Post by weemadarthur on Jun 16, 2016 3:56:01 GMT -8
It's fine. Defending yourself is natural.
Kristoffer is either attacking you because you seem like you're being coached (playing better than expected) or to bait your alleged partners. His arguments would apply much better to our noobs who have actually played Mafia before somewhere, and maybe about vanguard. He's being very inconsistent in treatment, possibly to see who picks up on it.
Post by weemadarthur on Jun 16, 2016 11:23:51 GMT -8
Yes. Let him go through the whole batch of people.
I need to contribute something meaningful. Should I call out Palmer for his bad reasoning, or go after someone less active like hobo? It's easier to attack Palmer because I don't need to make up questions to ask.
Post by weemadarthur on Jun 17, 2016 5:25:35 GMT -8
I'm glad to see a town vig claim. That was going to be one of my backup fakes. However, I don't think Freakinchair is necessarily the vig. He could be a mason (have a chat) with someone else and be covering for them so he becomes the night target. I don't want to bring up this possibility in the game thread. Could be Kristoffer I suppose. I made a collection post of everyone who used Beasts as a Mafia term and they're more suspect because it's hard not to accidentally drop information quietly.
I intend to stick with patches and claim to be anti recruitable if pushed too hard.
You should be ready to claim armorer. However it would be very difficult to pull off if you don't understand how it functions. Do you want me to give you a rundown?
Yeah, a run down on armorer would be nice. As for Chair, he's being a little too informative at this time. He's either playing a long gambit of leading town on lynches, or he's somehow protected (doctor?) and is being bait.
Post by weemadarthur on Jun 17, 2016 8:44:21 GMT -8
An armorer creates items that give protection to a player. I'm sure there are other terms for it. But this one was used in star wars so I'm familiar with it.
So, this would work with woman of pleasure. You give a vial of blood to another player on <night a>. Then they can use it on <night b>. Therefore, it's possible to claim that you gave an item to the person who gets night killed, because they can't come back and contradict you because dead players can't post.
An option would be to say that if you give out 3 items, you die. Due to the lore.
The item could be considered to go into an invisible inventory and get used automatically, or it could have a player trigger where they decide whether to use it each night. They are both ways to create the role. So either is plausible.
The protective item would give +1 protection to the holder. So if 2 people targeted them for -2 damage they would still die. If someone used a strong kill for -2 damage they would die. If someone uses a normal kill for -1 damage they live but the item is used up. If the item is voluntary use instead of auto use, then it would get used up even if the player wasn't hit.
All these options give you a reason to be seen moving at night. But if you claim to give an item to a living player who's not on your team, they can contradict you.
Or you can claim weak name cop, which is true - but really your power looks more like a lyncher because you have a single target. And you can't name your target, because it will probably just kill you.
These are just brainstorming ideas and I don't recommend claiming.
Post by weemadarthur on Jun 17, 2016 10:00:03 GMT -8
Also, just because you would give out an item, doesn't mean you would necessarily be told in your role how the item could be used. It's possible that you'd just get a comment on it protecting the recipient. If you have to claim and don't know the Mafia terminology, phrase it without any and let the townfolk tell you what you are.
If Freakinchair is really the vig, I could be a target. I could believe him making a claim on day two because he felt town needed to know there wasn't a trackable Mafia kill. We could consider having you do the kill and forego the hunt, in case I was roleblocked and will be again. But we'd probably target camjo for killing, and then if he's our recruit, we still wouldn't have a night kill, which would make me even more suspicious looking. Hmmm.
Post by weemadarthur on Jun 18, 2016 14:37:55 GMT -8
Listen, you troll, if I wanted to be constantly harangued by a cross eyed gremlin about what I'm doing and why I'm doing it, I'd call my ex-girlfriend. Last time I gave reasons for doing anything I almost found a noose around my neck, despite metric shit-tons of other players having ephemeral or totally non-existent game presence and bandwagoning aplenty, so this time around I'll just vote however I want and let the trusted sleuths do the sleuthing while we still operate on virtually nothing except lint and receipts. Your finger pointing histrionics are simply trite at this juncture and while we all (mostly) are moving on from the misguided indictment of yours truly, you still hang on desperately to me like a horsefly on dogshit because I called you out at daybreak and was slow to move off. If you really want an autograph that badly, you should speak up now, but otherwise: kindly crawl out of my ass, you healing church neophyte.
My my. Such strong words are usually a scumtell in my experience. On the other hand, you ARE a healing church neophyte. So it's not even an insult.
Post by weemadarthur on Jun 19, 2016 6:42:47 GMT -8
With just the two certain peeps, we should probably avoid sharing a vote at the end of the day. The connection would be a bit obvious among 22 players. You could bandwagon as long as it's not me or our probable partner. I have already established a willingness to go out on a limb and be alone in a vote so I don't expect to bandwagon.