# Unspoiled Colorless Mafia Discussion **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 4, 2009, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925 "2009-12-04T00:32:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2009, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/1 "2009-12-04T00:32:53Z")
No live players, please. PM me if you actually want spoilers. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/2 "2009-12-07T13:01:38Z")
not that anyone is reading this…but I’m completely amused by Freudian Slit’s issue. The point peeker was making was “Don’t bring up things that can’t be in the game” OK, granted peeker did it in a very confusing way. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/3 "2009-12-07T14:28:52Z")
I thought it was funny. 🙂 peeker: Don’t bring up stuff like Millers that’s not in the game or I VOTE YOU freudian: Oh yeah, we should totally kill the Miller. Hahahaha. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/4 "2009-12-07T17:56:37Z")
That reads to me like **Freudian** just being confused (which is, of course, a null tell), but I think that whole exchange reflects poorly on **peeker**. His usual strategy is something along the line of voting early, voting often to put pressure on folks, and then settling into a vote at the end of the day based on how people respond to the pressure. He had just said “Let’s lynch anyone who does so-and-so”, and then in the very next post someone does so-and-so. At that point, **peeker** being **peeker** , I would have expected him to immediately vote for **Freudian** (you know, like he just said he would). Add to that **peeker** ’s insistence that he’d never heard of the victim of a block being informed that they were blocked, when it not only happened in the last game, _it actually happened to him_. First Night, I blocked him, and he got a message to that effect and told everyone about it. Then again, people seem to have poor memory of specific game mechanics: I’ve seen plenty of folks say that they’ve never heard of the Scum requiring a strict majority to win, too, and for the games on this board, that actually seems to be a more common win condition than equal numbers. Oh, and it’s not clear which side **peeker** is taking on this one, but the Scum (or Serial Killer) would absolutely learn more than Town from a low-kill Night. If the Scum choose to kill Bob, and Bob doesn’t die, they can immediately rule out the possibility that they and the SK chose the same target. They’ll know that either their killer was blocked (and hence is under suspicion by the roleblocker, and hence they should use a different killer), or that the Doctor protected their target (which, early in the game, probably means that that person is themself the Doctor). Either way, it’s a valuable piece of information that Town wouldn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/5 "2009-12-07T23:46:53Z")
> [@](#): > > Win Condition: You win when the number of living Scum players is equal to or greater than the number of living players and the SK is dead. I haven’t read the entire thread, so maybe you’ve already corrected it, but that win condition is going to drag the game out at the end? Isn’t it better to stop the game once the Scum control the vote (after the SK is dead)? ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/6 "2009-12-07T23:48:41Z")
The wording on that sort of thing confuses me sometimes, but I know the _intent_ has been adjusted to Scum winning if they tie the number of Town left (or exceed). ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/7 "2009-12-08T00:17:56Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > I haven’t read the entire thread, so maybe you’ve already corrected it, but that win condition is going to drag the game out at the end? Isn’t it better to stop the game once the Scum control the vote (after the SK is dead)? yeah, um, I did word that poorly. And I did so well in Disney. It should read: You win when the SK is dead and the number of living Scum players is equal to or greater than half of the number of living players. I’ll leave a message in the thread. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/8 "2009-12-08T00:28:37Z")
Who is it that always makes the point not to take things personally in these games? I think **Freudian** could use that advice. She also needs to realize that the comment about **peeker** ’s not voting her is acually a comment against **peeker** , not her. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/9 "2009-12-08T00:49:02Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Who is it that always makes the point not to take things personally in these games? I think **Freudian** could use that advice. > > She also needs to realize that the comment about **peeker** ’s not voting her is acually a comment against **peeker** , not her. Yes, when you’re wrapped up in it personally, it looks like Drain Bead is telling peeker that he should be voting for Freudian Slit. MHaye always has the no grudge speech. Didn’t it used to talk about taking things personally? ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/10 "2009-12-08T03:42:31Z")
hehehe Amrussel is a “Master Baiter” ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/11 "2009-12-08T03:55:56Z")
All this talk about scum secret messages is bizarre. Town usually lynches a Townie the first Day anyway, without any particular Scum help. What message could possibly be so urgent that it can’t wait for Night? Now, it’s conceivable that the first Night, Scum could set up some sort of code to be used during the Day if need be, but if they’re clever about it, they could make it something that Town would have no chance of accidentally noticing, so it’s not worth worrying about secret messages on following Days, either. ---
**Author:** ![Hoopy\_Frood](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hoopy_frood/32/8452_2.png) [@Hoopy\_Frood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hoopy_Frood)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/12 "2009-12-08T12:42:41Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Who is it that always makes the point not to take things personally in these games? I think **Freudian** could use that advice. > > She also needs to realize that the comment about **peeker** ’s not voting her is acually a comment against **peeker** , not her. But the comment is rather moot anyway since peeker never said he’d vote someone who mentioned miller. peeker simply said that should anyone claim miller, being that we know there isn’t a miller in the setup, that person should be lynched. It’s kind of obvious, really. I don’t know why peeker even mentioned it. But Freudian wasn’t paying attention to the setup so she misinterpreted peeker’s point and expounded in a way that’s inconsistent with the actual setup, and peeker rightly took her to task for it. So why has Drain Bead got in her head that peeker is being in any way inconsistent? And what was with her attack on amrussel? It was a ridiculous misinterpretation. And then pedescribe jumped on it? :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/13 "2009-12-08T13:46:06Z")
Yes, it would be a silly risk for scum to start day-talking strategy. Peeker’s initial vote on Ped was fine, as was Ped’s explanation that he was wondering whether the GodFather could be blocked from killing (when I first read the setup, I wrongly thought they couldn’t be). I do think Peeker’s churn approach is somewhat anti-town, especially in a large game, but he does make some decent content posts as well. The vig/town blocker strategy discussion is somewhat flawed, as there is little point running the numbers until we see what claims and lynch day 1 brings. Not seeing much yet. MentalGuy’s post #275 pings me somewhat. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/14 "2009-12-10T12:03:40Z")
I have no logical reason for this, but I really hope at least one of pedescribe or Freudian Slit is scum. It’ll mean I actually have a scumdar. ETA: And I wanted to have a record if I’m right. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/15 "2009-12-10T15:53:43Z")
Strange passage of play. If Ped is scum, claiming vig doesn’t achieve much, as the real vig could have just killed him tonight with little chance of interference. Would have been better to take a stab at outing the doc or cop. If Peeker is vig, he could have just killed Ped tonight. Most likely explanation is that Ped is scum and Peeker believes that outing himself is worth it to prevent a probable mis-lynch. It’s debateable, town shouldn’t be scared of lynching, as it generates info - the biggest risk is outing the doc or cop. Neither Ped nor Peeker can be the SK, unless they are suicidal. I don’t understand why people are worrying about it, there is no chance they would be able to get to the end of the game without being counter-claimed. Zeriel’s suggestion to let them sort it out won’t work, as the scum have a blocker and could just block the real vig. FS’ response to Ped’s initial claim looked like bussing to me, but could easily be poor town play, as FS doesn’t seem to be thinking through the game mechanics. FS’ last couple posts really don’t make any sense whatever her alignment. > [@](#): > > We COULD get a power role, I’m just saying the likelihood that the person who’s on the chopping role being that power role? Seems like BS to me, frankly. Doesn’t she remember Peeker’s and jpei’s (genuine) claims on day 1 in the last game? Wish I was playing tbh. Mods, if you need a sub could you let me know please? ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/16 "2009-12-10T16:27:59Z")
> [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > Wish I was playing tbh. Mods, if you need a sub could you let me know please? Thanks for the offer. I’ve already attempted to contact Ichini via PM. If I don’t get a response by about halfway through the Night phase, I will sub you in. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/17 "2009-12-10T16:34:34Z")
Thanks very much. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/18 "2009-12-10T20:34:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Neither Ped nor Peeker can be the SK, unless they are suicidal. Well I guess we have the answer to that one, now. Frankly, though, I’m a little disappointed: This means that there will be no real information in the final vote toDay, and I was hoping to run a blind test of my program. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/19 "2009-12-10T21:02:06Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Well I guess we have the answer to that one, now. Frankly, though, I’m a little disappointed: This means that there will be no real information in the final vote toDay, and I was hoping to run a blind test of my program. wouldn’t it make more sense to take the data from an already completed game for testing? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2009, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925/20 "2009-12-10T23:54:59Z")
Yeah, but first, I want to blind myself, and second, going through all the pages of a completed game to dig out the votes (and things like Detective claims and so on) would take friggin’ forever, but it’s not as much work to tally them as we go in a game I’m watching. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/unspoiled-colorless-mafia-discussion/519925.md?page=2)