In post 48, mastina wrote:I was expecting a troll role when I submitted my picks, and hoh boy did RC not disappoint.
I am Ginngie, Hated Loyal Gladiator
.
Outside of lylo/mylo (which is purely by the numbers, per the role wording), I take one less vote to lynch.
I can gladiate anyone by claiming a guilty on them, but if they're not town-aligned, it'll fail.
I can maybe, MAYBE use this as a conditional cop, IF we can no-lynch after a gladiate (I need to ask RC about this), but if not, yeahhhhh...
The town mastina I know asks questions first, I don't liek this.
The town Mastina I know claims early and usually lies about it in some aspect.
In post 176, Innocent Children wrote:In any case, early townblocking is more likely to be townie, so long as it’s not over the top.
You were just in a game were you and scum took full advantage of the "townblock" but I
kinda
agree that "townblocking" is a thing done by mostly bad town.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
In post 147, jjh927 wrote:Also, Ginngie-
Did you get anything from RC saying you recognised Mastina or anything similar?
I don't think so.
If she did, it should have also been in my role PM; it was not.
In post 230, jjh927 wrote:Titus, the role makes plenty of sense and it's not a miller
Fun fact, Gamma's sig given my view on vote/lynch manipulation roles being equivalent to a vig is quite hilariously appropriate given my role.
In post 236, Innocent Children wrote:She fakeclaimed D3 IC iirc? but was in actuality mafia vig, so I would definitely think it’s wise to take hers and probably most early claims with a grain of salt.
While technically true, this is incredibly misleading.
I fakeclaimed D3 innocent child...as a N2 Vigilante. (And once D3 rolled around, I realclaimed my role. So no. Didn't lie. Told the truth!)
Given my stance on Vigilantes.
That in of itself was not a lie.
It was misleading, sure.
But my stance on vigilantes is that when they successfully shoot, they
are
conftown; they are proven to be town, and thus, proven innocent, just as if they were an innocent child. (Why this, in spite of my stance of roles != alignment? Because I am a member of the NRG and I am strongly in favor of the argument of vigs not being mafia-controlled. Nontown, sure. Even antitown, fine. But mafia vigs are a fuck no to me and are borderline bastard. They're not QUITE there, in that they're akin to a mafia Godfather; it is something TREMENDOUSLY powerful for the scum to have and NOT something I want in games out there willy-nilly.)
You can see my full realclaim the moment D3 unfolds, right here.
Actual claim: Night 2 Vig; last night, I shot Purrcocet.
(And yes, it's spelled that way. Not Vigilante; Vig. Not N2, Night 2.)
Purrcocet, a scumread of mine no less!, claimed my fucking role. He fucking claimed Night 2 vigilante. I had been
planning
to shoot someone like, say, Kokichi Oma, but as a vig the correct play is to always just fucking shoot your counterclaim especially when you don't get the chance to fucking talk all of D2.
I was basically breadcrumbing this role in every fucking post of mine (I can pull up my VERY specific wordings in a bit), but.
The reasoning for the fakeclaim should be self-evident. I said on D3 I would be an innocent child; that's because you don't fucking give a vigilante to a scum player, and the proof would be in the second nightkill with me having killed Purrcocet. (Well originally I was planning on shooting Kokichi, but. Yaknow. Claimed my exact fucking role, and all that.) By claiming D3 Innocent Child, I would lead scum to think I had no night action; by claiming D3 innocent child, I would lead players to think that I was utterly harmless before D3.
In post 77, mastina wrote:BTW investigatives should stay off me; they'd be wasting their action.
I'm a D3 Innocent Child.
If you are wondering, no, not
automatic
; I have to manually
trigger
it.
Investigatives should stay off of me because a gunsmith would get a guilty on me; rolecopping or vanilla copping or neapolitaning me would be a waste because my role would be proven come N2 with a successful vig.
I made it clear from the wording here what my true role is. AUTOMATIC-->guns. TRIGGER-->guns.
Again, I specify TRIGGER. I also was very careful with my wording. I never said that I would trigger my action ON D3. I said, QUITE SPECIFICALLY, I would be conftown on D3 after HAVING triggered my action.
In post 132, Human Sequencer wrote:Wrt innocent child shenanigans it's possible they have something to do with the "main characters" this setup is based around
I'm not a main character; my confirmation comes from a different method altogether.
My confirmation method comes from being a fucking vig.
In post 252, Brian Skies wrote:Or they'll just do to you what they did to me and vanillarize-neighborize you.
That'd be their funeral then because it'd turn this game from "not exactly something I want" to "oh fuck you I AM GOING TO WIN THIS SHIT" mode.
Vanillaizing an innocent child wouldn't do much because I go without being conftown in most games, but I was specifically putting A LOT OF EFFORT into the strategy behind my vig; being vanillaized after I worked so hard on that would be a "fuck you".
In post 262, Andriod18 wrote: This is no excuse to not post any reads because you can die before hand.
I have my reasons.
Put it this way.
If a townread of mine gets run up, I'll defend them.
I'll give thoughts on players randomly. Some of these may even be productive.
But I've no reason to give full reads before then.
Also this is a good way to help ensure I
don't
bite the bullet before D3. The suspicion on me helps me stay alive.
I know how to play roles, even ones I'm not particularly fond of. (I mean, I love being conftown, but this is a fairly shitty way to get it.) And I promise you, this is the best possibly strategy for me holding this role.
"Bite the bullet" was another hint, but the strongest hint here was "roles I'm not particularly fond of". What role have I on NUMEROUS different occasions stated I absolutely loathe? That's right. Vigilante. I hate them with a passion, but they have one particular use--being made conftown. It's a SHITTY way to become conftown, but it's becoming conftown nonetheless.
Also, this was me outlining my plan.
I wasn't going to give scumreads because guess what? As a fucking vig, I can let my SHOT do the talking in terms of scumreads.
In post 778, mastina wrote:I never lie about being conftownable as town.
Exaggerate
, yes.
Mislead
, sure!
But lie, fuck no, I know better than that.
So I guarantee you.
I will be conftown.
Here I basically admitted that I was in fact not a D3 IC, because the D3 IC claim was precisely this: misleading, and exaggeration, but still the truth, because by shooting N2, I'd be conftown on D3, just as good as an IC.
In post 274, grapes wrote:I'm gonna guess she's on a team with a vanillarizor or something and planned to explain it away that way or something
Joke's on them if they vanillaize me, actually. I'd laugh my ass off if they tried.
The assumption here was that I wouldn't be vanillaized N1 (after all, they thought I couldn't be conftown until D3 so why vanillaize me N1?), and if they attempted it N2, it presumably wouldn't stop my shot from going off. Thus, why the joke would be on them if they had tried; I'd still have fucked them over with the shot.
I buy Katsuki's D5 Innocent Child claim if Katsuki has the two-phase-shifted equivalent of my role. (I
suspect
Katsuki would be able to share details about my role from their own, if so inclined to share, which I imagine Katsuki is not.)
So that's not a lynch ever happening because Katsuki is going to be just as conftown as I am, albeit two phases later than I will be.
Here I stated my suspicion that Katsuki had an Night 4 Vig. I was VERY careful about my wording. Not "two-day-shifted". Two PHASE shifted. And I suspected Katsuki would be able to give details of this.
In post 840, Purrcocet wrote:if we have 2 ics there must be a disadvantage somewhere else
Would you believe me if I said I had an idea of what?
The disadvantage I am referring to here is how Vigs require KILLING, to REMOVE a player from the game--yes, they become conftown by having done so, but shots are DISPROPORTIONATELY likely to be on town (thus why I hate vigs), on top of the chance of failure (thus the gambit to help ensure I'd succeed).
I do not believe for so much as ONE SECOND I was roleblocked, because my claim was D3 Innocent Child.
I do not believe for so much as ONE SECOND I was redirected, because my claim was D3 Innocent Child.
I do not believe for so much as ONE SECOND I was rolecopped N1 to justify them knowing my role, because my claim was D3 Innocent Child.
So Purrcocet survived by some other means.
And I don't buy that it's by a town method.
Sure enough.
Exactly as I roleclaimed.
N2 Vigilante
was
my real role, and
I really did
shoot Purcocet using it.
So like I said.
I don't lie about my role as scum.
BY NECESSITY, I will mislead; the reason I by necessity need to mislead as scum is because I love to do it as town. BY NECESSITY, I will exaggerate, I will play up things, I will make very careful usage of very specific wording. BY NECESSITY, I will try to imply something, when it is something else, but this is done purely to mimic my town meta, and I will always claim the actual real role later.
All fakeclaims have an end date.
All fakeclaims are made knowing a realclaim will need to be made later.
And when I reveal the real claim, the reason for the fakeclaim makes complete and total sense when you view it, because you go, "Oh, I understand why that was done" instantly just by knowing the real role.
You can think of it in this term.
Macho <-> Bulletproof as a switch to make, is in fact a lie.
I would tell it gladly and have done so, specifically because I knew that upon a realclaim, the reasons for me having done so would be abundantly clear. The kind of thing where I don't even need to explain it. I could end up a corpse, and that fact alone, just seeing my flip, would instantly explain my actions.
That's how "lies" of mine work. And that's why I say they're not actually lies. They are, technically speaking, not the truth. But they are a lack of truth, which when you see the truth, you understand why they were done and follow it as having been the optimal play.
Claiming D3 Innocent Child as a N2 vig was a
brilliant
play move,
regardless
of alignment and I'm actually sad I was scum that game because that move would have actually been better were I town. It wasn't really a lie, just me playing the closest I've ever played to my town meta in spite of how little I actually played the game. (Through little fault of my own, mind you.)
If the town hadn't kept quicklynching and I hadn't been so swamped with real life stuff at the time that game coulda been a contender for best scumgame I ever played, but since they did and I was busy I barely got to do anything. BUT I DIGRESS.
Point being.
I don't lie as scum; the closest I come to lying as scum is mimicking my town lies, and when I lie as town, I am most definitively not doing so just for the lulz; there is a clear, role-based reason for the lie and when you see the real role you can understand how it wasn't really much of a lie at all if it was in fact really something you could call a lie because my fondness for wordplay and precise usage of words leads me to carefully selecting words which IMPLY the meaning I want BUT ACTUALLY are me confessing to my real role.
In post 176, Innocent Children wrote:In any case, early townblocking is more likely to be townie, so long as it’s not over the top.
You were just in a game were you and scum took full advantage of the "townblock" but I
kinda
agree that "townblocking" is a thing done by mostly bad town.
Why is townblocking something done by bad town? I very rarely have strong scumreads this early in the game but I usually do have some strong townreads. Do you know how many games I’d played as town before I got one scumgame? - like well over 20. I’m really glad I have a hydra partner. I kind of miss the teamwork aspect of it.
In post 147, jjh927 wrote:Also, Ginngie-
Did you get anything from RC saying you recognised Mastina or anything similar?
I don't think so.
If she did, it should have also been in my role PM; it was not.
In post 230, jjh927 wrote:Titus, the role makes plenty of sense and it's not a miller
Fun fact, Gamma's sig given my view on vote/lynch manipulation roles being equivalent to a vig is quite hilariously appropriate given my role.
In post 236, Innocent Children wrote:She fakeclaimed D3 IC iirc? but was in actuality mafia vig, so I would definitely think it’s wise to take hers and probably most early claims with a grain of salt.
While technically true, this is incredibly misleading.
I fakeclaimed D3 innocent child...as a N2 Vigilante. (And once D3 rolled around, I realclaimed my role. So no. Didn't lie. Told the truth!)
Given my stance on Vigilantes.
That in of itself was not a lie.
It was misleading, sure.
But my stance on vigilantes is that when they successfully shoot, they
are
conftown; they are proven to be town, and thus, proven innocent, just as if they were an innocent child. (Why this, in spite of my stance of roles != alignment? Because I am a member of the NRG and I am strongly in favor of the argument of vigs not being mafia-controlled. Nontown, sure. Even antitown, fine. But mafia vigs are a fuck no to me and are borderline bastard. They're not QUITE there, in that they're akin to a mafia Godfather; it is something TREMENDOUSLY powerful for the scum to have and NOT something I want in games out there willy-nilly.)
You can see my full realclaim the moment D3 unfolds, right here.
Actual claim: Night 2 Vig; last night, I shot Purrcocet.
(And yes, it's spelled that way. Not Vigilante; Vig. Not N2, Night 2.)
Purrcocet, a scumread of mine no less!, claimed my fucking role. He fucking claimed Night 2 vigilante. I had been
planning
to shoot someone like, say, Kokichi Oma, but as a vig the correct play is to always just fucking shoot your counterclaim especially when you don't get the chance to fucking talk all of D2.
I was basically breadcrumbing this role in every fucking post of mine (I can pull up my VERY specific wordings in a bit), but.
The reasoning for the fakeclaim should be self-evident. I said on D3 I would be an innocent child; that's because you don't fucking give a vigilante to a scum player, and the proof would be in the second nightkill with me having killed Purrcocet. (Well originally I was planning on shooting Kokichi, but. Yaknow. Claimed my exact fucking role, and all that.) By claiming D3 Innocent Child, I would lead scum to think I had no night action; by claiming D3 innocent child, I would lead players to think that I was utterly harmless before D3.
In post 77, mastina wrote:BTW investigatives should stay off me; they'd be wasting their action.
I'm a D3 Innocent Child.
If you are wondering, no, not
automatic
; I have to manually
trigger
it.
Investigatives should stay off of me because a gunsmith would get a guilty on me; rolecopping or vanilla copping or neapolitaning me would be a waste because my role would be proven come N2 with a successful vig.
I made it clear from the wording here what my true role is. AUTOMATIC-->guns. TRIGGER-->guns.
Again, I specify TRIGGER. I also was very careful with my wording. I never said that I would trigger my action ON D3. I said, QUITE SPECIFICALLY, I would be conftown on D3 after HAVING triggered my action.
In post 132, Human Sequencer wrote:Wrt innocent child shenanigans it's possible they have something to do with the "main characters" this setup is based around
I'm not a main character; my confirmation comes from a different method altogether.
My confirmation method comes from being a fucking vig.
In post 252, Brian Skies wrote:Or they'll just do to you what they did to me and vanillarize-neighborize you.
That'd be their funeral then because it'd turn this game from "not exactly something I want" to "oh fuck you I AM GOING TO WIN THIS SHIT" mode.
Vanillaizing an innocent child wouldn't do much because I go without being conftown in most games, but I was specifically putting A LOT OF EFFORT into the strategy behind my vig; being vanillaized after I worked so hard on that would be a "fuck you".
In post 262, Andriod18 wrote: This is no excuse to not post any reads because you can die before hand.
I have my reasons.
Put it this way.
If a townread of mine gets run up, I'll defend them.
I'll give thoughts on players randomly. Some of these may even be productive.
But I've no reason to give full reads before then.
Also this is a good way to help ensure I
don't
bite the bullet before D3. The suspicion on me helps me stay alive.
I know how to play roles, even ones I'm not particularly fond of. (I mean, I love being conftown, but this is a fairly shitty way to get it.) And I promise you, this is the best possibly strategy for me holding this role.
"Bite the bullet" was another hint, but the strongest hint here was "roles I'm not particularly fond of". What role have I on NUMEROUS different occasions stated I absolutely loathe? That's right. Vigilante. I hate them with a passion, but they have one particular use--being made conftown. It's a SHITTY way to become conftown, but it's becoming conftown nonetheless.
Also, this was me outlining my plan.
I wasn't going to give scumreads because guess what? As a fucking vig, I can let my SHOT do the talking in terms of scumreads.
In post 778, mastina wrote:I never lie about being conftownable as town.
Exaggerate
, yes.
Mislead
, sure!
But lie, fuck no, I know better than that.
So I guarantee you.
I will be conftown.
Here I basically admitted that I was in fact not a D3 IC, because the D3 IC claim was precisely this: misleading, and exaggeration, but still the truth, because by shooting N2, I'd be conftown on D3, just as good as an IC.
In post 274, grapes wrote:I'm gonna guess she's on a team with a vanillarizor or something and planned to explain it away that way or something
Joke's on them if they vanillaize me, actually. I'd laugh my ass off if they tried.
The assumption here was that I wouldn't be vanillaized N1 (after all, they thought I couldn't be conftown until D3 so why vanillaize me N1?), and if they attempted it N2, it presumably wouldn't stop my shot from going off. Thus, why the joke would be on them if they had tried; I'd still have fucked them over with the shot.
I buy Katsuki's D5 Innocent Child claim if Katsuki has the two-phase-shifted equivalent of my role. (I
suspect
Katsuki would be able to share details about my role from their own, if so inclined to share, which I imagine Katsuki is not.)
So that's not a lynch ever happening because Katsuki is going to be just as conftown as I am, albeit two phases later than I will be.
Here I stated my suspicion that Katsuki had an Night 4 Vig. I was VERY careful about my wording. Not "two-day-shifted". Two PHASE shifted. And I suspected Katsuki would be able to give details of this.
In post 840, Purrcocet wrote:if we have 2 ics there must be a disadvantage somewhere else
Would you believe me if I said I had an idea of what?
The disadvantage I am referring to here is how Vigs require KILLING, to REMOVE a player from the game--yes, they become conftown by having done so, but shots are DISPROPORTIONATELY likely to be on town (thus why I hate vigs), on top of the chance of failure (thus the gambit to help ensure I'd succeed).
I do not believe for so much as ONE SECOND I was roleblocked, because my claim was D3 Innocent Child.
I do not believe for so much as ONE SECOND I was redirected, because my claim was D3 Innocent Child.
I do not believe for so much as ONE SECOND I was rolecopped N1 to justify them knowing my role, because my claim was D3 Innocent Child.
So Purrcocet survived by some other means.
And I don't buy that it's by a town method.
Sure enough.
Exactly as I roleclaimed.
N2 Vigilante
was
my real role, and
I really did
shoot Purcocet using it.
So like I said.
I don't lie about my role as scum.
BY NECESSITY, I will mislead; the reason I by necessity need to mislead as scum is because I love to do it as town. BY NECESSITY, I will exaggerate, I will play up things, I will make very careful usage of very specific wording. BY NECESSITY, I will try to imply something, when it is something else, but this is done purely to mimic my town meta, and I will always claim the actual real role later.
All fakeclaims have an end date.
All fakeclaims are made knowing a realclaim will need to be made later.
And when I reveal the real claim, the reason for the fakeclaim makes complete and total sense when you view it, because you go, "Oh, I understand why that was done" instantly just by knowing the real role.
You can think of it in this term.
Macho <-> Bulletproof as a switch to make, is in fact a lie.
I would tell it gladly and have done so, specifically because I knew that upon a realclaim, the reasons for me having done so would be abundantly clear. The kind of thing where I don't even need to explain it. I could end up a corpse, and that fact alone, just seeing my flip, would instantly explain my actions.
That's how "lies" of mine work. And that's why I say they're not actually lies. They are, technically speaking, not the truth. But they are a lack of truth, which when you see the truth, you understand why they were done and follow it as having been the optimal play.
Claiming D3 Innocent Child as a N2 vig was a
brilliant
play move,
regardless
of alignment and I'm actually sad I was scum that game because that move would have actually been better were I town. It wasn't really a lie, just me playing the closest I've ever played to my town meta in spite of how little I actually played the game. (Through little fault of my own, mind you.)
If the town hadn't kept quicklynching and I hadn't been so swamped with real life stuff at the time that game coulda been a contender for best scumgame I ever played, but since they did and I was busy I barely got to do anything. BUT I DIGRESS.
Point being.
I don't lie as scum; the closest I come to lying as scum is mimicking my town lies, and when I lie as town, I am most definitively not doing so just for the lulz; there is a clear, role-based reason for the lie and when you see the real role you can understand how it wasn't really much of a lie at all if it was in fact really something you could call a lie because my fondness for wordplay and precise usage of words leads me to carefully selecting words which IMPLY the meaning I want BUT ACTUALLY are me confessing to my real role.
In post 247, Vaxkiller wrote:The town mastina I know asks questions first, I don't liek this.
The town mastina you know also doesn't phonepost or write posts when late for tae kwon do or some other similar activity and yet that is precisely what I am doing this game.
I'm not as active onsite as I used to be. I also don't spend most of my time on here in the same way I used to. Most of my browsing I do on my phone now; a fair number of my posts I actually write on my phone. Not in games, not when modding, but for PT posts, MD posts, and the like, a lot of it's on my phone, during breaks in my busy schedule.
I didn't have a chance to ask the question before. The first chance I got was when the game began, and I did so immediately; I'm still waiting for a response.
Also to some extent.
Every time I play extensively on an alt, I tend to pick up some of my alt's habits on my main, that are then permanently integrated into my playstyle.
This is the first game I've played on mastina since having used one of my alts. (At least I'm pretty sure it is?) So some of my habits from there--including the increase in phoneposting and the like--have been picked up now in this game.
This is the new norm for me; I'll not be able to do what I did before. I just have too much of a life.
...Not to mention, too much of a strong Civ 3 addiction.
A statement which is always true, but true in a way that is not what people would assume. A statement carefully, deliberately worded, as to imply one meaning while actually meaning another.
I don't lie; I mislead.
But this is not a role which I can mislead you on. (I mean, I suppose there could be a hated <-> loved switch but if that were the case you'd think I'd fakeclaim it'd still work in mylo/lylo as to set the bait, but. No such luck.) I can gladiate town; I take one less vote to lynch outside mylo/lylo. It's something easily proven at any time. Just, tremendously stupid to do on a whim, especially so early in the game.
I do not want to control the lynch. Keep in mind that using my power
does
, no matter what, control the lynch. Because by using my power, I automatically prevent all lynches except two, leaving it as only myself, only my target, and MAYBE (RC still hasn't answered me yet) no lynch. Which means, on D1, if I used it, I would be saying, "Hey, those 20 players who contain people you widely scumread and would love to lynch? Yeah sorry, you can't lynch them thanks to me".
The only way I don't control the lynch is if I get a guilty. Which, I suppose. Is still a form of a controlled lynch in that we lynch my target, but it's a controlled lynch in a GOOD way rather than a BAD way. (But in a game of this side, we're likely to have 4-5 scum. Even assuming the higher number of 5, that's a 16/21 chance of targeting town, and any targeting of town is instantly controlling the lynch.)
In every one of those, I claimed my real role (often with real results) or the mod-provided safeclaim.
Exercise.
Find a single instance of me mentioning lying as a pro-scum strategy.
Exercise.
Try to compile the NUMEROUS times--both as town and scum--I have gone on record to state that lying as scum is incredibly stupid because the best weapon is the truth; if you have the truth on YOUR side as scum, you have the advantage over the town because you're being sincere, you're being genuine, you don't have to lie, and that fools tonereaders because by their metric you're tripping all the townbells because you're not actually lying.
I don't lie as scum, because lying as scum would be playing against wincon. It's not that I
can't
lie as scum. It's not that I have a trust tell about lying as scum. It's just that ten times out of ten. It is always tremendously stupid to lie as scum. And within my interests to tell the truth as scum.
Lying as scum gives the town the win.
If you disagree, feel free to try it out yourself. When you next roll scum, try lying about your role, especially in a theme game.
See how well it turns out for you.
you literally change one iota of your scum gameplay to give you the edge each game, just worry about play and not meta boo
Shoutout to PJ and Nahdia for making my amazing new avi :)
Following the previous dozen pages that cropped up in the last 10 hours I would like to congratulate Ginngie for being drunk with distinction. - Vi
You're familiar with the modifier Hated, right? The flavor name of it is textspeak "Please fucking no", but with parenthesis of 'Hated' to indicate what the ability is, and then a description of it, requiring one less vote to lynch outside of mylo/lylo.
(The gladiate ability's flavorname for the curious is, predictably enough. "I HAVE A GUILTY".)
Incidentally.
Pretty sure this is singleball with no 3p given my ability's wording.
It specifies that it fails on mafia and only works on town, so.
In post 264, Nero Cain wrote:also, Mastina should totally use her power on Chick.
I mean I do scumread her, but we'd need to get the consent of at least half the town first, make sure both outcomes are accounted for, and especially wait for RC to give me a reply.
You apparently haven't been paying attention since I gave them already.
I wanted to give a full readslist but even speeding at 10-20 mph over the speed limit on slick roads I was almost late for tae kwon do as-was, so it had to wait until now. Gimme a sec, will compile very shortly.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
Like Vax scum reading Chick but not voting her while calling MY scumread on her off is talking out of both sides of his mouth and is prob scum, so we agree there. I'm really confused about why the haven't posted players are in different spots.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
In post 176, Innocent Children wrote:In any case, early townblocking is more likely to be townie, so long as it’s not over the top.
You were just in a game were you and scum took full advantage of the "townblock" but I
kinda
agree that "townblocking" is a thing done by mostly bad town.
Oh dear god
People don’t play like you do. We normal people actually send in flavor picks and get roles designed to match the flavor. So mastina didn’t pick gladiator but picked something that worked as one flavor-wise.
We're falling through space, you and me, clinging to the skin of this tiny little world, and if we let go...That's who I am.
I will send something to the first person to do so.
you aren't freaking out like you normally do as town.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
Of all tyrannies,a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
