Mafia V: The Cult of Sekham

The Game Room
2261

[QUOTE=sachertorte]
I’m not sure if the number of dead power roles supports your claim. We started with 6 power roles, a secret role, and some number of monks. With 9 dead how many power roles would be hit at random?

Really bad math, but a quick calculation: assume 3 monks (conservative estimate)
that’s 9 power roles against 30 players with 9 dead:
[badmath] 9*(9/30) = 81/30 = 2.7 [/badmath]
So 3 dead power roles seems to me to be within expectations.
[/QUOTE]

Again with the math, sigh. Please understand this is not a math game it is a people game. Math has little to no bearing.

What power roles have been discussed in depth?
What power roles are dead?
Is there a danger in not participating in the discussion? If so, does this force said power role to talk about their role?

The point is we don’t KNOW what got Hal Briston killed. It could have been luck. It also could have been the fact that his role was discussed in depth and he was forced to participate. Do you grant that as a possibility?

If so, does it not make sense that he may have left something that the cult picked up on? So why take this risk again?

Also please answer these:

What is the goal of the believers? How do they go about achieving this goal?
What is the goal of the cult? How do they go about achieving this goal?

2262

[QUOTE=Queuing]
Why would it imply that? Discussion itself is the problem. It forces the power role to discuss. Again you can say what you want, but the facts are completely different then what you say.

Do you deny there was a lot of discussion about the Oracle?
Do you deny the Oracle is dead?
Do you deny that Hal Briston was a part of the discussion?
Do you not think it is possible for scum to re-read the thread, looking for power role clues?

No, of course not because you are not an idiot. However what you do appear to be is someone who really wants all the power roles to be talked about.

What is the role of the believers? Do you deny that it is to find scum?

What is the role of the cult in this game? Do you deny that it is to kill believers/non-believers? Who are the most dangerous believers to scum? Power roles: the oracle, the priest, the apprentice, the masons, etc. How do scum go about finding this people? By making them talk, by having role discussion that they (being the power roles) MUST take part in or risk being branded a lurker and getting the believers after them.

So what is it you hope to gain here?
[/QUOTE]

I hope to put an end to the pointless witch-hunting that accompanies any strategy discussion. Hal was frankly a fool to participate in the Oracle discussion as heavily as he did. The Apprentice, talked about as much, remains unscathed.

The problem with all these theories is the idea that the scum can somehow magically pick the power role out of the townies who’re discussing it.

The second problem is your baseless contention that townies not in the role discussions are called out as lurkers–that expressly didn’t happen and hasn’t happened.

I don’t want to lose the chance to enact a kickass strategy simply because the idea for it is had by someone who doesn’t happen to be the power role in question. This example is not an example of a kickass strategy, but at the same time, what do we have to gain if the power roles don’t have any discussion cover–which is essentially what Diggit claims happened to Diggitv1, that not enough townies participated in the Crusader discussion and therefore he was easy to pick out. (it’s still a dumb theory, but it’s a counterexample).

Is everyone who discusses strategy scum? Do you think somehow that I’m more scummy than sach despite the fact that he’s the one discussing strategy, and I’m just defending his right to do it?

This last point is the kicker for me–how do you attack me for defending an offensive (to you) behavior without attacking the people actively performing the offending behavior?

2263

Role Claim:

Alright, folks, I’m a Monk, just a very opinionated one. If my remaining coreligionists wish to defend me, it’s their call. If it’s better that the monks remain hidden, so be it.

I lived for the waters, what matter to me if I die in them? When I’m dead, look at Queing, NAF1138, fluiddruid, and DiggitCamara[sub]2[/sub].

2264

Not going to bother quoting.

You still never said what you hope to gain besides some mythical kick ass strategy that hasn’t happened, and is most likely not going to happen. A lot of people have been threatened with votes for not participating, so what you say is simply not true. Your unwillingness to ever admit when you are wrong is very frustrating. I am attacking you because I already believe sachertorte to be a believer and the crumb from our Oracle. You do not have that behind you.

Go ahead and FOS me, but how about you make a case rather then whine and pingt fingers because I happen to disagree with you.

Plus you never answered any of the questions. How come?

That said I see a role claim is done by you. Why am I not surprised?

2265

No one has ever been in danger of dunking for nonparticipation–everyone in a race for the pool has been an active player thus far.

I’m FOSing you because I believe as passionately in open strategy discussion as you believe it’s a scum tell.

I ignored your questions because they weren’t relevant to the point–no one’s arguing that Hal exposed himself.

As for the role claim, at least it’s verifiable, should the Brethren wish it. I’ve got more going for me that way than the previous ones.

2266

I wasn’t clear on the second sentence–clearly, we’re going to have strategy discussion. People have been snarking about it since Day 1 and near-certain and former confirmed townies alike have participated.

You want to claim that every such discussion includes the involved power role AND try to minimize the number of participants? Who does THAT serve?

2267

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
Role Claim:

Alright, folks, I’m a Monk, just a very opinionated one. If my remaining coreligionists wish to defend me, it’s their call. If it’s better that the monks remain hidden, so be it.

I lived for the waters, what matter to me if I die in them? When I’m dead, look at Queing, NAF1138, fluiddruid, and DiggitCamara[sub]2[/sub].
[/QUOTE]

WHAT!

You’re kidding me right?

Grumble unvote Zeriel grumble.

Well my nose for power roles is still serving me well, I just can’t seem to differentiate scum roles from town roles. Crap.

Seriously Z I spent a good half a day working on collecting quotes from you.

MASONS! DO NOT CLAIM TO VERIFY HIS CLAIM! WE DONT’T NEED TO LOSE ANY MORE OF YOU!

bah!

2268

Joy, another role claim. At least this once can be confirmed.

If Zeriel is lying, one of the real Monks should say so ASAP. We will then lynch Zeriel. The real Monk will be outed, unfortunately, but trading a Cultist for a Monk is always worth it. If Zeriel is telling the truth, the real Monks should say nothing. We should believe Zeriel unless we hear otherwise from a Monk. If a Cultist were to pretend to be a real Monk in order to get Zeriel dunked, we’d obviously kill him/her Tomorrow after Zeriel is confirmed by death toDay.

–FCOD

2269

[QUOTE=Captain Klutz]
And a question to Pleonast: who have you been protecting each night?
[/QUOTE]

OK, I’m absolutely NOT arguing that discussion of role claims and power roles in general should be shut down, but this question bugs me. Pleonast has wisely chosen to ignore it, but it isn’t something that should have been asked. First of all, anything he chooses to say is unverifiable; secondly, the Martyr’s job is to try to get a bead on the other power roles and protect them, so of course he shouldn’t say whom he’s been protecting.

This would bother me less if it weren’t part of a pattern of suggesting strategies that have a strong potential to backfire on the town. On Day 1, Captain Klutz argued that the Apprentice should claim immediately after finding the Avatar, and then went on to suggest that after the role claim the town should dunk the Apprentice in order to avoid recruitment. I think this is a bad, bad idea – dunking a known townie power role should be the court of last resort, and CK doesn’t mention the far more useful possibility that the Priest or Disciple should protect the Apprentice against recruitment. In any case, I’m pretty sure the Oracle or Apprentice should never announce that the Avatar is the Avatar, because it makes it way too easy for scum to stay out of that lynch.

I’m also concerned about CK’s Day 3 vote for fluiddruid on the grounds that she cast a second vote for Malacandra on Day 2 with “weak justification” and CK thinks Mal is probably town. (Since we don’t, in fact, KNOW that Mal is anything of the sort, CK’s justification for this vote strikes me as far weaker than fluiddruid’s.) On Day 3, CK also expresses suspicions of Hockey Monkey for talking about what scum will and will not do on Day 1, on the grounds that she might be trying to give instructions to other scum. This line of argument seems liable to shut down any townie discussion of how the scum might be thinking, which strikes me as deeply counterproductive for the town.

I realize that someone disagreeing with me about strategy does not make them scum, but enough about CK’s posts bugs me that I’m comfortable voting Captain Klutz.

2270

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
Alright, folks, I’m a Monk, just a very opinionated one. If my remaining coreligionists wish to defend me, it’s their call. If it’s better that the monks remain hidden, so be it.
[/QUOTE]

Given that Monk is the nuttiest claim that scum could make, I’m inclined to believe this. Unless, of course, a raft of people in brown robes start voting for Zeriel. I don’t think anyone else should come out of the woodwork and vouch for you – it’ll be enough if they refrain from attacking you.

2271

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
I ignored your questions because they weren’t relevant to the point–no one’s arguing that Hal exposed himself.
[/QUOTE]

How convenient. They are to relevant. Hal may have exposed himself, he may not have. The fact that you want continued discussion about other power roles is so very scummy that I can’t believe you don’t see it. You don’t though, so whatever. I have had enough. We will just have to agree to disagree. I will vote for whomever continues to discuss the power roles in hopes of some grand plan when in reality it just exposes people. Take that however you want. As for FOSing me, how about coming up with an argument rather then basically admitting it was a OMGUS vote? I always find it odd that people say “look at who wanted me dead, they must be scum” It doesn’t necessarily follow and is stupid.

Regardless, Unvote Zeriel

2272

My biggest suspicion remains DiggitCamara
And seriously, Queuing, I’ve been pro-strategy-discussions since day one, I think don’t-discuss-strategy is a scum tell, and frankly other than this discussion you’re not really on my radar so I’ll cautiously withdraw my suspicion.

2273

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
Role Claim:

Alright, folks, I’m a Monk, just a very opinionated one. If my remaining coreligionists wish to defend me, it’s their call. If it’s better that the monks remain hidden, so be it.

I lived for the waters, what matter to me if I die in them? When I’m dead, look at Queing, NAF1138, fluiddruid, and DiggitCamara[sub]2[/sub].
[/QUOTE]

Well, I’ll obviously have to unvote Zeriel. Like everyone else has said: no monk should bother to verify his claim, if true. However, if false one of you should make a counter-claim.

And I’ll proceed to vote Kyrie. He’s the last one of the possible “Crusader-outers” on my list.

2274

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
My biggest suspicion remains DiggitCamara
And seriously, Queuing, I’ve been pro-strategy-discussions since day one, I think don’t-discuss-strategy is a scum tell, and frankly other than this discussion you’re not really on my radar so I’ll cautiously withdraw my suspicion.
[/QUOTE]

Ok, so I didn’t really give any credance to your suspicions before since I was positive you were scum. Wanna recap your suspicion of Diggit?

2275

Question: For the sake of argument, since I’m a confirmed Monk, is there any way it would be advantageous for me to confirm the total number of monks?

My thinking was that if the number of monks is unknown to town, if all of the monks get whacked that it’ll make it that much easier to catch scum trying to use this very defense when there’s no one alive to disprove it.

2276

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
Question: For the sake of argument, since I’m a confirmed Monk, is there any way it would be advantageous for me to confirm the total number of monks?

My thinking was that if the number of monks is unknown to town, if all of the monks get whacked that it’ll make it that much easier to catch scum trying to use this very defense when there’s no one alive to disprove it.
[/QUOTE]

NO! Not knowing how many monks are out there is one of the things that gives the town advantage over the scum. When there are only 2 monks left is when that sort of claim should be made. And only further down the road. We need the monks to stay alive as long as possible.

2277

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
Question: For the sake of argument, since I’m a confirmed Monk, is there any way it would be advantageous for me to confirm the total number of monks?

My thinking was that if the number of monks is unknown to town, if all of the monks get whacked that it’ll make it that much easier to catch scum trying to use this very defense when there’s no one alive to disprove it.
[/QUOTE]

The way we played it in M3, we simply never spoke up about it. However, in that game we never were in danger of being lynched (well… I was. But I chose not to disclose my role).

I don’t think the monks should disclose their number. It might be helpful if they claim their roles once there are only two left (once there are only two one of them might die without being able to verify the other’s identity).

2278

[QUOTE=Zeriel]
Question: For the sake of argument, since I’m a confirmed Monk, is there any way it would be advantageous for me to confirm the total number of monks?

My thinking was that if the number of monks is unknown to town, if all of the monks get whacked that it’ll make it that much easier to catch scum trying to use this very defense when there’s no one alive to disprove it.
[/QUOTE]

  1. You’re not confirmed in my eyes yet. It’s only been an hour since your claim and I’m sure a lot of people haven’t seen the thread yet.

  2. The only time a Monk should divulge the number of Monks is if there are only two left.

–FCOD

2279

Alright, gents. That’s more or less what I’d thought too.

Anyway, on to DiggitCamara.
My arguments are in post 2181 and subsequent posts, basically summarized as his continued attempts to paint me as more hostile/bloodthirsty than I am, combined with his unhealthy fixation on his previous self.

see also CaptainKlutz’s analysis in post 2119.

On preview: I’m a confirmed monk to ME. =P

2280

Ok, my idea was to take a look at Day 1. In particular two things; did anybody spur the discussion of the O/A on when it seemed to be dieing? Did anybody do “drive-by” posting in regards to the O/A? I did this because I firmly believed discussion of power roles is bad, very bad, and should be avoided. Believers should want to search for scum, it is scum who want to search for power roles.

Sachertorte first mentioned the idea in post 273
mtgman commented on it in post 275
NAF 276
Fretful 278
HNC in 280

It was all non-commital.

The next post was Zeriel in 325
HNC 332
Sach 339
Cookies 348
Story 350
sach 354
USC 365
Pasta 366
sach 382
FCOD 384
zeriel 385
Pleonast 387
sach 388
Klutz 390
Pleo 392
Que 393
FCOD 395
USC 396
USC 398
Sach 401
SCL 403
Zeriel 406
Sach 408
FCOD 409
Sach 410
Pleo 415
Sach 416
SCL 423
Scuba 426
Que 428
Sach 437
Diggit 439
Que 441
HNC 442
Sach 443
HNC 444
Cook 445
Pleo 447
Que 448
Sach 451
Mhaye 452
SCL 453
Sach 454
Sach 455
Diggit 456
Fret 457
Sach 458
Que 463
Diggit 465
Sach 466
Fret 467
Pasta 475
Idle 478
USC 479
Mal 485
Sach 488

Broken down by player:

Sach: 273-339-354-382-388-401-408-410-416-437-443-451-454-455-458-466-488 (17 posts)
Que: 393-428-441-448-463 (5)
HNC: 280-332-442-44 (4)
USC: 365-396-398-479 (4)
Pleo: 387-392-415-447 (4)
Fretful Porpentine: 278-457-467 (3)
Zeriel: 325-385-406 (3)
FCOD: 384-395-409 (3)
SCL: 403-423-453 (3)
Diggit: 439-456-465 (3)
Cookies: 348-445 (2)
Pasta: 366-475 (2)
NAF: 276 (1)
Mtgman: 275 (1)
Story: 350 (1)
Klutz: 390 (1)
Scuba: 426 (1)
Mhaye: 452 (1)
Idle: 478 (1)
Mal: 485 (1)

What does this mean? Beats the hell out of me, but I did it so here you go. One thing I noticed was at the beginning there seemed to not be much traction, and the Zeriel piped up about it. We all know my stated opinion on him, and his grand strategy idea that has never materialized. This is what I meant by him looking scummy however. Pre role claim however.

So where does that leave this idea? I guess the next thing to do is look at the single or 2 posters and see if they spurred on the discussion. I have done this and don’t see any obvious gaps, or anything.

In conclusion, this idea did not work out for me. Since I did it, here it is.