Mafiascum.net

“Whatever the Eldrazi’s purpose is, it has nothing to do with something so insignificant as us.”

—Nirthu, lone missionary

Creature, [Champion of the Parish], Venmar, Iconeum
Maid Cafe, Almost50, Purple Heart
Shining Dreamers
baku and munna
Gamma Emerald
OnTheMark

Reasonably Rational, SnarkySnowman, Dunnstral, Nancy Drew 39, Chara, Bronya Zaychik, Skybird
Elemental, Mother of Runes

:(expired on 2018-03-27 20:30:00)

In post 2799, OnTheMark wrote:Oh and FYI I think those Creatures belong to scum.

The white ones.

Just a hunch.

Not impossible, but likely a misplay if true.

Unless they had reason to believe ownership could be revealed somehow. The first creature came into play before Micc/Nancys ability to gift a creature was known, so if scum, they made a mistake imo, or suspected creatures could be tied to owners easily enough to justify using their creatures and spells sure optimally.

Since someone brought this up publicly(much easier to get potential scum to admit a connection to something if they think it gets people to town read them), I have to ask:

Alisae, why did you give Chara that creature? Chara in particular. The real reason.

-Cerb

In post 2800, Varsoon wrote:Apparently, the Squirrel creature type only became such a big staple of Magic because the head of the art department didn't know how to play Magic.

This is an amazing piece of trivia.

Also, I <3 Squirrels.

-Cerb

In post 2797, Purple Heart wrote:varsoon puts a sample role pm in his games
RC doesn't.

I guess that makes sense

In post 2801, Reasonably Rational wrote:

In post 2799, OnTheMark wrote:Oh and FYI I think those Creatures belong to scum.

The white ones.

Just a hunch.

Not impossible, but likely a misplay if true.

Unless they had reason to believe ownership could be revealed somehow. The first creature came into play before Micc/Nancys ability to gift a creature was known, so if scum, they made a mistake imo, or suspected creatures could be tied to owners easily enough to justify using their creatures and spells sure optimally.

Since someone brought this up publicly(much easier to get potential scum to admit a connection to something if they think it gets people to town read them), I have to ask:

Alisae, why did you give Chara that creature? Chara in particular. The real reason.

-Cerb

Interesting. Elaborate on the mistake further please.

In post 2686, Reasonably Rational wrote:

In post 2685, Bronya Zaychik wrote:

In post 2683, Reasonably Rational wrote:Oh, and I guess they could also still end up the lynch for today even as scum if they're being bussed, but that player wouldn't be getting bussed D1, and if they were, they'd want to get a lot more credit out of it than anyone can currently claim.

-Cerb

If the double voting creature is town, then it's way easier to get a lynch on scum without bussers.

~Kiana

I'm saying I find it very doubtful that none of the scum slots in the game have the ability to remove a creature from play.

That means even though there are currently 5(as of last VC) votes on SD, you can only count on 3 of those votes remaining in play when SD hits L-1, if they're scum(or scum want us to THINK they're scum). The highest they ever got was L-2, I believe, so if all those vote come back, they'd only be at 5 votes, ignoring the creature, because it doesn't count if we're voting scum.

That means we're far from a consensus.

-Cerb

I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from on the bolded part. Roles were created before alignment. How can you be so sure scum has the ability to remove a creature from play? Is removal of a creature a pretty common ability in MtG?

(I'm about 10 pages behind so I apologize if this has already been answered.)

In post 2802, Reasonably Rational wrote:

In post 2800, Varsoon wrote:Apparently, the Squirrel creature type only became such a big staple of Magic because the head of the art department didn't know how to play Magic.

This is an amazing piece of trivia.

Also, I <3 Squirrels.

-Cerb

Indeed, I wish squirrels weren't so feisty so I could have one as a pet

From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.

Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?

In post 2802, Reasonably Rational wrote:

In post 2800, Varsoon wrote:Apparently, the Squirrel creature type only became such a big staple of Magic because the head of the art department didn't know how to play Magic.

This is an amazing piece of trivia.

Also, I <3 Squirrels.

-Cerb

I love the art department. Squirrel decks are okay but the art is where it’s at.

@Skybird yes. Control decks very typically remove Creatures and is a good combat to an aggrieved deck.

I would think removal of Creatures is town aligned. But what do I know?

The ability to remove a creature might actually be a spell card, I think I remember seeing that somewhere that there are cards that let you send a creature back to its owner, maybe not for mtg but I feel like even if so it would be similar across trading card games
PEdit: OTM confirms my suspicions

In post 2804, OnTheMark wrote:

In post 2801, Reasonably Rational wrote:

In post 2799, OnTheMark wrote:Oh and FYI I think those Creatures belong to scum.

The white ones.

Just a hunch.

Not impossible, but likely a misplay if true.

Unless they had reason to believe ownership could be revealed somehow. The first creature came into play before Micc/Nancys ability to gift a creature was known, so if scum, they made a mistake imo, or suspected creatures could be tied to owners easily enough to justify using their creatures and spells sure optimally.

Since someone brought this up publicly(much easier to get potential scum to admit a connection to something if they think it gets people to town read them), I have to ask:

Alisae, why did you give Chara that creature? Chara in particular. The real reason.

-Cerb

Interesting. Elaborate on the mistake further please.

Oh, just not preserving the ability to spring multivoting on someone they really wanted lynched. That's all.

-Cerb

pedit:@Skybird: Two reasons.

1) I know scum have factionals.
2) Every color in magic can remove creatures somehow, some more easily than others. It seems implausible that an entire scum team, with 9-12 cards between them, would not have at least one piece of creature removal that they've managed to generate the mana to use.

ppedit:@OTM:I don't believe your conclusions necessarily follow. Duplicating a teammate, who you know has an ability that allows you to steal mana, so you can prevent town slots from using their cards, seems good. I don't see any reason why the creature owner couldn't be scum with Micc/Nancy, unless you find the strength of the combination of their abilities(which were created before alignments were assigned) unlikely.

-Cerb

That burns the Creatures though and then town can prepare for that.

It would be a mistake to not play them here.

@Cerb I think there is something at play with my abilities I can’t say. I find that if Alisae and Nancy were scum together there is a huge misstep.

In post 2807, OnTheMark wrote:From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.

Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?

It doesn't.

In post 2814, Purple Heart wrote:

In post 2807, OnTheMark wrote:From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.

Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?

It doesn't.

Exactly my point.
The creatures are creature cards.

So the voting can’t be duplicated from what I see.

So no “mistake” exists.

tbh I kinda just gave it to Chara on a whim.
I heard they were town and didn't really think much about it besides
"Bee is really obvious town and likely going to get shot and I don't want to put all of my eggs in one basket"

In post 2815, OnTheMark wrote:

In post 2814, Purple Heart wrote:

In post 2807, OnTheMark wrote:From how I see it, it means if Alisae is scum it isn’t with Micc/Nancy. It also to me means the Creature owner if scum, is not aligned with Micc/Nancy.

Furthermore Alisae supposedly copied a role and stole mana. How would that apply to cards?

It doesn't.

Exactly my point.
The creatures are creature cards.

So the voting can’t be duplicated from what I see.

So no “mistake” exists.

...

Alisae did not play a creature card from Micc's hand.

She used an ability of Micc's that can give someone else a green elemental, and generates a mana for herself.

Cards have no relevance to this.

Token generation is a common green theme.

-Cerb

Yeah but you were saying the creature person made a mistake by not waiting on Alisae yeah?

So I fail to see the “mistake”

So just moving on. Chalking it up in the wtf posts from Cerb.

Cerby I don't think Chara is scum, I don't think Chara makes that move as a wolf, I really don't.

Like, I've seen that exact same stunt before from town.
I agree its not a town motivated move
But at the same time I don't think wolves in general claim miller then retract.

In post 2821, Purple Heart wrote:Like, I've seen that exact same stunt before from town.
I agree its not a town motivated move
But at the same time I don't think wolves in general claim miller then retract.

I am giving you a bit of a side eye for that.

You know of at least one occurrence where that has happened and scum won.

I don’t think Chara is doing it here but I really don’t think that town!Alisae discounts it so quickly.

You're going to have to refresh my memory I am in class