum, and I see it as a null tell).

My problem, though, is that pedescribe voted for Cat, and in his explanation, averred that it was not because of Cat’s everybody-claim idea but rather because of Cat’s “role-fishing.” This makes it look like he’s building a pile of evidence. My point is that they are the same thing.

If I say: “I think everyone should wear a green shirt,” and then later say, “I think Nanook should wear a green shirt,” and then you vote for me, saying, “It’s not just that he thinks everyone should wear a green shirt, it’s that he tried to get Nanook to wear a green shirt,” then you are trying to suggest a multi-point case that really only has one point.

As far as “defending” and “snuggling” and so on, I say bah and piffle. Pointing out that the arguments against a player are bad arguments does not equate to defending that player. CatinaSuit could well be the scummiest scum who ever scummed; the case against him would still be silly, ill-thought-out, and - possibly - scummy.

483

I’d also like to draw some more attention to ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies post 187:

I was a little reluctant to bring it up, since I figured people would think it was an OMGUS, but I find it very strange that while essentially everybody posting on Night Zero at that point was talking setup and how it might be different or the same from the last game and if we have x will we have y, but she (she, right?) only called out two names. The substance of the post was answered and argued by several people, but I’m still wondering - why name names, and of all the names to name, why me and Dio? (Especially since I wasn’t talking about why somebody might not be present, which is the stated point of her suspicion, but rather what the powers were in the last game and that we would probably have all groups.)

On the other hand, somebody also made the comment way upthread that that’s Cookies’ aggressive playing style, which could certainly be the case. But the comment stood out to me - she called out two people of many, and I at least wasn’t even doing what she claimed was the suspicious action. Perhaps because she knows I’m not on her side?

484

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I think my earlier unwillingness to discuss any secret role I may or may not have was a mistake now. Obviously people aren’t going to be willing to just let it go, so let me clear something up. I do not have a hidden secret power. My “slip” was not based on projecting something I have to everyone else, it was based on projecting from the last game to this one, combined with sloppy wording.
[/QUOTE]

Hm.

I am trying to think of a way that a player who knows he has no secret powers would make the statement above, or even think it.

I am trying, but I am failing.

485

[QUOTE=Koldanar]
You can’t see a town motivation for defending people, even on day 1? Take a look at day one in the current Cecilvania. Sach attacked the case against OAOW repeatedly during the first day, as he was sure that the reasonings were weak.

[/QUOTE]

Especially on Day one. I want to test motivation for every action, and I do not see a town motivation for a defensive action. I do not, yet, see Story’s motivation for defending anyone. His post seemed far more defensive of Cat than critical of the reasoning against him. It’s more than likely that Story will respond with a clearer picture than he has presented.

486

Wait wait…**Nanook ** said all the roles have secret powers, but now claims to not have a secret power? Backpedal much?
Vote Nanook of the North Shore

487

[QUOTE=One And Only Wanderers]
so, you don’t have a secret power, but made a post saying that all roles had a secret power? OK you say you couldn’t access the rules, but your own role pm was surely available. This makes no sense. My vote stays
[/QUOTE]

I don’t get the logic behind these arguments. Forgive me OAOW for picking on you, you are just the most recent person to do it.

Ok, so Pleo said in the rules

and

Now I don’t know about you. But my reading of this makes it sound like the only side that will have multiple secret powers is the town. So why would anyone who WASN’T town possibly think that EVERYONE had a secret power? We were told by Pleo that people who could talk offboard were able to talk Night 0. Wouldn’t they have all found out who amongst them had a secret power? I suppose there is a slight possibility that some of the groups had each member having a secret power, but I consider this possilbility vanishingly small as each secret power you add increses the difficulty of balancing the game, and good balance is something I know is important to Pleo based on past discussions.

So…assuming that Nanook HAS a secret power AND that he tipped his hand…how does that make him more likely to be scum. MORE IMPORTANTLY, how does him not knowing that not everyone will necessarily have a secret power make him anything other than LESS likely to be part of a group that was able to talk on Night 0?

Someone tell me what I am missing?

488

[QUOTE=NAF1138]

So…assuming that Nanook HAS a secret power AND that he tipped his hand…how does that make him more likely to be scum.

[/quote]

Well, if Nanook has a secret power, he has now lied about it directly.

I think that’s the essence of the problem.

489

[QUOTE=NAF1138]
Someone tell me what I am missing?
[/QUOTE]

The undead scum faction do not know who each other are.

Think about it.

490

[QUOTE=Redwing]
I do not see, however, a town motivation for defending any one.
[/QUOTE]
Snipped.

I prefer to look at it less as **story **defending somebody, and more as **story ** defending the idea.

I just got back from physical therapy, where they put these electrode pads and ice my knee down for 15 minutes. They ask if I want a magazine, but I like the “me” time, so I use it to ponder. I thought good and hard about a mass role claim, and I’m starting to like it more and more.

For the purposes of this post, I’m going to assume all the roles are present. The Witches are powerful for two main reasons. They can talk amongst themselves, even when dead, which is a very powerful weapon. When three are alive, they can protect and investigate, or one of the two with two of them alive. Now, while we all agree that talking to each other is very powerful, I’m less inclined to think that the investigative or protective powers that takes three people to pull off is as powerful as one that takes only one to utilize. Four roles (Detective, Seer, Warlock, and Witch Doctor) fit this description.

I also really, really like pigeonholing scum into their fake role claim now. When I felt it was time for me to role claim in the last Conspiracy, as a Wolf, I went down the list checking off roles that wouldn’t make sense based on what had happened early in the game combined with my past actions. I think eliminating this tool for scum is a great idea.

There are downsides, of course, but I’m going to ask that we all vote. Majority (of players, not voters) rules.

I vote in favor of a mass claim.

Use indigo as your color, and I volunteer to tally the votes.

491

[QUOTE=dotchan]
On re-read, I do not like story’s snuggle of CIAS at all. Offering alternate explanations for CIAS’ behavior is one thing, saying “I suspect people who suspect you” is another.

[colorblue]vote storyteller[/color]
[/QUOTE]
On first read, I’m reminded why you always seem so scummy so early in the game. :stuck_out_tongue:

492

I am starting to really understand sach’s frustration in Cecilvania.

A bunch of you are ready and willing to lycnh me because I said everyone, when I meant to say most(the sloppy typing part), and because I posted from work where I couldn’t access the full rules and so went off the set up from the last game. There’s no backpedaling, there’s clarification.

493

I vote against a mass roleclaim

For reasons I have already stated.

494

[QUOTE=NAF1138]
I don’t get the logic behind these arguments. Forgive me OAOW for picking on you, you are just the most recent person to do it.

<Snip>
Now I don’t know about you. But my reading of this makes it sound like the only side that will have multiple secret powers is the town.
So…assuming that Nanook HAS a secret power AND that he tipped his hand…how does that make him more likely to be scum. MORE IMPORTANTLY, how does him not knowing that not everyone will necessarily have a secret power make him anything other than LESS likely to be part of a group that was able to talk on Night 0?

Someone tell me what I am missing?
[/QUOTE]

I think from the rules it is pretty clear that each team only has one power, no side has multiple secret powers
I kind of agree with your thinking that someone who could communicate and had a power assigned only to them would not make the assumption that everyone had a secret power.

495

[QUOTE=Zsofia]
I vote against a mass roleclaim

For reasons I have already stated.
[/QUOTE]

Ditto… for ditto

496

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
Well, if Nanook has a secret power, he has now lied about it directly.

I think that’s the essence of the problem.
[/QUOTE]

Well I suppose that’s what I get for running with an idea and not checking to make sure that the player I am standing up for isn’t going to make me look like an idiot before I post.

I still stand by the basic premise that the logic of the argument is flawed.

CIAS makes an interesting point about the undead though. I hadn’t thought of that.

497

I vote that thirty people voting on a mass claim that hasn’t a chance of carrying, given that we’d need substantially more than a majority to meaningfully enforce such a plan, and providing justifications for their vote, will generate an enormous amount of noise to no purpose.

498

[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
I vote that thirty people voting on a mass claim that hasn’t a chance of carrying, given that we’d need substantially more than a majority to meaningfully enforce such a plan, and providing justifications for their vote, will generate an enormous amount of noise to no purpose.
[/QUOTE]
It can be included in a post with content, just like I did.

And I think it would be quite nice to be able to hold up a list later with who was for and against the plan. It won’t be foolproof, of course, but it’d be nice to have another analytical tool.

499

I vote against a mass roleclaim.

500

Alright, maybe I was a bit rash. I had a visceral reaction…a bad one. And it doesn’t look like Cat has made much more of a splash, so
Unvote CatInASuit

But I FULLY OPPOSE a mass roleclaim

I do not get the Nanook bandwagon. At all. The best I can figure is you’re playing the odds. ::sigh:: If that’s what we have to do, than do it, but count me out.