But I disagree with your conclusion regarding a Mason claim… if they claim now, it puts any remaining power roles at greater risk, by reducing the size of the pool the killers (vig and scum) may choose to go hunting in.
A mason claim would remove folks from your fishing pond, but not from the general list - I think we can trust a Mason in danger of being lynched to say so, and so in effect that pool is already smaller… we just don’t know it yet. Capiche?
So a smaller pool for your investigation is the only benefit I see to a mason claim at this time, offset by increased danger to still-hiding power roles… I don’t like it.
What I was trying to say is, isn’t it even better if we find a Scum than if we find more vanilla? That’s why I would suggest investigating those you are most suspicious of.
ouch. Well that sucks. I didn’t even notice until Rapier pointed it out.
The rest of my post was me trying to reason out that the remaining power roles are safer in the smaller pool because there is a better chance of a vig hitting a non-confirmable vanilla or a scum than the power role. And as long as there are fewer power roles than vanillas they stay safe and the scum are exposed. That’s why the mason claim.
Ed, I see where you are coming from, but I don’t think you are right. That’s what the lynches are for. We lynch the people we are suspicious of, we confirm the people who claim vanilla town (and cookies and TL) and then I get killed to nail down the conirmation. They we are working both sides toward the middle.
I don’t follow this at all, NAF. To my mind, a mass mason claim exposes power roles to scum just as much as it exposes scum to the rest of us, to the extent that unclaimed power roles are hiding in the same pool as scum are.
Yeah, I get that. I suppose I understand being wary of a false claim, I just wonder why I am being put through the wringer while, Diggit for example, isn’t. Not that I don’t believe Diggit, but I don’t understand why his claim is so much more believable than mine.
His claim isn’t more believable. I just don’t see it having the potential to do as much damage as yours if it’s false.
And, I also don’t see it as having the potential to do as much good if it’s true.
He should come back tomorrow with the name of a Deadite. As long as that Scum isn’t already dead, we should get a lynch out of it.
Thing Fish should have nothing else for us after that. And, depending on who else dies, I don’t see Diggit having the potential to mislead us as much.
I wouldn’t entirely expect that both you and Diggit will be alive in the morning anyway.
But still, I’m not discounting your claim. I’m just trying to be careful.
From my perspective there’s more objective evidence:
No one (well… maybe** Hockey Monkey**) can deny there were knocks in the morning
No one (but me) claimed to know anything about them
Using them to establish my powers (if I hadn’t anything to do with the knocks) would be risky at best, stupid at worst, because I couldn’t have known what they meant. And could be exposed as a fraud if I claimed to know about them
By the way: I’ll send my PM shortly. So: don’t expect me to change the contents after this post.
So, I’ve just done a review of Cookies, because I have a feeling we’re going to be discussing her for a while.
As far as the (pre-claim) case for her being scum goes, I think you can make three main points:
Early on Day One - very self-conscious about the weakness of her vote, mentioning it several times:
Note that she ultimately backs off this vote, which had failed to gain traction with others and had been openly questioned (of which more later).
Defending macey. Naturally, I’m a little ambivalent about this, as this charge applies to me too. For what’s it worth, there is obvious pro-scum motivation.
Pre-emptive defence against Hawk:
Which leads to this little gem of an exchange:
What strikes me about this (and I think **Rapier42 **mentioned it as well) is that **Cookies **is very quick on the defence. Specifically, as soon as **Hawk **mentioned that he was going to look over the macey lynch, **Cookies **immediately felt that she would be the target of that analysis. Furthermore, she moves quickly on to suggest that should **Hawk *find her suspicious, this will be strong evidence that he is scum - sort of a pre-emptive OMGUS. Again, for what it’s worth, it wasn’t until I read through Hawk’s first macey-analysis post that I realised I was going to be fingered. You can argue that this behaviour smacks of a guilty conscience - that **Cookies **knew **Hawk **would be coming after her because she knew she’d been acting scummy. This ties in with point 1 - getting her defence of her vote in early, because she was thinking about what made it look bad.
There are however, counters to each of these arguments:
It’s pro-town not to overstate your case - if you know your vote is weak, there’s no harm in saying so
Sometimes, people make mistakes
Cookies had been fitted up before, and realised quickly that she was in the frame.
There’s one other point, that I would say tends to argue for **Cookies **being town: **bufftabby **voted for her. Not once she’d come under suspicion but an early Day One vote, pre-macey, calling her out for her **JSexton **vote. This doesn’t mean **Cookies ***can’t *be scum. But, what is the scum motivation for voting for each other Day One? I can see a long-term goal of muddying voter records, but a big risk in that it doesn’t take much to get a Day One lynch and that first vote might have turned into a bandwagon. More likely, **bufftabby **saw an admitted weak vote and went for it.
So that’s the pre-claim case, as I see it. Nothing completely conclusive; but for the bufftabby vote, I’d lean scum. With it, I’m less convinced.
The claim raises its own questions. The big one for me is this: given that story published the two vanilla role-PMs, how come “Ash” is vanilla? If you had to give a name to a role that can vouch for one other player, it would be mason. But **pede **has explicitly said she isn’t one. Pending an answer to this, I’m leaning back to scum.
I’m moving on to a new post because I want to make a point about where we are in the game now, and I’m going to use my above post as an example:
Arguably, it was a complete waste of time.
We can’t vote for Cookies, because NAF is going to investigate her. And if we can’t vote for her, is it even worth discussing her? Surely, we should be looking elsewhere just now?
Well, there’s no point talking about NAF, because we’re not going to lynch him toDay either. We’re giving Diggit a chance to speak to Thing Fish, so we’re not talking about him. Those are the people at the centre of the game. YesterDay, we shouldn’t have talked about Chucara, who put herself at the centre of the game, because she was NAF’s target. What I’m getting at is, tip-toeing around power-roles is leading us to squelch conversation.
Not being able to talk about the most involved players, the alternative is to go through the quieter ones. The problem with this is that not having posted much, there’s little to go on. And if they’re not posting back, we won’t get any info.
There are two alternatives that I can see: we start voting for lurkers to drive participation and let NAF investigate the central characters. OR, NAF investigates the quiet posters and the town talk about the big issues.
I’m going to split the difference right now: add to the vote on Blam and hope that NAF will consider looking elsewhere for targets.
vote Blam
because, as pointed out upthread, his sporadic posting has been bandwagon voting and game theory, and because of the quieter posters, he’s already got a vote, giving NAF more options if he wants to change tactics.
It’s not just the lack of capitalization. It’s the entire style–the sentences about TL just sound different than the rest of the post–not to mention the randomness of the birthmark/new Ash thing.
Exactly. The way I see it, there are two major possibilities:
-Cookies is godfather, NAF is town, TL is town.
Here, cookies is trying to shake of the lynch while building the ultimate townie cred: a ‘confirm’ from an investigator and a confirmation of her role powers.
-Cookies is scum, NAF is scum, TL is town.
This is a slightly riskier play, but given we hit Scum day 1, night 1, and Hawk fingered NAF and cookies, they might be willing to try it. Here, NAF looks like an investigator while ‘clearing’ cookies–at night, the scum hit TL, also ‘confirming’ cookies. Even when NAF bites it on day 7, the scum think they’ll have enough numbers to pull it off.
Yes, cookies could be town, but by this point I’m convinced she isn’t.
Here’s the way I see it:
-You investigate cookies, we lynch…someone else–Questionable. Who is this mysterious ‘someone else’? What if we find a power role? What if we don’t find anyone, and screw up at the last minute? It could work, but it depends on who we find–and so far, I haven’t found anyone scummier than cookies.
-We lynch cookies, you investigate someone else–Net +. If cookies is town, we’ve confirmed 2 townies minus a vanilla town, slightly better than the one above. However, if she’s scum (likely), we’ve caught a scum and have a lead on one more…you [naf].
What?? NAF’s powers are day actions. If we vote cookies tomorrow, only an idiot or a scum (or an idiot scum) wouldn’t change his target. If he refuses, good! We have another lead! If he investigates someone else, good! We either have one dead scum and one more confirmed townie, or two confirmed townies and one dead vanilla.
We should not be backing down for a power role who hasn’t sent his PM yet. Do you want to be lead around by the nose by some Scum investigator who’s pulling the wool over our eyes? Even if you are town, NAF (and I grant there’s a good possibility), you should not be dictating the town lynch when all you have is the promise of a future investigation. That’s a collective effort, the only one we have.
Agreed. I will investigate someone else if it looks like you are going to lynch cookies. I am just trying to present a case as to why I think we should be looking in other areas. Even if Cookies is the Godfather she is fucked if she is scum. My powers aren’t hindered by that sort of thing since I detect lies not alignment.
I am not going to sit by toNight while town talks about doing something that I see as very short sighted. Come toMorrow I won’t be voting for Cookies but I also won’t try to talk anyone out of it anymore. I will be spending my time persuing the other suspicious folks in the game. That’s what Days are for.
I am not trying to lead town around by the nose here, but the case against Cookies isn’t particularly strong to begin with and we get a lot of benefit from that investigation with very little risk. If she is scum it can wait a Night while we do some other investigations.
This has got to be the most perplexing discussion in the history of mafia games I’ve missed a few real life days of and then come back to.
In all the talk about overanalysis of Cookie’s PM and capitalization thereof, we HAVE caught Cookies herself in a similar grammar slip when she was scum before.
NAF’s pseudo-masonry idea is good and it should continue (not the least of which because I’m a claimed vanilla and on the investigation list. =P), but at the same time, he needs to be responsive to town’s collective will in terms of who to lynch–I’m leaning toward Cookies myself, at this point.
There’s still a lot going on here and I’m gunshy about posting until I get my head back around the game, and I’m somewhat bemused to admit that it’s not going easily. =P
