Mafiascum.net

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).

So now the question is... what if Werebear put two prophets in the restaurant, waiting to meet the party ? Could they both be town, or would one of them be a prophet, in league with the waiter and dish-of-the-day, and waiting to trap the party within the restaurant ?

I am looking for more symmetries... Did your role description specify any restriction with regard to role claiming ?

Kerplunk, I would like to know if you have investigated Dourgrim.

I guess you're right, mathcam. If we waited a day longer, probably one of us would get killed by the mafia. So there's no point in a no lynch. .

Leo, I investigated mathcam. And I got that I had put my head in a bucket of water and no investigation tonight. I investigated mathcam, because I thought that maybe I had to investigate someone twice to get a result and to really really have mathcam confirmed innocent. But now math is attacked last night and someone protected him (Leo or Dourgrim), in my book he is confirmed innocent.

With this strange roleclaiming of you two, we can't lynch someone according to his roleclaiming. So, now I'm going back to read the thread (again) and hopefully that will reveal some things.

Y'know, it could be the beer talking (I had a few tonight), but if all of this confusion is caused by my role-claim, then lynch me... if I'm who I claim to be, then you know to go after Leo tomorrow. *shrug* Just a thought...

Yeah, I think it's the beer, DG. 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....

Leo: What's your role claim? Or are you still claiming that you're not allowed to reveal it? Is it at all doc-like?

Cam

Sorry, just re-read the entire thread and you claimed your role was doc a doc. an you explain this line to me?

Oh God, I've claimed my role with someone voting for me.
We're history tonight.

Why? Do you think the mod will punish you for revealing your role while being voted for?

Also, after reading through the thread again, I wanted to point out that Kerplunk is not as cleared as I thought, as far as I can tell. He is Marvin, almost assuredly, but Bane never got an innocent/guilty result on him. However, there is a lot of evidence in his favor: First, he's not affiliated with the restaurant. Second, Werebear might have just felt it was so clear that Marvin was pro-town that he didn't bother putting it in the PM. So I think Kerplunk is essentially cleared, but just wanted to make sure we had this in the back of our heads.

Last, I feel that I myself am fairly cleared. Given the two prophet claims, the slim possibility that Kerplunk is evil, there's just not much room left for potential evil, and this is before we even consider my claim. I've claimed Trillian, who almost certainly has to be in the game, and I think I'm the only full-fledged cop out there. (Note: the fact that there other cops, like Bane221, increases the probability that I'm naive). Plus, I could have killed Polarboy but didn't, which Kerplunk was kind enough to point out several posts back.

I'd lke to request a list of protections from dourgrim and Leo...who did you target each night?

Cam

Yes. I was not entitled to claim my role when someone was voting for me. This would bring the Universe to its final end on the following night. Meaning the town would have had to win by the end of that day, or lose.

I missed the end of the last day, so I decided to claim early today. But in the process, you voted for me, and I re-claimed my role with your vote on me, so I thought we were fried - hence my post.

My night choices:
Night 1: jasonpingpong
Night 2: PolarBoy
Night 3: mathcam

This is very difficult. On the one hand, I'm going to feel like an idiot if I end up lynching someone who I investigated and found to be innocent. On the other hand, Leo's certainly not putting up a good defense for himself.

Suspicions of Leo:
1) Claimed a role that has already been claimed, and never said anything when DG made the same claim earlier.
2) Spelled his claimed role name incorrectly.
3) Was one of two people who didn't vote for the mafia Foolster41.
4) Falls under the GL argument I proposed day 1
5) Went after me a lot.
6) Claims that if he revealed his role while being voted for, the universe would end the next day. Would werebear design a game that could be over in day 1 if one person messed up?
7 (new)) Claims to have protected jasonpingpong on night 1, even thought at that point he had been replaced by jadesmar.

I can't imagine what will deter me from a vote, but I still want to hear DG's full role claim and list of protectees before finalizing. Remember, with four of us, we need everybody but the lynchee to vote for it.

Cam


Cam

Post gone. Wait a sec.

The essence of my role is that I'm a two-shot Doc... I can protect someone once with each of my holy hands. I have only used my ability once this game (on mathcam last Night). The only other stuff in my PM is flavor text relating to my Great Prophet-ness (we all know how fond of flavor text Our Benevolent Mod is ). 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.

I'll try to answer to my best.

mathcam wrote: 1) Claimed a role that has already been claimed, and never said anything when DG made the same claim earlier.

Yes. Dourgrim claimed while I was away from the thread. Had I seen his claim, I would have come out and tried to get him lynched. I'm not entirely sure it would have been appropriate, but even if he is Zarquon the prophet, he is probably a false one - I can't see two real prophets waiting for the party, just as I can't really see two docs in the game.
But I can see a false prophet in league with the restaurant to trap the party.

mathcam wrote: 2) Spelled his claimed role name incorrectly.

As I have agreed before, Zarquon is indeed the most common name for the prophet. But I can't lie about my name.

mathcam wrote: 3) Was one of two people who didn't vote for the mafia Foolster41.

Yes, I was voting for you. I did not like your OGMUS vote, which was putting me in peril of getting bandwagoned, having to claim, and being unable to. Much more, I hated your attempt (which I thought was scummy) to encourage the town to vote for one of the 'bandwagons'... you know the story. As to Foolster, I believed his claim as a one-shot vig.

mathcam wrote: 4) Falls under the GL argument I proposed day 1

Yes - if you can call that an argument.

mathcam wrote: 5) Went after me a lot.

You deserved it (in my view - and at the time)

mathcam wrote: 6) Claims that if he revealed his role while being voted for, the universe would end the next day. Would werebear design a game that could be over in day 1 if one person messed up?

Only if he was trying to stick to the spirit of the books...
And: the universe would end the next . Please remember the definition of nights in this game (introduction). Nights are ten-minutes periods we take to look at parts of the universe exploding.

mathcam wrote: 7 (new)) Claims to have protected jasonpingpong on night 1, even thought at that point he had been replaced by jadesmar.

I don't know what you're talking about here. I did protect jasonpingpong on night 1. His posts on day 1 seemed suspicious to me - and by the time night fell, PolarBoy was a much worthier candidate for my protection anyway.

Point blank: Leo's lying through his teeth. He screwed up the name of my role, and didn't come out to get me lynched when I role-claimed because, at the time, he didn't need to. Now suddenly he's trying to do all of this backpedalling to cover his butt... I'm not buying it at all.

I can hear your vicious logic as you speak...

If I did not challenge your claim, although aware of it... , as you put it ?

Anyway. You deserve to win, Dourgrim. Either Zarquon is the mastermind behind the restaurant in this game (in which case your merit is somewhat limited), or you took a great risk claiming 'prophet' when the town was after you - and it ended up paying off because of my absence and the controversy on the names. I believe risk should be rewarded from time to time.

Very nice play.

.

I guess it's more a gut vote then a ' logic' vote. I can't believe that if Leonidas was scum, he claimed a role already claimed. It's true that Leo didn't vote for Foolster and Dourgrim did. An OMGUS-kinda vote. Dourgrim was away and Foolster voted for him. Still, mathcam got Leonidas unguilty, but he could be naive. But then again Leo's got the name of the Prohphet wrong, but Dourgrim was not eager to roleclaim... AARRGHH!

Maybe I should just trust my instinct (which is probably not a good idea).

Well, the chance of Kerplunk being evil is limited... I can't even reproach him that he did not investigate Dourgrim, because after all his role claim was believable.

So no matter how you look at it, Dourgrim has to be scum



However, I think it might be better to actually wait one day, and give our cops a chance to investigate him - after all, one of the cops is certain to survive.

leonidas wrote:

mathcam wrote:7 (new)) Claims to have protected jasonpingpong on night 1, even thought at that point he had been replaced by jadesmar.

I don't know what you're talking about here. I did protect jasonpingpong on night 1. His posts on day 1 seemed suspicious to me - and by the time night fell, PolarBoy was a much worthier candidate for my protection anyway.

Oh...right, night 1 before day 1. He was replaced in the middle of day 1.

Dourgrim wrote:The only other stuff in my PM is flavor text relating to my Great Prophet-ness (we all know how fond of flavor text Our Benevolent Mod is )

This new quote from Dourgrim is really setting off alarms in my head: WB does put a lot of flavor text, but I felt this was a "Hey guys, look, I really do have a good role, cause I know stuff about good roles."

I almost feel like changing. A cop cleared him after all. Kerplunk, what was your cop ability again?

Cam

I'm afraid I have no ability what so ever. Every investigation (mathcam, Leonidas, mathcam) has failed.

If we not lynch today. mathcam investigates Dourgrim. Leo or Dourgrim protects mathcam, then maybe we have some info about Dourgrim guiltyness. mathcam might get 'innocent', but then at least we know that he is naive. And then we can decide who to lynch. Maybe it's gonna be a lucky guess, but today it's also a lucky guess.

,

Agreed. I forgot we had a doc.

Here's the plan:

I investigate Dourgrim tonight. Dourgrim and Leonidas: One of you protect me, one of you try to kill me. Work it out between yourselves who does which. (Note: the killing is optional). When kerplunk dies in the morning, I'll have info on Dourgrim that will either pinpoint Dourgrim as evil (best case), or pinpoint me as naive (worst case). Even in the worst case, we're no worse off than we are now.

I'm going to vote no lynch if no one has anything else to say before night. WB, does me voting no lynch automatically mean the day is over? If two people are voting to no lynch and three is needed to lynch....

Cam

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 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 . 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 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 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 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 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 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 end the day with a no-lynch until we've seriously hashed this out, folks.

Ummm...yeah. Good point, big D. Leo, if you're telling the truth about your role, then we can't wait another day, because you claimed your role while I was voting for you. How can you then suggest we wait a day? Perhaps it's because you figure a draw (all getting blown up) is better than a loss (you getting lynched)?

This whole end of the universe thing is so bizarre to me. Either he's telling the truth, and we have to lynch someone today, or he's lying, and we have to lynch today. That's already giving great odds on lynching Leo over DG.

Cam

Dourgrim wrote: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?

And mathcam did not vote for him yet, when he roleclaimed. So I don't think we have to worry about that. Maybe Leonidas can PM Werebear about this?

Dourgrim wrote: 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?

The mafia already had a role with a multiple kill in one night. So there's a small chance that they can do something like that twice.

I think we must take that chance and let mathcam has his investigation.

Ah, good point. So Leo he had, and that's why he said so in the thread? I agree there's little threat in storing kills. Okay, so it seems like were risking very little by taking another day, and the possible good of doing so is very large.

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?

People who are innocent and can't find the argument to convince the town of this fact so give up in frustration. Also, in response to the rest of point 5, I think Leo was actually arguing that might might be possible that you were both great prophets. And yes, Leo conceded he was not reading the thread. Your argument is that he saw you claim it and then claimed the exact same role but misspelled ? I find that hard to believe. Why not just pick some unrepresented character. We had all claimed roles by this point, he had tons of choices left.

Kerplunk, I realize your cop role sucks...could you spell out exactly how it works?

Cam

mathcam wrote:Kerplunk, I realize your cop role sucks...could you spell out exactly how it works?

Well, my role-PM said something like that when the lights go out, I walk to a person and speak with them. Then it said I was honestly not a serial killer, but an investigator this time. So each night I send in my target and get a Douglas Adams kinda PM back with a small story and the information that my investigation failed or that I got no investigation, something like that.

BTW, why do you keep asking me about my role?

mathcam wrote:

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?

People who are innocent and can't find the argument to convince the town of this fact so give up in frustration.

... or scum trying desperately to frame someone else in an endgame situation to pull out a win. what he's really doing.

mathcam wrote: Also, in response to the rest of point 5, I think Leo was actually arguing that might might be possible that you were both great prophets. And yes, Leo conceded he was not reading the thread. Your argument is that he saw you claim it and then claimed the exact same role but misspelled

intentionally

? I find that hard to believe.

Yes, you do... which is precisely why it's working. The more unbelievable the role-claim, the easier it is to believe it... that's what I was trying to say.

mathcam wrote:Why not just pick some unrepresented character. We had all claimed roles by this point, he had tons of choices left.

Because can do that and he knows it. This way he can use the "I can't help it the Mod gave me such a bizarre role to claim" line (I've used it in the above-referenced "Misery, MO" game and, more recently and successfully, in "Princess Bride"). Don't you get it? He's using reverse psychology on you: "That's so unbelievable that it must be true, because who would be dumb enough to make something up like that?"

I have a very strong feeling that this is the endgame, people. I don't think we're going to get another Day to dink around with this, and I really don't want to see us lose at this point because we were too timid to lynch when the chips were down.

has this to say about paranoia:



This is not wholly remarkable, except that this was a recent revision. The original entry said,



There was more, mostly about dire consequences should the reader NOT pack up anything considered valuable by current galactic standards, but the reader should get the gist of it. And although the claims it is definitive, and reality is frequently inaccurate, some editor along the way found the entry and finally changed it, mostly because he wasn't getting a cut of the proceeds.

The reader may wonder what this has to do with a bunch of beings sitting in a nearly abandoned (and almost, but not completely destroyed) restaurant glaring at each other and deciding who to kill. It really doesn't, but the Mod gets a commission from the for every user it gets to read quotes.

All right. See if I can hack and slash Dourgrim's post to my best.

Dourgrim wrote: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?

Yes - 'Zarquar' gave me only two sites on google - one of them being a review by Douglas Adams, but I agree, Zarquon is indeed the most frequent name for the prophet.

Dourgrim wrote: 2. 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?

Funny you should mention it. I find it strange that your claimed role is not linked with the end of the Universe at all. Given the way the book ends, two-shot doc for Zarquon... You're not giving us your real role description.
(This is why I was asking you about any restriction you might have regarding claiming).

Dourgrim wrote: 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).

Nice try, but absolute crap. Why would the end-of-game condition be ? What are you talking about ? In addition, I technically claimed my role being voted (see Kerplunk's post - I think).
I had decided to come out early today exactly for that purpose, so it's not like if the crowd had handed me the microphone and asked me to talk in public about my 'revelations' and the meaning of life.

Dourgrim wrote: 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?

ROFL, Dourgrim. Seriously. Just look at the events of the nights. The mafia killed or tried to kill once each night (except night 2), and would certainly have used any remaining multiple kill ability last night. Can you really imagine 'them' having one kamikaze, one bonus killer, and on top of that multiple kills ?

Dourgrim wrote: 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?

Bah.

Dourgrim wrote: 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.

Point already answered.

Dourgrim, the mod's description makes it clear that mathcam was last night's target. Who had an interest in killing him ?

Kerplunk, I'm just curious. I never got a straight answer. Frankly, I guess I'm leaning toward voting Leonidas, which means one of us is being duped hard-core, Kerplunk. The one thing I don't understand is DG's gut feeling on this being the last night. Other than that, it seems clear that no lynch is the right option.

It's very weird, really. DG's the one to be investigated tonight, so if he were guilty, he would be pressing for not letting us have another day. On the other hand, if Leo really can end the world, then he be pushing for another day.

Kerplunk, how sure are you?

Cam