This is absolutely unbelievable.
Leonidas does his "good game" speech in an effort to paint me as a baddie and you guys fall for it. I claim a role
against my wishes
because the Town demands it, no one contests it, but now suddenly I'm Suspect #1 because Leonidas says so? Let's look at this in more detail:
1. Leonidas claims a role that
does not exist as a significant character in the book
. I specifically PM'd Werebear asking for another copy of my role PM because I had lost it and wanted to make sure I got the name right when I claimed... why is his role-claim more believable exactly?
2. Do any of you remember the mini gslamm modded, "Misery, MO"? Remember how I avoided being lynched even after being fingered by a Cop? I made up a role-claim so unbelievable that everyone thought "God, that's so strange it must be true, because who would make up something like that?" Doesn't it seem a bit funny that Leo makes this outrageous claim and suddenly no one doubts him? Think about it... he claims that his role can
end the game
if he role-claims while being voted for (which is pretty much the only time anyone ever has a real reason to role-claim, and I dispute even that). Do you people honestly believe that?
3. What if (and I don't believe this at all, but I'll play Devil's Advocate here) Leo
is
telling the truth about his role's restriction on role-claiming? That would mean this is our last and only chance to win the game. It seems to me that lynching Leo is probably the only hope of averting said disaster (after all, there has to be a way to avert the end-of-game condition, or else it'd be a bit unbalancing).
4. Suppose the scum have the ability to save up kills or make multiple kills on a specific Night (both have precedents). What happens if either one of those possibilities is true and we decide not to lynch today? WE LOSE. And you're willing to risk that just to play it safe?
5. Who in their right mind gives the "good game" speech before the game is ended unless they're trying to pin blame on someone via misdirection? If Leo had genuinely believed I was scum, don't you think he would've voted for me earlier? Instead, he says this:
Leonidas wrote:There are two reasons why I'm not voting for you right now, Dourgrim.
1) Zarquon is indeed the most frequent name of the prophet that comes to the Restaurant shortly before the universe collapses.
2) There is a striking similarity between the two claims. You did not write: 'I'm Zarquon the prophet' or 'I'm Zarquon'. We both claimed exactly the same way. And you claimed before you saw my own claim.
(Just as I claimed without seeing your claim - otherwise I would probably have tried to get you lynched by the town).
He
knew
he couldn't dispute the role-claim, so instead he casts doubt on it by making a similar claim and "theorizing" that one of us must be scum, and it
certainly
isn't him.
6. The underlined portion of the above quote is ridiculous. Is Leonidas telling us he's not reading the thread? I did not exactly hide my role-claim in a gigantic post so as to make it difficult to find. Of
course
he saw it, people... only a complete idiot would've missed it, and we all know from past experience that Leonidas is not a complete idiot.
That's enough for now... but let's
not
end the day with a no-lynch until we've seriously hashed this out, folks.
If we lynch you and Leo's evil, then tonight he'll kill me, and it'll be him and kerplunk left in the morning. I wonder who'll win that matchup....
). In answer to Leo's question, I have no restrictions on role-claiming or anything else that I'm aware of... I assume that question was in regards to my earlier refusal to role-claim. It's not a role thing; it's a Dourgrim thing.
