Minigame 64.5: a very Supernatural minigame

[MaesterLuwin]

Luwin, why Fireball and why Masonity?

Think fast, for my vote might land on you if you don't! :pirate:

My impression was that Fireball had been pretty passive for most of the day. Upon reviewing posts, I have found this to be correct. He's posted frequently, but hasn't said all that much or has summed up what others have been saying.

Masonity, on the other hand, has been very accusatory since the beginning. He keeps pointing out what seem to be jokes or unclear phrases, and tries to turn it into something major. He got excited about Slick's vote for WJ early on, for example. He also jumped on Halo way to quickly after Halo urged people to reveal. His tone seemed to be something like "WHY would you do that?!? For the love of God, NO ONE reveal!!!!!" Whereas most people were confused at this point, Masonity seemed very aggressive, as if he were taking advantage of the opportunity to get people riled up.

[Fireball07]

My impression was that Fireball had been pretty passive for most of the day. Upon reviewing posts, I have found this to be correct. He's posted frequently, but hasn't said all that much or has summed up what others have been saying.

I have? I don't recall posting more frequently than any of the other people bar Malc. I haven't been here for most of the game day, and I would say that nearly everyone has a higher post count than me at the moment. What do you call frequently, I am wondering?

Edit: Changed the bold to underline. My mistake.

[MaesterLuwin]

I have? I don't recall posting more frequently than any of the other people bar Malc. I haven't been here for most of the game day, and I would say that nearly everyone has a higher post count than me at the moment. What do you call frequently, I am wondering?

Edit: Changed the bold to underline. My mistake.

I suppose I meant "consistently" or "at regular intervals" or "enough that I haven't noticed a lack of posts." I haven't been tallying; it's all subjective.

Fireball, you voted for Halo because of the attention he called to himself for wanting to reveal roles, correct?

[Whiskeyjack]

In the meantime, you are the best candidate of those 5 suspects, from my point of view.

You just said a whole lot, without actually explaining why you feel Slick is the best choice of those 5.

[Fireball07]

I suppose I meant "consistently" or "at regular intervals" or "enough that I haven't noticed a lack of posts." I haven't been tallying; it's all subjective.

Fireball, you voted for Halo because of the attention he called to himself for wanting to reveal roles, correct?

Not the attention, the actual call for us to claim our roles. FMs don't usually try and draw attention to themselves in that light but you do get the odd one. I'm not familiar with Halo's usual style of play so I'm happy to vote him for what I think is a suspicious action.

[LCOTNW]

You just said a whole lot, without actually explaining why you feel Slick is the best choice of those 5.

I believe I said that Slick was the most perturbed at my narrowing down of my suspect list. Considering that, and based on all the stuff that came before it, that makes me think he is the best candidate to be evil in that group of 5.

:checks post:

Yep. that is what I said.

[Piper of Chaos]

I am really not a friend of looking for symp clues, but.....

You seemed to be the most perturbed by my closing the loop on my 5 suspects. I am the first to admit that I could be completely wrong about my method. The evils could easily be Mex and Mina, for example. Time will tell. In the meantime, you are the best candidate of those 5 suspects, from my point of view.

....this we should remember if one of M+M should turn out to be guilty.

I don't think there should be a symp in a small game like this, but with these evil moddesses you never know..... :unsure:

[Piper of Chaos]

This is really not easy. My top choices right now are:

Masonity, TMW and Fireball

Luwin and Mina are close behind

Mexal comes next

[haLobEnder]

I believe I said that Slick was the most perturbed at my narrowing down of my suspect list. Considering that, and based on all the stuff that came before it, that makes me think he is the best candidate to be evil in that group of 5.

:checks post:

Yep. that is what I said.

I'm pretty perturbed by it too and I happen to know I'm not evil :P

And in all honesty why shouldn't we be? It's like a faulty logic version of Cerwyn's Bible -- er, sorry for the old school mafia terminology newbies :P

[Fireball07]

I am really not a friend of looking for symp clues, but.....

....this we should remember if one of M+M should turn out to be guilty.

But how will we know without a CF?

Btw, it looks like I may be around for the end of night. I have a history paper to prepare for tomorrow and so I've to do that rather than watch the match which is already horrible. Two bloody nil already. So I'll be on and off as I take breaks from my work.

[Mina Martell]

Three things.

1. Mina, why did my post ring false?

Your logic seemed very forced. Simply, I don't buy that it was suspicious for TMW to bring up that he didn't want to make an exception for experienced players--at least not when the conversation has already turned to discussion of making exceptions for experienced players. (Whew, that was a mouthful.) It's not as if TMW said, "Hey, I don't think we should lynch the big guns" out of the blue. Obviously, I don't know whether TMW is innocent or guilty, but your conclusion seemed to be poorly supported.

Also, I haven't seen you make any particularly rigorous cases as of yet (at least for someone who's supposed to be a top player). I thought Fireball07 has been worse, for what it's worth, but he came across as more illogical than scummy. But again, I freely admit that I was going mainly on gut instinct.

nothing wrong with being polite. Polite players like us are always innocent. Always. Non-confrontational can be a problem, though. Also, you should avoid looking at all reasonable. Being reasonable is a sure ticket to getting lynched.

Hmm, not reasonable....

...Wait a minute, what do you mean, "polite players are always innocent"? You were guilty last game! Remove vote! LCOTW! Actually, remove vote. Masonity? What kind of name is that? Never mind that. Remove vote. Mina Martell has been acting suspicious.

Also, role claim: I'm the vampire. And the werewolf.

...No. Remove vote. I'm voting House Targaryen. Its reaction to my role claim has been very shifty. I think it might be the symp.

I have no problem with you being willing to vote Piper if you have a good reason, but I'm not sure that we need to "get the lynch" every day since we don't have a CF. I so rarely play in a game that doesn't have a CF that I forget the logic. It would seem to me to be better not to lynch since that leaves a bigger pool for the finder to hide in. There is nothing worse than lynching the finder on D1 and having no benefit, not even a CF result. At the same time, we can't learn much unless we have lynch trains (or finder results) to go on.

Forgot about that. In that case, I'm willing to go to night. At least it will give us one CI to base our conclusions off of tomorrow. A lynch only risks our getting rid of the finder or healer too early. Also, since there are an even number of players game, it means we will have four players after the fifth lynch instead of the fourth night (assuming no vig deaths), giving us the same amount of chances to catch scum.

Read Halo's original post where he suggested the reveal and then try and think about what might motivate him to make that post if he was evil, and if he was innocent. You don't have to know anything about Halo to figure it out. It is not anything conclusive, either way (as Malc pointed out).

I think I've got it.

[MaesterLuwin]

I vote Fireball based on his reaction to my use of the word 'frequently', and his lack of posts with substantial content, and because he seems to be voting for the "easy" choice of Halo.

[Slick Mongoose]

I don't like the recent movement to go to night. I'd only ever favour that if we have an even number of players and we're potentially at an endgame.

If we lynch, we have a 1/4 or 1/6 chance of getting an evil player. If we don't lynch, we have 0 chance of getting an evil player. Plus we lose a lynch if there's a heal later.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Edit: Spelling and Edit 2: Clarity

[Piper of Chaos]

But how will we know without a CF?

Btw, it looks like I may be around for the end of night. I have a history paper to prepare for tomorrow and so I've to do that rather than watch the match which is already horrible. Two bloody nil already. So I'll be on and off as I take breaks from my work.

There is no CF? How mean is that???????? :stunned:

:bawl:

[Slick Mongoose]

I believe I said that Slick was the most perturbed at my narrowing down of my suspect list.

That list of 5 is a suspect list now? :unsure:

I was under the impression that it was a list of people you thought you'd be able to get lynched. I didn't realise that the suspiciousness of the players came into it.

[Fireball07]

Your logic seemed very forced. Simply, I don't buy that it was suspicious for TMW to bring up that he didn't want to make an exception for experienced players--at least not when the conversation has already turned to discussion of making exceptions for experienced players. (Whew, that was a mouthful.) It's not as if TMW said, "Hey, I don't think we should lynch the big guns" out of the blue. Obviously, I don't know whether TMW is innocent or guilty, but your conclusion seemed to be poorly supported.

Also, I haven't seen you make any particularly rigorous cases as of yet (at least for someone who's supposed to be a top player). I thought Fireball07 has been worse, for what it's worth, but he came across as more illogical than scummy. But again, I freely admit that I was going mainly on gut instinct.

Hmm, not reasonable....

...Wait a minute, what do you mean, "polite players are always innocent"? You were guilty last game! Remove vote! LCOTW! Actually, remove vote. Masonity? What kind of name is that? Never mind that. Remove vote. Mina Martell has been acting suspicious.

Also, role claim: I'm the vampire. And the werewolf.

...No. Remove vote. I'm voting House Targaryen. Its reaction to my role claim has been very shifty. I think it might be the symp.

Forgot about that. In that case, I'm willing to go to night. At least it will give us one CI to base our conclusions off of tomorrow. A lynch only risks our getting rid of the finder or healer too early. Also, since there are an even number of players game, it means we will have four players after the fifth lynch instead of the fourth night (assuming no vig deaths), giving us the same amount of chances to catch scum.

I think I've got it.

A few things:

Annoying votes and remove votes :bang:

Going to night is fair enough, I see you reasons for it, it does make a lot of sense at the moment.

And can I just ask where I have been illogical? A quote or two maybe?

[Piper of Chaos]

Going to night is a bad idea.

It's not exactly how I would word it. Better say it like this:

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

[Whiskeyjack]

People have been asking if we have to lynch in a game that doesn't include a CF. The answer is no, but with a caveat that I still think its better to lynch, if possible.

First off, if we don't at least try to lynch today...if people just start voting for night....then we aren't going to get any lynch mobs or potential lynch mobs. That reduces the amount of information we have to work with on later days.

Second, in certain circumstances, failing to lynch will reduce the number of opportunities we get to remove an evil player from the game. With an even number of players to start, this isn't currently a concern. However, if a role like Vig or Healer or whatever steps in and alters the lynch/kill pattern (and results in us having an odd number of players during the day), then this does become an issue, and if we ever failed to lynch on any given day, then we basically sacrificed an opportunity to try to get rid of an evil player.

On the other side, not lynching supposedly allows a potential Finder a longer period of time to gather information.

Personally, I'm not one for relying on good roles to figure things out for me. So for the above reasons, I'd prefer to lynch today.

[Whiskeyjack]

It's not exactly how I would word it. Better say it like this:

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Going to night is a bad idea.

Best cross-post ever. :lol:

[Whiskeyjack]

I'm not in favor of lynching Fireball. Actually, I'm pretty strongly against it.

That said -

Going to night is fair enough, I see you reasons for it, it does make a lot of sense at the moment.

Why do you think that it makes sense to go to night?