Swords and Sorcery Mafia Without the Swords [Concluded]

[Zack]

GH why did you townread me so quickly this game?

I'm going to write it down in my notes for the next time I rand wolf.

[GeneralHankerchief]

GH why did you townread me so quickly this game?

I'm going to write it down in my notes for the next time I rand wolf.

Mostly tone, some other things that I'll get into postgame assuming I'm right.

[Jabbz]

Mid Day Vote Tally Accurate to post 840

Day two ends in


Visor - 3 (Renata, Winston Hughes, GHC)
Sooh - 2 (Atheotes, Snerk)
Atheotes - 1 (Montmorency)
Lewwyn - 1 (Visor)

Not voting (6) (Arakhor, Choxorn, Csargo, Kcaz, Lewwyn, Sooh)

Voting History

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Arakhor - No Vote

Atheotes - Sooh 773

Choxorn - No Vote

Csargo - No Vote

GeneralHankerchief - Visor 833

Kcaz - No Vote

Lewwyn - No Vote

Montmorency - Atheotes 616

Renata - Visor 629

Snerk - Sooh 777

Sooh - No Vote

Visor - Lewwyn 768

Winston Hughes - Visor 634

Please Note

Game Rules.

Please pay close attention as some of these rules are from where I usually host, which means they might not be what you are used to.

Breaking rules will result in penalties ranging from warnings to loss of abilities, being mod killed, or being replaced at the GM’s discretion.

• Voting is mandatory. Voting no lynch or abstain is not an option. Failure to vote is subject to penalties up to and including being mod killed. Failure to vote on two separate occasions will automatically initiate a modkill and a loss.

[Montmorency]

Arakhor, can you reveal now whom you watched last night?

though we cannot be sure at this point, the method of both the night kills seem to indicate that they were vigs.
Renata might have done the smart thing and used some kind of self protection or a redirector onto someone who was protected.

Well, I'll note one thing down: the vig spell is called "Incinerate", and the kills were accomplished with fireballs. We need to see what sort of different kill writeups appear. Perhaps this is just how direct lethal spells appear in the fluff.

What makes you think BSmith was the scum kill? i mean, other than the obvious lack of any other townie death.

No other reason.

no. i said some was looking out for you...like a redirection. it is also possible you did whatever Monty did.

She didn't commute then, commuting makes you immaterial to all roles, including roleblocks or other early effects.

If you're claiming a watch, you should see whoever targeted me. Assuming Al Sips was there to kill me, you should have seen someone else I think. Whoever the redirector was, if it was that I'd think, and then you would NOT see Al Sips. If it was a straight-up protection you should have seen the protector. This doesn't make sense.

I can think of one scenario where it maybe works, but it seems farfetched.

Al Sipsclar could have been affected from his end, or maybe he just wasn't planning on killing you that night.

Maybe he converted you.

Is this not exactly how Visor plays as town? He seems normal to me. I thought his argument was interesting at least...

Also, @Montmorency I Detected Corruption on someone and they were not corrupted, so unless I got redirected or some other nonsense it should be correct. I'm not gonna say who for obvious reasons unless you guys come after me with the pitchforks...

Thank you for your input.


I'm not lynching atheotes today. His claim is weird though, but more resilient than other fake claims in most cases.

Unvote: atheotes

I don't want to jump onto Visor unless there's no clear alternative.

Here is the claim list:

Monty: Commuted
Winston: Failed watch on Monty; can multicast
Arakhor: Watched someone
Snerk: Failed scan on Sooh; confirms existence of alignment spell
Zack: Scanned Winston non-corrupt
Lewwyn: Redirected from Choxorn to Sooh
Renata: No Self-protection or redirection used
Atheotes: Watched Renata
Csargo: Scan ("Detect Corruption") on GH, not corrupt
Sooh: Didn't hide


Could someone have targeted Choxorn to nullify powers used against him, thereafter redirected by Lewwyn onto Sooh - thus cancelling Snerk's scan?

It's also time to start thinking of these claimed results in terms of scum pairings.

[Arakhor]

I think it's super-unlikely that Zack and Montmorency are both mafia, given that it was Zack who started the attempted rush on Monty near the end of D1. Trying to turn a double-scum vote into a triple-scum vote seems foolish in the extreme, though of course it would make sense if Zack was scum and trying to implicate an innocent Monty. Given that the only two other votes on him were known scum, I think it rather unlikely that Monty is scum at all.

Zack then of course voted for Dp, when it might have been more sensible to vote for Al, given that if you're guaranteed to lose one scum, you want to lose the inactive one first. Chances are then that Zack is not scum either, but scum-Zack is not nearly as implausible as scum-Monty is.

(Granted, I've done implausible things before, but that doesn't make implausible things any more plausible simply because they do occasionally happen.)

[Sooh]

what did you do last night sooh?

I chose to protect someone.

[GeneralHankerchief]

I think it's super-unlikely that Zack and Montmorency are both mafia, given that it was Zack who started the attempted rush on Monty near the end of D1. Trying to turn a double-scum vote into a triple-scum vote seems foolish in the extreme, though of course it would make sense if Zack was scum and trying to implicate an innocent Monty. Given that the only two other votes on him were known scum, I think it rather unlikely that Monty is scum at all.

Zack then of course voted for Dp, when it might have been more sensible to vote for Al, given that if you're guaranteed to lose one scum, you want to lose the inactive one first. Chances are then that Zack is not scum either, but scum-Zack is not nearly as implausible as scum-Monty is.

(Granted, I've done implausible things before, but that doesn't make implausible things any more plausible simply because they do occasionally happen.)

I 100% agree with this. Don't want to examine either of them individually until we start getting into tinfoil-safe territory (f7 and beyond), refuse to consider them both together.

[Arakhor]

Arakhor, can you reveal now whom you watched last night?

No one's coming forward to claim that they targeted Zack, which is understandable, as I targeted him and he had no other visitors. Well, I was told that no one visited him, but since I did (based on the long-standing tradition that people tend to target either Zack or ATPG an awful lot), I presume Jabbz meant no one else did.

[Montmorency]

The following will continue to operate on the assumption of two remaining scum.

Permissive interpretation of claims so far:

Zack, Winston, Csargo, GH, are town.

Plus Renata and Monty for game.

Add Arakhor, Lewwyn, Choxorn as before.

Atheotes OK for now.

Snerk null.

That leaves Visor and Sooh.

Rule out Zack-Winston and Csargo-GH for m/m.

Rule out Snerk-Sooh and Atheotes-Renata m/m (weaker than above).

All scum being in Visor-Sooh-atheotes is too easy. I can't see alternative to lynching one of Sooh-Visor today, at least.

[Montmorency]

I chose to protect someone.

Whom? It's a cheap kind of claim, you have to admit.

[Sooh]

Whom? It's a cheap kind of claim, you have to admit.

It's also an understandable decision, don't you think? I spent D1 pretty much zoned out, and though I did have certain moments when I felt I might be on to something I pretty much entered the night not knowing how to feel about most things. The only thing I felt pretty certain about was one person's townieness, so I chose to use my action there, keeping them in the game. If you don't know who, go read N1. It should be pretty clear who the one person I town read was.

[Arakhor]

I wonder if "unique role" beside a spell means that no one else was offered that spell or if it simply means that it doesn't map to an existing mafia role.

[Zack]

Mostly tone, some other things that I'll get into postgame assuming I'm right.

lowers notebook

[Zack]

It's also an understandable decision, don't you think? I spent D1 pretty much zoned out, and though I did have certain moments when I felt I might be on to something I pretty much entered the night not knowing how to feel about most things. The only thing I felt pretty certain about was one person's townieness, so I chose to use my action there, keeping them in the game. If you don't know who, go read N1. It should be pretty clear who the one person I town read was.

just answer the quesetion imo

[Montmorency]

GJ on the lynch people. I'm in the process of coming out of a fever haze, so I'll reread the game and see where I'm at then. Renata looks good from EOD, but if she hasn't been murdered by like D4-5 (depending on how this works with deaths at night when there are spells and such things) I'll take a look back there. For me, for now, she's clear.

GH looks pretty bad for that EOD, at least pending a flip on Al sips. Also nicely pointed out that Al refused to self preserve, whoever said that.

Btw, I hate that the tally is alphabetical and doesn't list people in the order they voted.

You mention Renata as looking good.

I honestly really thought that GH tied it up. Especially with how he worded it. In any event, your vote is still looking good imo, because it made it impossible for Dp to survive D1. I don't think a mafioso would do that to another on D1. GH on the other hand. That's still a bit up in the air. I mean, it becomes wifom when you start thinking about it too much.

Renata's vote still looking good. GH still up in the air.

Are you claiming to have protected Renata? Atheotes contradicts this.

[Renata]

I have like... less than ten posts this game so far. It wouldn't break your back to go back and find out.

I was asking about your change on GH early on.



GJ on the lynch people. I'm in the process of coming out of a fever haze, so I'll reread the game and see where I'm at then. Renata looks good from EOD, but if she hasn't been murdered by like D4-5 (depending on how this works with deaths at night when there are spells and such things) I'll take a look back there. For me, for now, she's clear.

GH looks pretty bad for that EOD, at least pending a flip on Al sips. Also nicely pointed out that Al refused to self preserve, whoever said that.

Btw, I hate that the tally is alphabetical and doesn't list people in the order they voted.

Looks like Sooh had me clear and is suggesting she protected me. That's a direct contradiction between her and atheotes, shenanigans allowing.

[Renata]

Who has not claimed an action? Me, GH, Visor, anyone else?

[Montmorency]

Choxorn.

[Arakhor]

That would suggest that, barring shenanigans, either Atheotes or Sooh is lying. That's interesting, because currently Atheotes is one of the very few people still on my "possibly shady" list.

[Choxorn]

Adding my night action to the pile of claims: I vigged Al Sips. Like I've said before, I didn't like how he and Dp's reactions to being the top two wagons seemed very w/w.

I'm not sure why you're highlighting my post in passing. Sure it wasn't extremely detailed, but it's not as though I could be. I meant that since both wagons were corrupted, then I think it's likely that corrupted are likely in one of them. So looking at the votes and making judgments based on them is wifom type deal.

Because it was just kinda weird seeing a "Oh look what happened last night" type post more than a few posts into the day, and saying that it would change your opinions... well, duh, of course it would. Your post was just very meaningless and didn't say anything at all.

[Renata]

Good. Was pretty sure it was you. Slightly paranoid it wouldn't be and that someone coughVisorcough would try to take credit for something that BSmith actually did.

[Montmorency]

Sorry to bring this off-topic, but I just recalled something Pizza said in QT a couple of games back.

My town game is in the shitter, it really really is. There's no comparing it. My scum game is the New England Patriots and my town game is the London Sillynannies.

Timely.

[Renata]

We should trade scum games. That'd be fair, right?

[Zack]

The trick is in method acting.

[Winston Hughes]

If the player with the most votes has used a lynchproof spell, is the player in second place lynched?

[Zack]

If the player with the most votes has used a lynchproof spell, is the player in second place lynched?

asking for a friend?

[Montmorency]

Well, it compensates for vigs I guess. Unless everyone takes both lynchproof and vig (and bulletproof for good measure).

[Visor]

I am not going to claim what I did last night.

[Choxorn]

Good. Was pretty sure it was you. Slightly paranoid it wouldn't be and that someone coughVisorcough would try to take credit for something that BSmith actually did.

I was sort of hoping someone would try to claim it if I went long enough without mentioning it so I could call them out on it, but that obviously wasn't going to happen.

[Montmorency]

I am not going to claim what I did last night.

Could you at least say whether it had or on paper could have had impact on any of the other claimed actions?