# Mafia Reunion - Day Two **URL:** \ **Category:** Thread Games\ **Created:** [January 17, 2017, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425 "2017-01-17T22:20:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 58
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1141 "2017-01-23T05:30:20Z")
> [@ToeJam](#): > > 1. I do agree with your Breadcrumbs. That’s what I was expecting if that Cultist role was real- someone to be making “Leave us the hell alone or Luther or LUTHA” comments during the N0 or D1 especially because noone would be looking for it. So for that you get Cultist Credibility. > > However, I’m still paranoid because “Non-Hostile” is easy to change from “Hostile”. Especially because what’s the value in linking up your fellow cultists one by one? In a chain reaction? That sort of a mechanism reeks to me of there being powerups or needing to discover all of you guys to unlock an ability. Like if 4 of the 5 of you or 5 of the 5 of you connect, you guys become a scum faction or have an alt. win condition. > > That’s why I don’t trust you Cultists and 3rd parties. I’m always pro-Vigging you guys if there’s a mandatory Vig who doesn’t have a good read on people. > So it’s not your role that I worry about, it’s your win condition/powers. > -Because you could have let **Chrys die, but you stuck your neck out at the end of the Day to protect Chrys** , and then you started up the **RooshBus**. That plus you’re pro-Double Lynching… I don’t like how you’re playing trying to speed up the kills. > > I love you too, buddy, and the feeling is mutual. I want \*you \*dead. 😛 > You’re my Anti- **StoryTeller** , every Mafia game. A strong conniving player who I expect the best from. Including a fake Cultist Claim if you were scum to try to push it through. I respect your skills. But we always seem to end up in each others necks every Mafia game we’ve played. Hence my Anti- **Storyteller**. 🆒 In the bolded portion above, you say that Sach stuck their neck out to save Crys. But here… > [@sachertorte](#): > > My vote on brewha was terrible and not for good reasons. I’m not keeping my shitty vote on brewha just to save Crys. I also didn’t feel Crys was in danger anymore. I also, also really wanted ToeJam dead. Sach specifically says they didn’t think Crys was in danger anymore. But you didn’t comment on that… they seem contradictory to me… how do you interpret it? Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Meeko](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Meeko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meeko)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1142 "2017-01-23T05:39:46Z")
**I swear, I’m going to Mod a Mafia game, and just force everyone to claim on day one.** . **WOULDN’T THAT BE FUN.** ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1143 "2017-01-23T05:42:20Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > A suggestion to the vig toNight: I think a claimed cultist is a poor choice of target. We do want to find out more about them, but there is no rush. They are virtually certain not to be scum, and we do need to hit scum. > > That’s my $0.02. Use your best judgment. It probably won’t matter… brewha had the batswitch… I expect to not see a vig kill at Dawn. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Biotop](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biotop/32/321_2.png) [@Biotop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biotop)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1144 "2017-01-23T05:44:53Z")
Well, I was sort of hoping to put \*\*sachertorte \*\* on the spot, but he is apparently not here this evening. Here’s what I was going to ask him: Is it possible that the unexplained fire in the game text comes from a LUTHA member? \*\*crys75 \*\* posted a PM that describes her 3rd party role as non-hostile. Is there any reason to believe that is the case for all LUTHA? If the fire comes from a third party member that is not LUTHA, that would mean we’d have at least 6 third party players. Maybe this theoretical 6th person (an arsonist?) has a win condition of killing a certain number of players or killing certain roles or who knows what. But the thought occurred to me tonight that maybe there is a crazed member of the cult or a nutty cult leader. A cult leader might even already know who is in the cult. That player might be trying to hasten along the wincon game for LUTHA by killing SK or arson style. The other clueless cult members would not necessarily even need to know. Of course the “fire” in the text color could just be a red herring. Maybe no fire player exists. But if there _is_ a third party fire person on the loose, why couldn’t they be LUTHA? It also seems possible that the members of LUTHA, who seem to have unique role names, “Second Deacon” for example, might have different powers. So I think I may have been a tad hasty in waving off the problem of LUTHA. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1145 "2017-01-23T05:46:38Z")
> [@Crys75](#): > > Quite often 3rd parties are treated like scum. I mean are you trying to tell me that your big won’t take shots at us? I wish that sachertorte hadn’t claimed but they have so I will investigate them and disclose my results if I wake up tomorrow. I will leave the switch alone tonight as I am taking the suggestion I was given somewhere upthread > > Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk Yes… I honestly believe our vig will not be killing cultists. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![LightFoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e8cbc/32.png) [@LightFoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LightFoot)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1146 "2017-01-23T06:23:11Z")
> [@Biotop](#): > > [spoiler]Well, I was sort of hoping to put \*\*sachertorte \*\* on the spot, but he is apparently not here this evening. > > Here’s what I was going to ask him: > > Is it possible that the unexplained fire in the game text comes from a LUTHA member? \*\*crys75 \*\* posted a PM that describes her 3rd party role as non-hostile. Is there any reason to believe that is the case for all LUTHA? > > If the fire comes from a third party member that is not LUTHA, that would mean we’d have at least 6 third party players. Maybe this theoretical 6th person (an arsonist?) has a win condition of killing a certain number of players or killing certain roles or who knows what. > > But the thought occurred to me tonight that maybe there is a crazed member of the cult or a nutty cult leader. A cult leader might even already know who is in the cult. That player might be trying to hasten along the wincon game for LUTHA by killing SK or arson style. The other clueless cult members would not necessarily even need to know. > > Of course the “fire” in the text color could just be a red herring. Maybe no fire player exists. But if there _is_ a third party fire person on the loose, why couldn’t they be LUTHA? > > It also seems possible that the members of LUTHA, who seem to have unique role names, “Second Deacon” for example, might have different powers. > > So I think I may have been a tad hasty in waving off the problem of LUTHA. [/spoiler] Are\ we playing tHE SAME GAME? we have been told by 2 Mods that colour is just colour. weird double spoiler I checked the tags twice ---
**Author:** ![Biotop](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biotop/32/321_2.png) [@Biotop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biotop)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1147 "2017-01-23T06:28:43Z")
> [@LightFoot](#): > > [/spoiler] Are\ we playing tHE SAME GAME? we have been told by 2 Mods that colour is just colour. > weird double spoiler I checked the tags twice I thought they said color may be just color. Please point out where they said for sure to ignore color. I easily could have missed it. If so, sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1148 "2017-01-23T06:31:25Z")
> [@Hoopy\_Frood](#): > > Can you detail what made you come full circle from originally wanting to lynch Crys to now defending her? The original claim was very odd. It was unforced and described a role that did not seem to work properly: only being allowed to find a single fellow member looked like a very nasty and unnecessary limitation. To me it looked more like a fake role (yes, I think it quite likely that scum have been given fake third party roles). The weird linkage with brewha also did not make sense. As I said in my vote post, “I have doubts about Crys’s claim, the necessity for the claim and the strong desire to keep brewha alive.” So Crys’s reveal could also give some info on brewha. I confirmed this vote in post [712](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19937674&postcount=712). I think that is pretty clear as to why I was still happy with a **Crys** lynch. Now we have confirmation from **sachertorte** that the cult exists. We don’t yet know if whether they are hostile, but there is no rush to find out. They are almost certainly not scum, so I suggested that the vig shoot elsewhere. When one turns up dead we will then have more information on them. If there is no indication of hostile/non hostile then we are in a bit of a pickle. But if they are indeed non hostile then they can help town. ---
**Author:** ![LightFoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e8cbc/32.png) [@LightFoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LightFoot)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 7:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1149 "2017-01-23T07:12:52Z")
> [@Biotop](#): > > I thought they said color may be just color. Please point out where they said for sure to ignore color. I easily could have missed it. If so, sorry. > [@Mahaloth](#): > > \*\*Color is just color. Or if you prefer, Colour is just Colour. > \*\* and before that NAF said the same ---
**Author:** ![Biotop](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biotop/32/321_2.png) [@Biotop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biotop)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1150 "2017-01-23T07:19:43Z")
> [@LightFoot](#): > > and before that NAF said the same So I have been confused about fire and arsonists for two weeks — all for nothing? Wonderful. **sachertorte** : Never mind. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1151 "2017-01-23T08:10:19Z")
Thinking more about the cult, I think it is unlikely that they would be hostile. Consider: a group of 5 with a shared win condition that can steal the win. That is one heck of a burden for town to overcome. Killing off 14 scum is hard enough, now there are 5 cultists that need to be taken care of as well. Yes, they would also be a threat to scum, but scum would be happy to use the lynch to take them out. I’ll stick my neck out: I am going to regard the cult of LUTHA as non hostile, unless there is evidence to the contrary. Also, a suggestion to the cultists: **Crys** has already said that she will use her investigation on **sachertorte** toNight. This will confirm both of them. Since you can only find one member of your cult, I suggest that you keep your investigation in reserve and not look for anyone toNight. You may need it later for cross-confirmation purposes. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1152 "2017-01-23T08:23:21Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > Also, a suggestion to the cultists: **Crys** has already said that she will use her investigation on **sachertorte** toNight. This will confirm both of them. Since you can only find one member of your cult, I suggest that you keep your investigation in reserve and not look for anyone toNight. You may need it later for cross-confirmation purposes. (quoting myself) I got that a bit wrong: **sachertorte** confirmed himself with his breadcrumbs, and he has confirmed **Crys**. So they are already both confirmed (to me anyway), so **Crys** also does not need to use her investigation toNight. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 9:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1153 "2017-01-23T09:15:47Z")
> [@Biotop](#): > > So I have been confused about fire and arsonists for two weeks — all for nothing? Wonderful. > > **sachertorte** : Never mind. Not for NOTHING. But not for good reasons. ---
**Author:** ![BillMC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@BillMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BillMC)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1154 "2017-01-23T11:11:59Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > Thinking more about the cult, I think it is unlikely that they would be hostile. > > Consider: a group of 5 with a shared win condition that can steal the win. That is one heck of a burden for town to overcome. Killing off 14 scum is hard enough, now there are 5 cultists that need to be taken care of as well. Yes, they would also be a threat to scum, but scum would be happy to use the lynch to take them out. > > I’ll stick my neck out: I am going to regard the cult of LUTHA as non hostile, unless there is evidence to the contrary. > Also, a suggestion to the cultists: **Crys** has already said that she will use her investigation on **sachertorte** toNight. This will confirm both of them. Since you can only find one member of your cult, I suggest that you keep your investigation in reserve and not look for anyone toNight. You may need it later for cross-confirmation purposes. If the cult behaves as another scum team, then yes, the game would seem to be imbalanced with 19 scum. But - it’s not a team of 19, it’s 7,7,5 - so while it is still possible the cult are win stealers, their win condition couldn’t be materially less difficult than the published wincons for town or scum - otherwise it would be imbalanced. We do not know for certain the alignment and wincon of the cult - so we cannot say that crys investigating sach a) actually takes place b) actually gives the result they are publicaly stating. While I think in all likelihood they are being truthful, they are not “confirmed” until we have unequivocal evidence. Three mods? three scum teams? When we eventually get nearer the end game, if the wincon of the cult had not been reliabily established, then we will need to lynch one of them to fine out . ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1155 "2017-01-23T13:39:47Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > (quoting myself) > > I got that a bit wrong: **sachertorte** confirmed himself with his breadcrumbs, and he has confirmed **Crys**. So they are already both confirmed (to me anyway), so **Crys** also does not need to use her investigation toNight. Confirmed non-Townies? Until we know for certain that they’re non-hostile, that should buy them the best seat in the house to the new gallows opening, if you ask me. This is the perfect usage for the second lynch, in my book. (Although I’d really rather that we didn’t have the opportunity to use it) ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1156 "2017-01-23T14:05:26Z")
Ok, really for reals, I’m in this now. I’m trying to get caught up, but clearly there is a ton of data here. Could someone help me out and point to where **brewha** lied/came clean? ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1157 "2017-01-23T14:16:48Z")
Chronos ID’d the lie in post #538. Brewha fesses up shortly afterwards. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1158 "2017-01-23T14:28:38Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Here’s Who Posted for toDay (and toNight, so far). I still think this should be the basis of our votes. I’ll be keeping track for future reference, in any case. > > Who Posted? > Total Posts: 1,115 > User Name Posts > paulwhoisaghost 106 > snfaulkner 78 > raventhief 63 > Crys75 62 > LightFoot 61 > brewha 41 > Sunny Daze 37 > Drain Bead 36 > Chronos 32 > sachertorte 31 > jsgoddess 28 > Meeko 28 > GuiriEnEspaña 27 > Captain Klutz 27 > Thing Fish 27 > NAF1138 25 > TexCat 25 > Prof. Pepperwinkle 24 > AngeloftheNorth 23 > HookerChemical 22 > Mahaloth 21 > Johnny Bravo 20 > Hockey Monkey 20 > Biotop 19 > Inner Stickler 17 > Plumpudding 17 > ToeJam 17 > Scathach 16 > bufftabby 15 > Boozahol Squid, P.I. 14 > BillMC 12 > Koldanar 12 > ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 11 > Hoopy Frood 10 > Zeriel 10 > DiggitCamara 10 > nesta 9 > Total Lost 9 > Khameleon 8 > Hawkeyeop 7 > sinjin 7 > Lakai 5 > storyteller0910 5 > Pleonast 5 > MHaye 4 > Idle Thoughts 4 > Enderw24 2 > Nanook of the North Shore 2 > Sario 1 > Hal Briston 1 > Colby11 1 > Suburban Plankton 1 > Show Thread & Close Window > > I haven’t been able to be on much today, so I have a whole bunch of reading to do. Did you do a count for this on D1? I’d be curious if there’s anything we can learn from patterns. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1159 "2017-01-23T14:35:29Z")
[Countdown clock to the end of Night and beginning of Day 3.](https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/launch?iso=20170124T15&p0=77&font=cursive&csz=1) ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1160 "2017-01-23T15:01:17Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > (quoting myself) > > I got that a bit wrong: **sachertorte** confirmed himself with his breadcrumbs, and he has confirmed **Crys**. So they are already both confirmed (to me anyway), so **Crys** also does not need to use her investigation toNight. At least not on sachertorte. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425.md?page=57) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425.md?page=59)