GoT Mafia 66: Gold, Liars, Thieves, and killing Killers who Kill

[House Pommingham]

Swann: why do you think Vikary is an unlikely FM?

[House Clegane]

On second thought, I'll just post a chunk of my reread now, particularly since it's taking me forever to write. (I still haven't got to Thorne, and there's a lot to say about him.) I'd like to talk about Shawney:

Okay. I think Shawney made astute points about the use of guards. I will give him credit for redeeming himself from his initial spamathon. And I've got overall okay gut vibes from him.

I really do not like how the moment we discussed looking at the people on the lynch mob, he made an (IMO) weak case on someone off it.

To summarize his points on Waterman:

-Waterman thinks Thorne came off as more suspicious than Jordayne in their Day One kerfuffle.

-He didn't initially give a reason for voting Thorne. (Neither did players like Vyrwel and Thorne when they voted for Grandison.)

-Waterman criticized something specific Arryn wrote in an impressions post on Day One, then disagreed with Farman that Arryn writing an impressions post at all meant he was innocent, but said that "to be fair," it was more likely innocent behaviour. This was flip-flopping.

-He cast a serious vote on Belmore for joking about his gender.

I will grant him that the last one was a huge WTF (even if alcohol was really involved). But I can't shake off the feeling that this case is an attempt to direct attention away from the pool of players he's in. Pretty self-serving if Shawney isn't evil. So Shawney, what are your thoughts on the following players: Wagstaff, Belmore, Jordayne, Vikary, Vyrwel, Thorne, and Doggett?

It worries me that players on the lynch mob have made cases on players off it, while players off the lynch mob have made cases on those on it. If you're innocent, it shouldn't worry you if your actions are scrutinized by process of elimination.

One last thing. At a time when the lynch was a three-way tie between Thorne, Grandison, and Shawney, Shawney cast the swing vote on Grandison.

The main reason I made a case on Waterman is that he was my second major suspect from day 1, plus I'd found something that he'd done quite recently to be suspicious. I tend to base my suspicions on things I find suspicious rather than other stuff like mob distributions. I mean, people say we should look at the mob, as there may be 2 FMs there, which is plausible, but that still leaves one off of the mob who is equally isolated.

I'll readily admit that I swung the vote to Grandison. I've already detailed that I thought Thorne was not someone I would vote for, I was unlikely to vote for myself and Grandison was one of my top suspects. Not a massive swing though, moving from 2 votes to 3, which took him into the lead, but only a third of the way towards a lynch.

Someone else criticised people for discussing the money pooling plan. Which is silly. On thread conversation was on that topic for quite some time before people started to make cases. Anyone who was posting in any great volume at that point will tend to have a lot of posts discussing it.

Very quick OTOH thoughts:

Wagstaff + tend to agree with what they say

Belmore = has a lot of posts, but I can't remember what they said.

Jordayne = Not a fan of organised pooling, waiting to see what else they have to offer

Vikary =- Has made some good points, but I always have an uneasy feeling about forced abrasiveness/aggro

Vyrwel - Have they posted anything non-spammy?

Thorne = Felt good about their early contributions, but need to contribute more for me to keep up a good impression

Doggett - Don't like their position towards joining the mob

Toyne + tends to be reasonable

[House Velaryon]

If we settle on any of the players on the Grandison mob to lynch, I am going to vote for them because they are acting suspicious and we need the CF, the fact that they were on the Grandison mob will be a distant third reason.

Exactly what I feel.

[House Connington]

We're less than halfway through the day. Why are you worrying about which case is viable, now, and restricting your choices to players with one vote? It's not as if we're in danger of missing the lynch anytime soon. We still have time to discuss all options.

I wasn't worried, I was just reacting to Belmore. He (and maybe someone else) was saying we shouldn't restrict ourselves to players on the mob or off the mob but just look for suspicious behavior. I was thinking that not many people had actually put forth any cases so far - just random suspicions - so it was more to collect my thoughts. I went with people with votes because someone obviously felt strongly enough about them to back it with a vote. I remembered Drox's case, so I included it even though he didn't vote on it.

[House Connington]

Thorne = Felt good about their early contributions, but need to contribute more for me to keep up a good impression

What specifically made you feel good about Thorne, do you remember?

[House Connington]

Vikary suspects Wag mainly for being reasonable and because he didn't see a difference between the behavior of Drox and Arryn. I'm not feeling it. I don't think you tripped him up as much as you think you did with the Drox/Arryn comparison. Could he be a reasonable FM trying to blend in? Sure, but I'm not going to vote someone based on that alone. It might cause me to be suspicious and watch them very closely, but I won't act on it until something else convinces me.

If I were Vikary, and say Arryn posted what Vikary just did about Wagstaff, I might say that he changed his behavior to meet the expectations of others ... but I won't say that :P

[House Ashford]

Remove vote.

The cold light of day makes me realise I should do a bit more rereading before accusing people.

[House Connington]

Toyne - earlier you said you were re-reading Thorne and had some thoughts. Did you get any further on that?

[House Pommingham]

Toyne - earlier you said you were re-reading Thorne and had some thoughts. Did you get any further on that?

I got a little distracted, to be honest. :blush:

A summary, in point form:

-This has been repeated ad nauseum, but I thought his point about Jordayne being evil BECAUSE HE PUT HIMSELF IN AN FM'S SHOES was beyond moronic.

-I agree that Jordayne's reasons for the vote on him seemed forced.

-Is very abrasive, and has an OMGUS reaction to anyone suspicious of him (such as Arryn and Jordayne). Some of his posts make me want to gouge my eyes out, not so much because of what he says but how he says it.

-I am really not convinced by his reasons for lynching Grandison:

And why do you prefer me to Grandison? Personally I find it very suspicious that some players are trying to prevent a Grandison lynch by voting without even giving any reason. that makes me wanna lynch Grandison.

-I wish I had made a feeble attempt to push a Thorne lynch before the deadline. But I assumed that he was just a poor or inexperienced player, and therefore too "easy" a lynch target.

-For some reasons, lots of players have defended him, and even said they liked his contributions. Which makes me wonder if we're reading the same game. Also would be a very informative lynch, because there are lots of connections to him.

-Where the hell is he?

-He made this strange comment:

Can we stop with the gold calculation?

From what I understood from Grandison's death is that we may be able to discover some fake symping at the closing hours of day 1.

Makes me think he's not a n00b (or partnered with someone who isn't) because he knows what fake-symping is. Thorne, what did you mean by that?

-Like Farman said, why did you like his contributions so much, Shawney?

I have some comments about Vikary, but first I'll post what I have written on the other players:

I think Jordayne's justification for his Thorne vote was weak, but other than that, I've liked his posts. It's to Jordayne's credit that he trusted Wagstaff for disagreeing with his analysis. I also agree with Vikary that an FM probably wouldn't put himself out there the way he did with his money plan. Wagstaff has made very insightful points. That doesn't clear him, but I don't like to suspect players for no reason whatsoever. I'm not worrying about them for today unless they do something blatantly suspicious (or if they keep silent for much longer).

I have no real opinion on Belmore. Gut rumblings on him, but that's all.

Vyrwel and Doggett have barely participated. Seriously, guys, tell us what you're thinking. If you're not evil, then it's unfair not to give us anything to go on. What do you think of the lynch mob analysis idea? What do you think about the other players in that pool of nine? Neither came across all that well in the rush to lynch Grandison yesterday. I would gladly vote for Vyrwel or Doggett unless they post something of value.

[House Mooton]

Good morning!

I'm going to try and catch up with everything that has happened on day 2:

First, I agree with Arryn and Farman about the night kill. Ignoring it is silly. We don't have to go any further than last game to see a good example of FM killing players who suspected them because they suspected them. The night kill the FMs main weapon, and the decision of who to kill and why is always worth examining. This doesn't mean that Harclay's suspects are necessarily evil, but I do see it as a point against them, and would bring it up in a case.

I don't like Drox's case against Belmore. Drox's case just seems excessively contrived. I agree with the sentiment that he's trying too hard. He attempts to find a guilty clue in every single one of Belmore's posts, which I just think is excessive and over-stretching. Some of his guilty points are also plainly misrepresenting Belmore to me.

I didn't really like Waterman's vote on Belmore either because it just seemed lazy re-hashing of a point from yesterday which has been twisted different ways (Drox said he didn't suspect the gender slip but found the answer over-defensive...). Today he's come back and is offering something new somewhat apologetically, but since he was already called on this it's slightly eyebrow raising to me.

I find myself agreeing with Farman, Shawney and Swann quite a lot.

I don't particularly suspect Vikary, but I don't agree with his case against Wagstaff (whom I don't suspect much either).

Thorne has just dissapeared for the day, it seems. I want to hear more from him, because I'm currently not liking him at all.

I'm still liking Toyne.

I'll probably be doing a detailed re-read on Doggett, whom I feel deserves more attention.

On my pooling resources plan: I still think it's a good idea. How else do you plan to make use of the guards? Remember that as the game progresses the money balance will tip slightly to the FM's favor as they earn money both from robberies and from night kills. Pooling money forces the FM to contribute and can give us clues when people choose their prefered spender/healer. I'd at least like to hear people's alternative ideas if they don't like mine.

[House Velaryon]

Dogget: 8 posts, first three pure RP.

4th, asks Jordayne why he announced two other players trustworthy, disagrees with money pool idea, distrusts Jordayne.

5th, talks about previous money game, removes joking vote.

6th, doesn’t suspect Grandison, votes Jordayne.

7th, votes Grandison, “just to get the lynchâ€.

8th, Infamous “Just..you know...logging my disapproval with the current lynch choice. Making a point.â€

That’s all.

I wonder why he haven't gained any votes until now...

[House Mooton]

Hmmm... I said I was re-reading Doggett first!

Anyway, it was really quick, as he barely posts.

My main problem with Doggett is that he doesn't really give reasons for the things he says.

Both his vote for me and his defense of Grandison are completely insubstantiated. He says he doesn't like the case against Grandison because he's barely been here, but he had been relatively active (certainly when compared to him, as dead Grandison now has 12 posts compared to Doggett's 8).

I also didn't like Doggett's reaction to my plan:

Pooling our money today is a complete shot in the dark, and I'm not going to do it. Neither am I going to nominate trustworthy people publicly at this moment, but rest assured that, even on my private list, you're not among them

which I find slightly scummy (though this could be bias).

Or this post of his:

Just..you know...logging my disapproval with the current lynch choice. Making a point.

Where's my av gone off to, anyway?

where he criticizes the Grandi mob despite being on it. Kind of looks like getting ready to take credit when Grandi comes up innocent to me.

[House Mooton]

Okay, I'm going to make a Like and Dislike list.

Like: Arryn, Farman, Shawney, Swann, Toyne, Vikary, Wagstaff.

Dislike: Belmore, Doggett, Drox, Thorne, Vyrwel, Waterman.

I think I'd currently favor lynching one of Thorne, Drox or Waterman.

I'm going to do some actual work now, but will probably revisit the thread later on this morning.

[House Pommingham]

All right, I'm going to go to bed now. I've been debating for a while if I should come out and say this. So I'll just be vague:

Vikary, I was not all that impressed with your cases and reasoning for most of the game. You were never a top suspect, though. I thought that you were making outrageous accusations to provoke reactions and reveal connections, that no sane FM would put himself that much out there, and that if your cases weren't always the most convincing...well, you didn't know any better.

Now I'm not so sure. I can see your motives for doing what you're doing whether you're innocent or guilty. But it worries me that you've been attacking everyone and their mothers and pulling connections out of your ass. It's very sympish behaviour. That last post, in which you suddenly raised your level of discourse, still stretched the evidence a bit (such as with the Wagstaff-Arryn connection).

I will vote for Thorne for now. I'd switch to Vyrwel or Doggett. But I will be paying really, really close attention to what Vikary does from now on. Even if you don't want to explain your playstyle, I'd like to see a bit more refinement in your suspects.

[House Payne]

Hello in there, long morning post to come, since I quoted quite a lot of things on my way. I may split it if it's too long.

First, could we please get an update on Drox. He was 25 h without posting and should have been modkilled, could we know what the final decision is here before the end of the day (in game day)?

BTW: we don't get the alts of the killed players?

Now, on the night kill. There are many reasons Harclay could have been killed. I agree with Vikary that it makes it more likely that 2 FM are on the mob.

I agree with Swann that 1 mob is generally not enough for voting analysis, but I also agree with Vikary that the night kill makes it more likely that a few FM can be found on the mob.

Why would an FM do anything? Of course they want to deflect suspicion, though to be fair, Arryn has gone to an awful lot of effort and I'm inclined to agree that this makes him more likely to be innocent.

For the moment, I'm thinking Belmont, mainly for his/her evident willingness to lie about being (or not being) female; I'm not even sure if this is a crucial plot point, but for now it's the only clear evidence of dishonesty I've seen.

First, there is the clearing of Arryn based on a single post. I'm sorry dear but that absolutely doesn't clear Arryn, especially since this post came after Vikary jumped with fists and feet on Arryn. Besides, I really don't like his comment on Grandison and his comment that he hadn't seen that votes were piling on Grandison. Either he's lying, or he doesn't give a shit about the game, and both ways it's bad.

Second point is the vote. I see that upon being called on this Waterman blamed alcohol and night confusion and then removed his vote. Which I like even less than the original vote because yesterday Waterman made this post :

I don't think that's any more suspicious than, eg, claiming to be female when the accusations of queen-impregnating are being thrown around, then denying it later when it's convenient...

which shows that the gender change from Belmore apparently really did "bother" Waterman 10 hours before his vote. So unless Waterman has been constantly drunk all day (which would be rather ironical given his name), it doesn't give the impression that his vote solely came from drunkeness. As it is it looks like: Waterman made a rather innocuous comment on Belmore's claims to sex changes. Seeing that nobody comments negatively on it, he pursues the issue, and then when he's called on it, he removes his vote and tries to find justifications.

But maybe now that he's sober Waterman can give us more insightful comments.

I didn't want to place a vote in my first post based on quick impressions. I thought I would be back before the day ended, but that didn't happen.

Farman: I still don't like your absence of vote on Jordayne on day 1. If Jordayne already had 5 or6 I would have understood but he maybe had one. There are never full proof cases on day 1, and if you want people to take your cases seriously you need to vote. It could be poor play on your part, but it could be something more nefarious especially in light of the night kill.

On second thought, I'll just post a chunk of my reread now, particularly since it's taking me forever to write. (I still haven't got to Thorne, and there's a lot to say about him.) I'd like to talk about Shawney:

Okay. I think Shawney made astute points about the use of guards. I will give him credit for redeeming himself from his initial spamathon. And I've got overall okay gut vibes from him.

I really do not like how the moment we discussed looking at the people on the lynch mob, he made an (IMO) weak case on someone off it.

To summarize his points on Waterman:

-Waterman thinks Thorne came off as more suspicious than Jordayne in their Day One kerfuffle.

-He didn't initially give a reason for voting Thorne. (Neither did players like Vyrwel and Thorne when they voted for Grandison.)

-Waterman criticized something specific Arryn wrote in an impressions post on Day One, then disagreed with Farman that Arryn writing an impressions post at all meant he was innocent, but said that "to be fair," it was more likely innocent behaviour. This was flip-flopping.

-He cast a serious vote on Belmore for joking about his gender.

I will grant him that the last one was a huge WTF (even if alcohol was really involved). But I can't shake off the feeling that this case is an attempt to direct attention away from the pool of players he's in. Pretty self-serving if Shawney isn't evil. So Shawney, what are your thoughts on the following players: Wagstaff, Belmore, Jordayne, Vikary, Vyrwel, Thorne, and Doggett?

It worries me that players on the lynch mob have made cases on players off it, while players off the lynch mob have made cases on those on it. If you're innocent, it shouldn't worry you if your actions are scrutinized by process of elimination.

One last thing. At a time when the lynch was a three-way tie between Thorne, Grandison, and Shawney, Shawney cast the swing vote on Grandison.

The swing vote when there were 2 votes on each player and 9 needed for a lynch is a bit of a stretch.

I'll add Toyne to your list of people I want an opinion on. And I'll give mine on those (except Wagstaff who is the parangon of innocence as should be obvious :P):

At the moment, I'm not particularly suspicious of Belmore, but I admit it's mainly gut.

I'm shared on Jordayne: starting serious discussion was a good point; however discussing the use of gold strategy was not really hurtful for the FMs, and the discussion distracted us from the main question which was who to lynch. While Jordayne is not the only one to blame for this, I don't recall that he's made any attempt at stirring a discussion and he's pretty much disappeared when the focus came to this other side of the discussion. He says it's RL, and I won't question that, but I'd really like to get more input from Jordayne on his suspicions and such. I'll need to reread him. (I see he's posted more while I'm writing)

I also need to reread Vikary. He makes some good points, and I don't think he's being overly abrasive or aggressive. I like that he's looked at other people than Arryn (cause it bordered on tunnelvision) even though he still votes in relation with Arryn being guilty.

Vyrwel pisses me off. I mean, he barely posts, and when he does he doesn't give any substance, because no, saying I suspect X and Y without saying why isn't substance. Vyrwel hasn't felt any pressure yet, time to start on it a bit.

I didn't find Thorne all that suspicious yesterday, I'll need to reread him.

Dogget is very similar to Vyrwel, with in addition the Jordayne vote at the end to show that he voted Grandison against his heart. Dogget complained (IIRC) that the thread had been dead before he went to bed. Then why didn't he take advantage of the time to make a case on Jordayne if he suspected him. See, that's one of the other things that bother me about Jordayne. Farman made a simili-case but didn't vote and disappeared. Dogget voted for him when it was pretty useless and riskless.

As for Toyne, I don't really have suspicions of him right now, but I need to reread him too.

cut it in 2, it's way too long.

[House Payne]

Read through each of the players on the mob. The ones who look the worst to me are Vyrwel and Thorne.

Vyrwel

Reason for Vyrwel is pretty obvious, there's just no contribution there. He has barely posted. Also he gave an easy bandwagon answer of "maybe we can pool money later but not now." And he listed Drox, Harclay, and Farman as his suspects but didn't bother explaining why.

Thorne

Suspicion of Thorne mainly comes from this post -

Like I said before, I think these questions are a bit ridiculous. Jordayne's putting himself in the FM's shoes and thats suspicious? The money pooling strategy is an attempt to control the game, even though no suggestion had been made on who should get the money? The points just don't make any sense.

Also felt he was overreacting with this part -

Aside from that, and questioning all the people who voted for him, he hasn't contributed much. Seems to be a trend this game. :unsure:

As for the other players....

What about Dogget? Do you think he really gave much more than Vyrwel?

Wagstaff

Clearly intelligent, but I'm not as convinced of his innocence as many people are. I have a very strong gut feeling that at least one player is playing the reasonable FM, and he would certainly fit (as would Toyne and Shawney, but I'll get to them in a second).

More importantly, I still go back to his post where he suspected Drox but didn't mention Arryn. I cant fault him for initially missing Aryn because I know its impossible to track everyone especially at the start of the game, but his explanations seemed strange to me. Here's his first post on Drox -

So his criticisms were 1) lack of contribution, 2) complaint that he didn't understand game mechanics and failure to try to learn them. I asked him how Arryn was any different, and he tried to explain it....

OK, I'll try to explain it again, since apparently I was not clear. It's not just lack of contribution from Drox's part, it's giving a poor excuse to not contribute anything (when he could have found ways to do it) and disappear. Arryn didn't disappear. He didn't contribute anything of substance, at least before he went to bed (after that he did some comments on the use of gold thing), but he didn't attempt to hide as I feel Drox did. If Drox had said: sorry guys, very busy, I won't be able to post much today, I would be far less suspicious.

So he claims they are different, and I then show him a quote that shows Arryn doing the same thing that he is accusing Drox of doing. He says -

So he now admits that Arryn did the same thing, but he goes back to harping on Drox. And in the end he tries to turn it around on me, even though I'm not overdefending Drox at all. I'm just trying to see why he didn't mention Arryn, and I'm trying to better understand his accusations against Drox.

Yes, like Drox Arryn said he didn't get the gold rules. Other than that see above?

Now look at your post, you did defend Drox (underlined is mine):

Okay so didnt Arryn say that he didnt understand the gold rules too?

is there a place where he tried to better understand the rules?

Also your point against Drox is confusing, are you saying you think that he was realy making an acusation against people for RP. because that just reads like a joke to me. And even if he was, how does that indicate evil

Given that I had merely said I found Drox's attitude a bit suspicious and didn't vote for him, I find it a bit overdefensive.

The whole thing seems strange to me, and by the end of it, I'm left wondering if there is a reason for Wagstaff to protect Arryn.

Arryn was not the only one who didn't contribute anything. Vyrwel and Dogget did (and are still doing) far worse on this respect, and I didn't list them as having done something suspicious either. Why do you only focus on Arryn?

Shawney

Two things to discuss here. First, Shawney spends a lot of time talking about the gold sharing plan with Jordayne, which to me was a waste of time. I don't fault Jordayne much for harping on it, since it was his pet project. But Shawny just kept going back to disagree with him, when it was unnecessary. Seems like an easy excuse to contribute to me.

Second, and this is perhaps connected to point 1 above, Shawny has a tendency to overexplain things. A few examples outside of the gold discussion -

To be honest I'm not sure why that bothers me, but it does. The posts just seem contrived, as if he's making a big effort to be reasonable and helpful and explain things on a level even the slow kids in the class can understand.

the first point is interesting. Need to reread Shawney (I'll skip the RP part)

That will be all for now. Need to get some work done.

[House Pommingham]

Good morning!

Good night. :sleep:

On my pooling resources plan: I still think it's a good idea. How else do you plan to make use of the guards? Remember that as the game progresses the money balance will tip slightly to the FM's favor as they earn money both from robberies and from night kills. Pooling money forces the FM to contribute and can give us clues when people choose their prefered spender/healer. I'd at least like to hear people's alternative ideas if they don't like mine.

I still like the idea, but I suspect I'm alone.

[House Pommingham]

I agree with Vikary that it makes it more likely that 2 FM are on the mob. <snip>

...I also agree with Vikary that the night kill makes it more likely that a few FM can be found on the mob.

That was me. :cry:

Now I'm seriously off to bed.

[House Payne]

I still like the idea, but I suspect I'm alone.

I could get behind it today.

[House Payne]

That was me. :cry:

Now I'm seriously off to bed.

Oh :blush:, sorry then.

And I should reread myself before posting twice the same thing in 2 consecutive sentences. :dunno:

ETA: yeah, Toyne was the 1st to say it, Vikary argued it with Swann though.