Making a list isn’t a scum tell. Making a list without the requisite “Hi Opal!”? Now that’s a scum tell! 
**Opal ** is scum. :smack: Now why didn’t I see that.
Hmm. One thing that keeps me from voting amrussell right now is that I’m having a hard time seeing scum put themselves in the line of fire by coming out with a controversial, unpopular, and probably very bad idea. In the previous games I’ve played, everybody who did that sort of thing turned out to be town.
That, and while actually implementing amrussell’s ideas would be spectacularly bad for the town, talking about them may actually be good for the town, because I think we want to create as much uncertainty as possible about how we’ll react to a particular role claim. In other words, we shouldn’t automatically lynch anybody who claims Witch or Vicar, but it’s not a bad idea to have someone mention the possibility and put it out there, because it keeps scum off balance.
And I think I’ve just confused myself. Aughh!
Actually, I think Witch is the most likely false role claim. (Diomedes has quoted the relevant paragraphs). And do you mean Witchdoctor or Detective? Detectives can verify by naming a Wolf. If we force a true claim from a Witchdoctor, he can protect himself through enchantment. If he’s still attacked he survives and learns the identity of his attacker, which is quite powerful.
Well, I only played in Mafia V, but in that game there were many more town roles than scum roles. The balance seems very different here. And on Day One, there won’t be many inconsistencies to deal with.
This is a good point. But it does mean we may have a live scum where we could have had a dead one.
Rather than lynch, you want to reconsider. It’s exchanging certain death for a chance at life. There’s no risk to making the claim, so scum will.
Actually, I’ve been reading a lot lately about how, in certain circumstances, if all parties know that there are fixed and immutable consequences to making certain decisions, those decisions become vastly less likely. If the town makes it clear now that false role claims for the least verifiable roles (Witches and Vicar) will be non-starters, we shouldn’t need to deal with them. Forcing the scum to claim verifiable roles is good for the town; incentivising them to claim our best roles is bad.
However, it’s obviously clear to the scum now that this won’t happen. When we get a Gallows Claim, we’re going to start second-guessing ourselves.
Assume we follow your plan. Awesome, scum don’t false claim! But the corollary is that we lose the real role when they claim!!!
I mean Detective, since, although the alignment will be revealed 24 Hours* later, we won’t find out the role, which would have to be used to determine a Detectives validity, for 48 Hours*.
The Witchdoctor can’t bring himself back to life, since he’s already dead, so he can’t practice magic.
*Those are capital H hours.
Gahh, I’ll say everything I mean to in one post one of these days.
A Detective can’t just verify by naming a dead wolf. It’d be super easy for a wolf to tell everybody that a wolf just died in order to “confirm” your status. A Detective would have to verify by naming a role -other- than wolf or cabal; or one of each.
Very true. So true, in fact, that it would now make an excellent scum ploy, would it not?
<Waiter! Can I have a refill on this White Zin, please?>
While I’m still working through the thread, I think this is wrong.
Whe Witchdoctor enchants a player at Night. If the player gets killed that Night, he will come back to life the Dawn after next.
For example, if the WD self-enchants Night 1 and gets killed, he returns to life at the start of Day 3; at this time we would have Mod confirmation of his Side, but not his Role.
So if scum tries to kill a WD and he keeps coming back, they’ll know who he is but pretty much be unable to kill him. And everyone else would have some idea that it’s the WD.
The thing is, each player can only benefit once from the Witchdoctor’s protection. So if the WD is killed a second time, he’ll stay dead.
Witches play as a team, so I don’t expect any real Witches to be losing any close votes toDay. That aside, I frankly admit that this is a strategy that plays the odds. On this Day, I think the odds are in our favour. As the numbers change, we can reassess.
And you’re right, it will take time to verify a Detective, just as it would a Seer, or a Coroner, or to a lesser extent a Freemason. So what? How do we verify a Witch claim? Certainly not through other Witches.
Also, from Pleonast’s hints:
So if we string up the WD, and he claims, we let him go and he self protects. At worst, he comes back with the name of a scum, at which point we give him protection - at best, this deters them and he stays alive.
Further on preview: are you thinking of the same Detective I am, or do you mean Seer/Investigating Witch?
In fact, once a Player is saved by any Witchdoctor, he will no longer benefit from any Witchdoctor’s protection. And, to answer an earlier misunderstanding, a Witchdoctor protects a living Player, who if killed will then come back to life. (If a Witchdoctor protects someone and they are not killed, they may still be protected again.)
I with you on this one. amrussell is reading more like someone with a risky idea than as scum trying to bag a witch on Day One. YMMV. At least he’s here explaining himself and answering questions/criticisms.
My vote stays on the no-show for now.
[QUOTE=Hal Briston]
Very true. So true, in fact, that it would now make an excellent scum ploy, would it not?
Is this what you call WIFOM? It’s such an obvious scum ploy, so of course scum wouldn’t use it. Ah, but what if it’s a double bluff and the scum are using it because it’s just so obvious that no one would suspect them of using it! :smack:
I’m starting to like CatinaSuit’s reasons for voting Idle Thoughts, but I’ll need to go back and do some re-reading before I cast my vote. Which I will do tonight before I go to bed.
CURSE YOU NO EDIT RULE!!
Here’s what I meant to post:
Is this what you call WIFOM? It’s such an obvious scum ploy, so of course scum wouldn’t use it. Ah, but what if it’s a double bluff and the scum are using it because it’s just so obvious that no one would suspect them of using it! :smack:
I’m starting to like CatinaSuit’s reasons for voting Idle Thoughts, but I’ll need to go back and do some re-reading before I cast my vote. Which I will do tonight before I go to bed.
Okay, I’m mostly caught up, as I’ve been trying to read throughout the day between my work as I can. I’m not necessarily going to respond in chronological order to the posts, more or less where my brain is at the moment.
This is an important point, I think. The lynch lurkers sentiment is seldom more than a null tell. That is, it could be someone laying low because they don’t have much to say or are intimidated. It could be a power role laying low so they don’t draw attention. It could be scum laying low for the same reason. Or it could simply be that they haven’t had much access to the thread.
IMO, someone who deliberately doesn’t post is playing outside the spirit of the game; however, posting somewhat less than you probably normally would is within the spirit.
That said, for those that haven’t played with me before, I tend to be busy on weekends particularly. And when I do post, it will tend to be in spurts; that is, I’ll post half a dozen or more times over the course of a few hours then not again until the next day or whatever.
IOW, as it looks like a few have noted, my absence was likely (and in fact HAS been) because of a busier schedule than I’d hoped. That is, I think if people aren’t posting, the question shouldn’t be “Are they scum?” it should be “Are they busy?” Because, really, if you’re not posting, you’re not playing… so what’s the point?
I disagree with this. I would consider the Witch (along with the Free-mason) to be one of the safest claims, because the scum would be fools to make it (except in special circumstances). To demonstrate, I’ll run a couple scenarios
-
A witch is about to get lynched and claims. Well, we screwed up, but we can simply not lynch him and let him play chicken with the scum with the rest. If scum would be foolish to counter-claim, because they’d have to back it up with their night actions and investigation results which would reveal itself to be false or would expose a lot of the information they were hiding. Meanwhile, the real witch could easily get their information into the open. Anyway, IMO, the chances would be the scum would just be tossing his neck into the noose.
-
A scum is about to get lynched and claims. Chances are we won’t get a counter-claim because the role is probably too powerful to risk. So chances are, we’d let the scum go. However, we’d just be giving him rope with which to hang himself AND the witches wouldn’t need to waste an investigation and/or protection on him while they could try to find a way to reveal the falsehood of his claim and/or get him lynched.
IOW, why would scum claim something that would have a high degree of backfiring when there’s plenty of other roles that are a lot harder to verify and minimize backfiring?
I’m very much bothered by OAOW’s decision to lynch a Freemason, but even moreso by amrussell’s plan to lynch a Vicar.
Rysto’s post #371 also bugs me, as it comes across a bit as trying to squelch the discussion, which hasn’t been all that productive right now, true, but is certainly giving a couple of people extra shovels for their holes.
Oh, and I don’t have much hope that the “vote early and choose from the high votegetters” plan will work very well, as it’s not doing that great in the Firefly game.
Unvote MadTheSwine
Vote amrussell
This is not a comment on amrussell yet, as I’ll get to that, but I want to emphasize the point here. Townies are just as capable of coming up with a bad plan as scum are. That is, disagreement on strategy is not necessarily a scum tell; in fact, it’s essentially a null tell.
What IS important is the motivation behind the plan. It is easy for a well intentioned townie to miss some facts, or just have bad logic. For scum, he could also have a bad train of logic or bad facts, but he could also be motivated to do so deliberately, manipulate certain trains of logic, stretch to reach particular conclusions that, on the surface look good but are ultimately favorable (or, in some cases, less harmful) to the scum.
[Bolding Mine]
This was something that I think is important, but no one seemed to emphasize. That is, the Vicar doesn’t just get to play chicken; his advantage will grow each Night. That is, it’s not a 1/d chance of blocking a zombification, it’s an n/(d-z) chance, where n is the number of Days and d is the number of dead and z is the number of zombies.