Minigame 64.5: a very Supernatural minigame

[Slick Mongoose]

It's the kind of thing I can see a desperate killer trying.

My only question is why he'd be desperate enough to try that yet.

edit: Okay, probably a desperate symp more than killer. :-p

Why don't you try to answer your own question? Why would I be desperate at that point? I had one vote for being under the radar, but nobody else seemed to care. All the other posts look like jokes to me. So do you think there was pressure building up on my partner that lead me to make my post? If that's the case, who do you think my partner is?

[Slick Mongoose]

Slick Mongoose: *brain explodes* Are you just attacking Whiskeyjack because he's Whiskeyjack (I love that I am now terrified of him based purely on allusive references everyone keeps making), or is there some weird metagaming going on?

Neither. I attacked him because it looked to me like Mexal was symping him. And I wanted to get the game going.

[Mexal]

Why is it so hard to believe that my case might be serious? Keep in mind that it was the first serious post of the game, so don't expect a brilliant, watertight case. And i've seen far worse cases taken seriously.

Because it's against WJ? I'm not going to avoid voting for him just because he's a strong player. Bollocks to that.

Nah, it's not because it's against WJ. It's because you assume such a level of stupidity from me that it can't possibly be serious :)

[The Man Who]

Why is it so hard to believe that my case might be serious? Keep in mind that it was the first serious post of the game, so don't expect a brilliant, watertight case. And i've seen far worse cases taken seriously.

Because it's against WJ? I'm not going to avoid voting for him just because he's a strong player. Bollocks to that.

I had trouble believing you were serious due to your use of smileys. :unsure:

Posting a smiley like :) at the end of your sentence seemed to me to be a sign of sarcasm.

Oh well.

[Slick Mongoose]

Nah, it's not because it's against WJ. It's because you assume such a level of stupidity from me that it can't possibly be serious :)

The argument "The killers would never be that obvious" is not one that has ever appealed to me.

[Mina Martell]

I'm not too sure you can read too much into that listing of beasties.

I didn't get the sense that this game was that strongly roled, but then again I've never seen any of Supernatural.

It could all be flavour text, but I thought she wouldn't have added "and even a roleless innocent or two" unless roleless innocents were endangered species.

[Mexal]

The argument "The killers would never be that obvious" is not one that has ever appealed to me.

It's not one that I'm using.

[Slick Mongoose]

It's not one that I'm using.

Yes, it is. Unless you're claiming some special treatment for yourself:

"OK, the killers might be that obvious, but never me. I'm way too clever to do that.

[The Man Who]

Hmmh, voting for WJ or me is always a good way to make your vote completely useless. It guarantees that you won't end on a lynchmob in the end of day and gives you an opportunity to hop on another mob to look helpful.

I find this post very suspicious. SM's seriousness about his vote reminded me of it. There is a possiblity that it is a joke (it is Piper :unsure: ) but the rest of the post was what seemed to be a pretty serious piece of posting.

I guess this is one of the problems with unalted games, but my view is that it shouldn't matter. Yes, you may feel horrible if we lynch Malc day 1, but if it is the correct decision, we should do it anyway (I don't think we should lynch Malc). Similarly, I'm not going to let Piper or Whiskeyjack get away with stuff just because of who they are.

This could be Piper fake-symping or just being his usual self, but I don't like it, so I'm converting my joke vote on Piper to a serious one. It's clearly trying to keep attention away from himself, using WJ as cover.

[TheMalcolm]

I find this post very suspicious.

Why? What Piper says is, er, true.

Of course, it doesn't mean that any vote against WJ or Piper is a vote of a baddie... but some could be.

[Mexal]

Yes, it is. Unless you're claiming some special treatment for yourself:

"OK, the killers might be that obvious, but never me. I'm way too clever to do that.

Well yes, I do deserve special treatment. Maybe I think I'm cleverer than I am :dunno:

[The Man Who]

Why? What Piper says is, er, true.

Of course, it doesn't mean that any vote against WJ or Piper is a vote of a baddie... but some could be.

That's a quite reasonable view to hold in the case that Piper and WJ are CI.

But they're not. To me it says that Piper thinks he and WJ are lynchproof and we shouldn't bother looking at them because they're lynchproof. The flaw is that neither of them are lynchproof, neither of them are infallible, and Piper trying to discourage people voting for the pair is suspicious because it makes it look as if he has something to hide.

[TheMalcolm]

To me it says that Piper thinks he and WJ are lynchproof and we shouldn't bother looking at them because they're lynchproof.

WJ is definetely lynchproof at Day 1. I am not sure about Piper.

Ok, now I understand your point.

[The Man Who]

WJ is definetely lynchproof at Day 1. I am not sure about Piper.

Ok, now I understand your point.

I think what you've said basically tallies with my current train of thought. I may not like it, but WJ IS for most intents and purposes nigh on unlynchable on day 1. This is because WJ is the consensus strongest innocent player and people would want a degree of certainty to be able to lynch him, and that is not often found on day 1. I don't think the same holds true for Piper, and therefore his grouping himself with WJ comes off especially false to me, and could even be seen as fake-symping.

[MaesterLuwin]

This is because WJ is the consensus strongest innocent player

I've been on the board for a while but I'm new to Mafia. Why is WJ so unassailable early in the game? He's that good? I'm not doubting you, but I'd like a little clarification.

Piper does seem to be casting attention on himself for one reason or another. Either to show us he has a role, or to make enough noise that we're lulled into thinking he couldn't possibly be a baddy.

[Masonity]

My dislike for the case isnt even that WJ is unlynchable, which is all but true, but rather that a player as good as mexal wouldn't leave symp clues.If mexal is your symp, you never suspect it, yet also never quite get around to killing him. If you think he may be your symp, he probably isnt.

As for why WJ is unlynchable on day 1, there are three reasons.

1) If you have a 2/3 or 3/4 chance of the best player being oin your side, do you kill them?

2) Day 1 cases are crap, and it takes a mighty good case to kill WJ as anything less will be ripped to shreds by him, and

3) No-one's good enough to make that good a case on day 1. Even WJclone couldn't get WJ lynched on day 1.

Inan altless game, 1 shines through. 2 and 3 apply regardless.

[Masonity]

killer

(Not sure what to make of Masonity's reaction to Piper's joke.)

Bolding a name means making a vote. While I encourage voting off scum, the game would be a tad easy ifi we could just refer to them as "killer" in our votes. ;)

My reaction was a joke. The fact i claimed to be a big twilight fan should have given that away, What next, you'll believe me saying that Terry Goodkind is better thann GRRM and Erikson put together? :P

but, to the seriousness. I actually quite like your role analysis. I'd guess if we have two factions they will only be 2 strong each. That said, I could be wrong. Chances are most of those roles wont be used at all.

[haLobEnder]

...Apparently not a whole lot. I'm going to throw out a vote for Mina to begin with, based on the editing of posts. But I can be swayed, of course.

I edit my posts quite a bit -- though to my credit usually to put content in, not take it out. I really hope this isn't a valid excuse to lynch these days.

...Mexal and Halo, for example, have been covering a low profile so far...

If I'm covering a low profile it's not exactly by choice. I'm on a shared computer these days so the morning to mid-afternoon is really the only time I can post with some frequency.

I guess this is one of the problems with unalted games, but my view is that it shouldn't matter. Yes, you may feel horrible if we lynch Malc day 1, but if it is the correct decision, we should do it anyway (I don't think we should lynch Malc). Similarly, I'm not going to let Piper or Whiskeyjack get away with stuff just because of who they are.

QFT.

Sorry but I think it's dumb that anyone gets a free pass in the game just because of who they are. Right now I don't have much of a formed opinion on anyone but if Piper or WJ start to act suspicious, I'm sure as shit going to vote for them.

I've been on the board for a while but I'm new to Mafia. Why is WJ so unassailable early in the game? He's that good? I'm not doubting you, but I'd like a little clarification.

He's godlike in his mafia abilities. But that doesn't always mean he's got the innocents best interests in mind. He does have a tendency to be evil a disproportionate amount of the time. Mainly I think because the mods know he provides a challenge.

Piper does seem to be casting attention on himself for one reason or another. Either to show us he has a role, or to make enough noise that we're lulled into thinking he couldn't possibly be a baddy.

He's done that before. Watch out for that tactic as well.

No one should be unlynchable in this game.

[Piper of Chaos]

I find this post very suspicious. SM's seriousness about his vote reminded me of it. There is a possiblity that it is a joke (it is Piper :unsure: ) but the rest of the post was what seemed to be a pretty serious piece of posting.

I guess this is one of the problems with unalted games, but my view is that it shouldn't matter. Yes, you may feel horrible if we lynch Malc day 1, but if it is the correct decision, we should do it anyway (I don't think we should lynch Malc). Similarly, I'm not going to let Piper or Whiskeyjack get away with stuff just because of who they are.

This could be Piper fake-symping or just being his usual self, but I don't like it, so I'm converting my joke vote on Piper to a serious one. It's clearly trying to keep attention away from himself, using WJ as cover.

I have been serious, of course.

My reasoning is that I don't get lynched on day 1. Point. Except if an evil WJ would make a super-case on me, perhaps. That's why I gave the advice that voting for me is not leading anywehre right now.

I probably could have included Mexal into this group, too, but he hasn't played for a long time and might be a bit rusty. He also gives me the impression that he is looking for a challenge with another player. FYI, right now I have a good feeling about WJ, but not about Mexal.

Finally I think that Slick's comment about the number of beasts and the probability of a symp sounds very innocentish to me. It just doesn't sound like an evil line of tought.

[haLobEnder]

My mandatory controversial statement that will probably get me lynched day one: I say people 'role reveal' the names of their roles. As long as abilities aren't revealed it will still be a crap-shoot for the FM to hit the healer.