That makes perfect sense and all from the safety and relative paranoia-free confines of the forbidden thread. All I’m saying is that in-game it could cause headaches due to the apparent contradiction of your voting for Chronos on Day One and then claiming to have protected him on Night One.
The truth would probably be okay and work out. But if you were in a situation with a scum counterclaim, the inconsistency of your story regarding Chronos would be a strong point against you.
The lesson here is that townies act contradictory.
Of course, on the other other hand, had the Doctor been alive last Night, the Scum might have decided not to go for the most obvious target, and killed someone else anyway.
And as an aside, while it’s common practice for the Doctor to self-protect (at least in the early game), it’s nearly as useful for them to protect an unknown. The chances of stopping the kill are slightly less (since there’s a chance you’ll protect a Scum, who was never under any risk), but on the other hand, if you protect someone else and do stop the kill, you have confirmation that that person is Town, and that’s worth a lot.
I can’t believe no one is voting for Prof. Pepperwinkle.
In addition to the fact that he stated he thought septimus was Town, then voting to lynch him. He’s now openly using ‘following others’ as his reasoning for voting both TexCat and septimus. That’s a pretty blatant scum move right there. He refuses to own his own vote. He votes the same way as others (people he ‘thinks’ are town) and expects that to be perfectly fine. If he were Town, he should be absolutely paranoid that the people he’s trusting are liars.
In my mind he’s scum voting the same way as people he KNOWS are town.
Get him! He’s scummy scum scum scum! (Unless I’m wrong. See?! Uninformed are super paranoid)
Personally, I’m amazed that anyone is voting for anyone other than TexCat right now. With the way Day 1 ended, we ought to be taking very seriously the possibility that Scum deliberately saved her from the lynch. Did that actually happen? We can’t be sure… yet. Lynching her would give a great deal of information on that. If she’s guilty, then we need to look closer at the Day 1 votes with that in mind, and if she’s innocent, then we know to drop that particular line of inquiry. Plus, of course, the case against her from yesterDay remains.
(and I know that I need to be careful about expressing my thoughts on other players, since I do have privileged information, but I don’t think it’s any real secret at this point to say that TexCat is not a mason).
As a person who’s gotten caught up in that kind of thing from time to time in the past, I both completely agree that it should be avoided and yet think it’s completely unavoidable. Ultimately, accusing someone of being Scum, if they are not, is essentially an accusation that they are playing poorly as Town. That can really sting. Not sure how to deal with it, I’m afraid.
I have not been paying very close attention this last Day but I’m not liking a lot of what is going on right now and I’m wondering if town is being fatally lethargic.
I agree, with the following rambling train-of-thought.
Town has a strong tendency to lock on a target for most of a Day cycle, and then start reconsidering/getting cold feet/engaging at the last moment. Scum do the exact same thing, except I think they’re far less likely to get cold feet at the end of the day. I think “coordinated last minute switches” to save scum buddies are actually rare, all things considered. Especially on Day 1, it’s very easy for town to suddenly start messing around because of vague worries about ties or scum strategies. With the caveat that I was only ever scum twice (in my first two games of Mafia), if I were scum I’d try to engineer a situation where a lynch looks like it’s saving another person I know to be town. Easier said than done, for sure; I wouldn’t be making the last minute switches myself. Scum did that to me and Gadarene (both town) in Askthepizzaguy’s Phere game by getting us tied, and then eventually getting a third player lynched in our place. Town mislynched me on Day 2, and Gad on Day 3, because they had to “solve” the WiFoM. Very little other scum-hunting was done during that time. (Of course, it turned out there wasn’t a scum team anyway. That game was… problematic.)
This is a long way of saying I’m starting to think the TexCat/septimus dilemma might be self-inflicted by town, and once again not much other scum hunting is done. I’d be looking at early voters who started with a vote on someone, and then didn’t move it while casting vague “suspicions” on other players. We’ve got a fair few players who fit that bill, but since I’m not playing, I’m not gonna look up who’s who.
Well, I really screwed myself there. I’m out of practice and out of my element it seems. I do take solace in noting that others have mentioned that this particular game is different then others before. Maybe I just picked the wrong game to restart my mafia time with.
I hope I can moderate the next game. I enjoy doing that more so sometimes than I do playing the game.
Maybe you guys can answer a few questions I have about running games here.
1.) Is it common practice to post what Abilities/Roles will be in the game at the beginning? I noticed Storyteller posted that there was a 1st, 2nd and 3rd Mason a Seer etc. in the beginning of the game. Is that just something that he does, or is that standard rules for Dope Mafias?
2.) Can I shorten the time frame for Days and Night periods?
3.) Can I do a majority rules for lynch, as opposed to highest number of Votes is lynched?
No, that’s uncommon. I don’t want to speak for Storyteller, but an open game is usually ideal for beginners. That’s what this game was all about, after all!
Of course! You’d be the moderator of that game, anything goes!
sure! It’s less common here, so expect a few players to not immediately grasp it, but you’re welcome to add any rules substitutions you like.
We’re not actually a monolithic mafia-playing entity. Don’t let your first game color your expectations of us.
I think the most difficult thing about being a newbie (or new to this board, perhaps especially if new to this board) is determining what tiny and arbitrary things will get you lynched. Our list is long (did I mention it is arbitrary?).
In my view, Dante G’s lynch was largely motivated by his statement about not tipping his hand or not committing to one side or the other (something along those lines). In the vacuum that is Day One, that type of slip is glaring. Personally I try to ignore them, but early in the game it’s hard to do so and with a new player its doubly hard since there is no basis to accept if it is a legit slip or just the way one talks. I’m surprised it took to day 2 to lynch him. Scum love a slip like that since they know Town won’t be able to let it go and it’s pretty much a blameless lynch.
I think this game will come down to the Seer. If the Seer is smart and has been investigating outside the pool of interest, then good data might be able to be had. But the Seer needs to survive to have at least 3 investigations before the Seer could possibly turn the tide.
A forced Seer claim would screw the town pretty badly. With 2 Town roles already dead (that doc lynch hurts real bad), any forced power role claim at this point is bad news. In that sense, I think lynching TexCat on Day 3 is a very safe bet. There’s suspicion there; weird Day 1; and they know TexCat is NOT the Seer or a Mason.
Sache, have you and I ever played together in a game before? You’ve co-moderated games I’ve played, and I’ve chatted with you in forbidden threads and post-game threads… but it just occurred to me that I don’t think you and I have ever actually played together.
You can, but be warned. What do you plan to do if no one has a majority at the end of the day? The plurality rule exists because Town will simply enforce a majority based on the plurality at the end of the day to ensure a lynch. Around these parts, no lynch is generally considered bad for town.
I don’t remember. It’s been a long time since I’ve played a game proper.
Also, one last question. I noticed that you guys usually post your votes in Blue and unvotes in Red. Now, on the all the games I used to play, we voted in bold black for votes or Unvotes. No color changes. In fact, color was only used in the moderators narratives. Any scum character name was in Red, all Town character names in Blue. Other colors used at times were orange or brown for Serial Killer Character and Green for any other group faction characters.
So I am unsure about changing my ways to suit your guys’ playstyle or just stick with what I’m used to and just layout the rules and notes ahead of time in the game thread.
It doesn’t really matter. We tend for the blue and red by custom and the fact that it is easier to scan for votes when doing a manual vote count. If you change the format, many people won’t get the memo and will default to tradition.
Dopers have a habit of bolding other posters’ names when talking to or about them. If you choose to use bold for votes and unvotes, be prepared for false positives when scanning the thread.
Hmm, well, maybe I can still use the blue and red in the narratives and have players make there votes underlined and bolded. Or I can just stick with what you guys are used to … Not sure yet. I’ve got time.
