[Advanced Mafia] Black Ajah - GAME OVER!

[Alanna]

Vote Count:

Wombat (2) - Tynaal, Csarmi

Aust (3) - Meesh, Krak, Phelix

Krak (2) - Blackhoof, Talmanes

Meesh (2) - Leelou, Thorum

Red (2) - Player, Wombat

Talmanes (1) - Drew

Phelix (2) - Berf, Song

 

Not Voting (4): Red, Curt, Aust, Mav

 

With 18 alive, it takes 10 to lynch. Note: Currently no deadline.

[berf]

Aust (3) - Meesh, Krak, Phelix

 

That seems perhaps, a little sus group of people right about there.

 

 

 

 

Wombat (3) - Song, Tynaal, Csarmi

 

That has gone completely beneath my radar...

 

[MOD POKE]

 

BUT ALLANA - SONG HAS UNVOTED AND VOTED FOR PHELIX!

[Blackhoof]

i just realised that i didnt vote wombat.....

 

first this and then the charlie-sheen-mafia-voting-during-night-thing, where was my brain that day?

 

anyway, new evidence has arisen and i feel that

 

UNVOTE

 

VOTE PHELIX

 

his attack on aust was simply strange, in my opinion. and the whole '3' thing was strange.... who has a structured, logical argument for a little comment like that? someone overthinking it, is who. someone desperate to cover a slip.

[Phelix]

Point of fact, Csarms m'man, you got out of the lynch by claiming my role. You weren't gainsaid by anyone, but it wasn't your role you claimed.

 

Just chose a role. I wasn't picky :)

Seriously, i didn't want to ovecomplicate my post here with more off topic than I felt necessary (anyone can read up),

 

I think there is much more reason to vote for Aust than there is to vote for Wombat. Would you care to share your reasoning for that vote?

 

Sure. I voted and unvoted you for random fun.

I voted Wombat for

50%: wtf there's day 1

25%: sounded fun to vote the guy who voted the girl for not joining the bandwagon

25%: ever since I saw his nick in the 'Rebel Mafia' thread on my readups, I dreamed of voting Wombat. Dunno why.

 

Dream fulfilled.

 

I'm still a bit irked about my role being usurped by another Townie. *off topic*

 

Interesting motives... but makes sense. In an odd way.

 

 

Unvote

 

VOTE PHELIX

 

 

1) The rule of 3 sounds like a slip of the black, black tongue.

 

2) Jumping down Aust's throat to manufacture excuses.

 

1) Wow... I didn't realize I'd made a rule. I just made a logical assumption based on the structure of the game. The mistake might have been sharing my logical assumption.

 

2) They're not manufactured. Aust asked why I chose to vote for him, so I explained my vote. He even said he understood my reasoning for my vote, even though he obviously disagreed with it.

 

 

 

Now as for Phelix - what made you throw out the number 3? You may have stated this already and if I've missed it, I'm sorry but I did a quick scan and didn't catch it.

 

I did explain, but basically it was an assumption based on the set up of the game. My reasoning is a few posts back now, but it is there.

 

 

Well normally day 1 is about gathering the most information, not really about finding scum. So while I agree with you vote on Aust, I don't like this reasoning for it. Very thin and light? lol

 

I just find it highly highly weird that you just pulled the number 3 out of nowhere. Do you have some inside information that the rest of us don't have? Assuming in this game is ridiculous, and assuming that you know the number of scum on a team is highly suspicious.

 

Agreed. After seeing the back and forth between Phelix and just arguing the same thing over and not moving on to find more info, it's the same dance.

 

So I am going to UNVOTE, VOTE PHELIX

 

It's fine not to agree with my reasoning, each person thinks differently. And yes, evidence is thin and light right now, because very few people are talking. It's mostly people going with their gut.

 

I've explained the number three thing already. I don't have any insider information, it just made sense. If the Scum team were any larger they would dominate the lynching process. If it were any smaller, it would be too easy to get their whole team on a lynch so as to make that rule ineffective and a red herring. Then you add in the world building aspects, and a team of three makes perfect sense.

 

When was I arguing the same thing over and over? Aust asked me why I voted for him, I replied, he responded to that, and I replied back to him. That's hardly arguing over and over.

 

VOTE PHELIX

 

his attack on aust was simply strange, in my opinion. and the whole '3' thing was strange.... who has a structured, logical argument for a little comment like that? someone overthinking it, is who. someone desperate to cover a slip.

 

My attack on Aust was strange... why exactly? I'll admit the three thing looks strange, but it is a logical assumption, isn't it? Blackhoof, if I may, if you read through the debate thread on Sam Vimes' post about Christian Parents, Foster Care, and homosexuality, I'm sure you'll note there that I tend to make very structured logical posts. I bring that thread up because you participated in it so you have some context for how I think. A structured logical argument is how I think.

 

If I hadn't replied with a reason for the 3 scum comment, wouldn't you assume that it came from insider knowledge? If I just said "Oh, I don't know... it made sense to me." People would be baying for my lynch. The simple truth is I do think things through, at least up until looking at the consequences of sharing my thoughts.

 

Now, looking back at the thread, I might be the perfect test case for the first lynch. I know I'm town/innocent, but you all don't. If you lynch me, it will confirm that I am town, but you'll get to see the 10 people who voted for my lynching, and if there is a night kill that night, you'll be able to whittle down through those ten to find the scum.

 

I'm also proving the truth of my earlier comment to Csarmi, that people who talk draw the spotlight back to themselves.

[Tynaal Consen]

Beside the points pointed out about Aust and Phelix - which I agree with mostly.

 

It does seem highly suspicious that Phelix pointed out the possibility of 3 members specifically. If one considers that this game is based on the Black Ajah, and in the books they are in fists of 3 people. Its plausible that Alanna could possibly create multiple teams of mafia - so balancing out the ratio (she did specifically want 18 people - I think) and beside that without a fixed lynch the mafia would be hard pressed to win. Having more than one mafia team could compensate for this.

 

So, considering my vote was on Wombat cause of Bieber..

Unvote. VOTE PHELIX for now

[Tynaal Consen]

Way to go for posting while I was busy with my own post. Lol.

 

But ehm, I'm feeling like a retard, but where did you defend choosing the 3, before?

[Tynaal Consen]

Way to go for posting while I was busy with my own post. Lol.

 

But ehm, I'm feeling like a retard, but where did you defend choosing the 3, before?

[csarmi]

Okay, now that I'm finished with my flat renovation (well, rather say semi-finished - there's the cleanup still) and I got a little less work to do, I switch to serious mode :)

 

First, I will Unvote WOMBAT

. That vote was never meant to be serious (in all the rush I didn't even realize mine was the 3rd vote starting a possible bandwagon, sorry about that Song/Wombat), and now we should be consolidating.

 

I'll vote once I have a good read on any of the subjects. That will be this afternoon, once I had the time to do a serious re-read.

 

Sorry about my inactivity so far: by inactivity I mean the lack of any thought put into the game, I've been posing some, sure, but that's not the same thing.

 

I'll try to be more active :)

[Phelix]

Way to go for posting while I was busy with my own post. Lol.

 

But ehm, I'm feeling like a retard, but where did you defend choosing the 3, before?

 

 

Here's the full quote Tynaal.

 

Aust - i disagree about the "be on the lynch or not NK" rule making the scum uncomfertable. you ignored my post as well *pouts* your snookums feels left out

 

 

Phelix thanks for responding, I do see some of where you're coming from, but we'll agree to disagree on the accuracy of your paraphrasing.

 

And thanks Csarmi for supporting the idea of some discussion on day one. Usually I play it pretty safe on day one and say very little until I see a safe opportunity tocomment and cast my vote - precicely because it puts you at a lot of risk for standing out. But in the past few games I've played, inactivity has been really bad, so I thought I'd try a different approach to things today. At least we have (mostly) moved on from Bieber lol!

 

Again I will say hat our best tool against the mafia in this game is to use their discomfort about the lynch rule. If others have different thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them!

 

 

I'll always do my best to respond in a timely manner, Aust... assuming I'm awake and near a computer, and I am fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

I do agree that the lynch rule is key to winning this game, but I don't think we have enough evidence to lever it correctly right now. The scum have to get 3 players in on the lynch if they want to night kill someone... to my way of thinking, they could either stagger their votes, one early, one middle of the pack, and a final vote either just before the hammer or as the hammer itself... or they could try to get their votes in all at the last minute. Voting early opens them to suspicion, and reduces the chances that their chosen lynch will go through.

 

From our end, as Town, that means we can't do much other than wait and see on Day one. We might get lucky with our lynch, or we get to see what the scum do.

 

Unless you have a better way of leveraging the lynch rule?

 

the bolded unlderlined seciton caught my eye.

 

 

why 3 people?? we have 18 players and multiple teams (per rules and mod hints) why would you assume the scum groups are in multiples of 3's

 

 

inside information maybe??

 

Nope, not inside information, an assumption based on the world set up. This is a Black Ajah Game. The storyline mentioned multiple groups, but they are larger than are possible for this game (if we had 11 Mafia on a team we couldn't lynch a single person), so I thought it safe to assume the Black Ajah in this game would be organized along the same lines as the Black Ajah in the books... Hearts of three women.

 

Plus, larger groups would be more difficult to hide in a lynch group. Three is already a large percentage of a lynching, and it will only get larger as players are killed off. If there were four people in a scum group, they would be fairly obvious after two lynches.

 

Just my assumption, but it's possible I could be wrong.

[csarmi]

 

Nope, not inside information, an assumption based on the world set up. This is a Black Ajah Game. The storyline mentioned multiple groups, but they are larger than are possible for this game (if we had 11 Mafia on a team we couldn't lynch a single person), so I thought it safe to assume the Black Ajah in this game would be organized along the same lines as the Black Ajah in the books... Hearts of three women.

 

Plus, larger groups would be more difficult to hide in a lynch group. Three is already a large percentage of a lynching, and it will only get larger as players are killed off. If there were four people in a scum group, they would be fairly obvious after two lynches.

 

Just my assumption, but it's possible I could be wrong.

 

This is Phelix's reasoning on the three.

It makes sense, really. Still, pointing it out like that ...

[csarmi]

Meh.

 

Unvote Wombat

[Phelix]

Nope, not inside information, an assumption based on the world set up. This is a Black Ajah Game. The storyline mentioned multiple groups, but they are larger than are possible for this game (if we had 11 Mafia on a team we couldn't lynch a single person), so I thought it safe to assume the Black Ajah in this game would be organized along the same lines as the Black Ajah in the books... Hearts of three women.

 

Plus, larger groups would be more difficult to hide in a lynch group. Three is already a large percentage of a lynching, and it will only get larger as players are killed off. If there were four people in a scum group, they would be fairly obvious after two lynches.

 

Just my assumption, but it's possible I could be wrong.

 

This is Phelix's reasoning on the three.

It makes sense, really. Still, pointing it out like that ...

 

 

Looking back, it was foolish to point it out, even if it is logical. I did so because Aust was talking about how to use the lynching rule to find scum. He seems to think we can do so using voting patterns, and I agree to an extent... so I laid out the two primary patterns I would expect from the scum.

 

Logical assumption + implementation method = my statement.

 

But again, seeing as I drew all the focus to myself, it was obviously foolish. Though, canny observers could be watching the bandwagon slowly forming on me to notice which people are doing so with strong or weak reasons, and thus which are likely to be scum.

[Blackhoof]

of course we have flimsy arguments- it is day 1 for petes sake. here is the evidence that has arisen so far:

 

-your '3' thing

-aust making a comment about how the scum-lynch-nk rule could be used to find scum

-aust saying how the people who try to hurry things along are likely scum

-you attacking aust about above and making a big deal out of it (understandable for reasons i have already mentioned- i suppose it wasn't strange after all.)

-wombat talking about bieber

-assorted odd behaviour

(remind me if i have missed something, i know i have....)

 

nothing really definitive has happened so far, so we must lynch someone soon before alanna does anything drastic (scared!) and begin night and then day 2, where we can gather some useful information and combine it with the tidbits from today. we really only need to lynch a placeholder unitl we get into the real scumhunting. a poor (usually town) victim who made the mistake of bringing attention to yourself on day 1.

 

terefore, my vote stays for now.

[Blackhoof]

*therefore, therefore my vote stays where it is.

 

also, lol at tynaal. :)

[Phelix]

of course we have flimsy arguments- it is day 1 for petes sake. here is the evidence that has arisen so far:

 

-your '3' thing

-aust making a comment about how the scum-lynch-nk rule could be used to find scum

-aust saying how the people who try to hurry things along are likely scum

-you attacking aust about above and making a big deal out of it (understandable for reasons i have already mentioned- i suppose it wasn't strange after all.)

-wombat talking about bieber

-assorted odd behaviour

(remind me if i have missed something, i know i have....)

 

nothing really definitive has happened so far, so we must lynch someone soon before alanna does anything drastic (scared!) and begin night and then day 2, where we can gather some useful information and combine it with the tidbits from today. we really only need to lynch a placeholder unitl we get into the real scumhunting. a poor (usually town) victim who made the mistake of bringing attention to yourself on day 1.

 

terefore, my vote stays for now.

 

OK, as long as we're clear I'm in the sacrificial lamb role right now.

 

I would also point out that I didn't make a big deal of it. Aust asked why I voted the way I did, and so I told him.

 

I also don't think you missed anything else, really. I could be wrong though.

[Blackhoof]

then we are all on the same page. *thumbs up*

 

i tend to use hyperbole a lot, to make my sentences seem more dramatic and what-not. im a melodramatic dude. so that is why if i said "you made a bit deal" you probably made a "bit of a deal".

 

i am glad that you have accepted your role as sacrificial lamb and plan to go quietly (it suks lynching poor townies/scums for no reason while they are all like "wtf! what did i do! dont lynch me, plz!". kind of fun, though. if you have an important role, speak up now.

 

i almost hope that you arent the sacrificial lamb, phelix. you are so nice. :)

 

we could always lynch Aust, or csarmi, instead or krak.... he voted for me

[Phelix]

then we are all on the same page. *thumbs up*

 

i tend to use hyperbole a lot, to make my sentences seem more dramatic and what-not. im a melodramatic dude. so that is why if i said "you made a bit deal" you probably made a "bit of a deal".

 

i am glad that you have accepted your role as sacrificial lamb and plan to go quietly (it suks lynching poor townies/scums for no reason while they are all like "wtf! what did i do! dont lynch me, plz!". kind of fun, though. if you have an important role, speak up now.

 

i almost hope that you arent the sacrificial lamb, phelix. you are so nice. :)

 

we could always lynch Aust, or csarmi, instead or krak.... he voted for me

 

Whoo! Being on the same page!

 

Melodrama can have its place... though, when it's being used to explain a vote on me I like to point it out. As in the case of Song's vote. Over and over? Pshaw!

 

Quietly? Well... maybe not quietly. I don't do much quietly. I won't rant against it though. I'll just keep pointing out flaws in people's reasoning for voting for me. You, though, have already said it's the Day One sacrifice. No real argument against that.

 

And if I have a role I can't say I do. Alanna's rules forbid it. Then I'd just get modkilled instead of mob-killed. I could tell you my character though. The rules permit that... though, my character is fairly well known, so it might be a tell as to which side of the alignment I fall on. Wanna know anyway?

 

I try to be nice. It's much easier to keep people talking if you're nice. If you're mean they just ignore you and then smile as they lynch you.

 

I would be good with lynching someone else... but counting your vote, I've got 4/10 votes on me, Aust only has 3/10. I'm not sure how many votes Csarmi or Krak have... and neither have done anything that suspicious IMO.

[Aust]

Looking back, it was foolish to point it out, even if it is logical. I did so because Aust was talking about how to use the lynching rule to find scum. . He seems to think we can do so using voting patterns, and I agree to an extent... so I laid out the two primary patterns I would expect from the scum.

 

Phelix the bolded statement confused me. You state there that to an extent you agree with me yet his was also the basis of your reason for voting me. It's inconsistent. Can you explain?

[Phelix]

Looking back, it was foolish to point it out, even if it is logical. I did so because Aust was talking about how to use the lynching rule to find scum. . He seems to think we can do so using voting patterns, and I agree to an extent... so I laid out the two primary patterns I would expect from the scum.

 

Phelix the bolded statement confused me. You state there that to an extent you agree with me yet his was also the basis of your reason for voting me. It's inconsistent. Can you explain?

 

 

It's not inconsistant at all, just like it isn't inconsistant for Song to agree with my assessment of your playing (that you're giving off a scummy vibe) but not my reasoning.

 

My reason for voting for you was how you were taking the lead and laying out expectations. Here's the original quote:

 

Well, looking at the situation, there were two people with multiple votes against them and we have a Mod who is "encouraging" us to come to a conclusion. We need to consolidate on one person, and I don't see a reason to vote Wombat.

 

Beyond that, I think your comments about the Scum needing to move things along so they can get a NK are interesting. I just went through a game where the most "helpful" person ended up being the scummiest... it's made me suspicious of people trying to take the lead. You told Meesh you were doing it to provoke a response from the scum, but that doesn't sit right with me at the moment.

 

It's Day One, so my reasoning is very thin and light at the moment... but that's the nature of Day One, isn't it?

 

I've underlined another portion, to highlight that bit of reasoning.

 

Voting for you was never about disagreeing with you. I just questioned your motives.

[Aust]

You agree with me, but you think it's suspicious that I brought it up - I don't follow the logic in that at all. When you voted for me, I had only made one short post mentioning this- hardly taking the lead - so I don't buy your initial reason for voting for me and now this inconsistency with agreeing with me at the same time- it really looks like you're trying to maneuver around his issue and there have been a couple slips now.

 

I don't like Krak's random vote and then disappearing - but right now you're standing out the most to me.

 

vote Phelix

[Red2111]

i'm doing this in multiple posts cause it's quote heavy.

 

 

Ok well since we still have no deadline I see no reason to bandwagon. Wombat is pinging me, but he always does, so I won' vote him just for that.

Right now Krak voting for absolutely no reason on a bandwagon bothers me the most, so I'll vote him tonight when I'm home and can use the code. Lol I don't remember how to use it on my phone.

 

same here. *blows a kiss at Wombat. just cause you didn't get the Tweet about me accepting the pet name snookums a few games back doens't mean it didn't happen Womby. luv you too though

 

 

Red, I won't argue in circles with you over this as we clearly hold very different views. I see your point of view on this too, but I still think it's quite worthwhile to try to use, and I don't advocate pouncing on someone who votes to get a majority. I could accept someone stating that they are voting to achieve consensus if it makes sense within the context of their vote and they articulate it. And even someone who is agreeing with other people's reasons for voting can at least summon the effort to point out the particular issues they saw as relevant, or add support to key points with at least one original thought.

 

I put that comment out there as I say, to get some reactions and to spur some discussion. I'll just clarify on your last point (bolded) - there was nothing going on to distract from when I raised this issue, and if you have something you'd like to raise as a point of discussion - please do so.

 

So I'll leave this issue in your hands now to see what you do with it. You can try spin this as me trying to distract/set up lynches, etc., and I could go at you for trying to make it easy for people to make lazy votes, but I truly don't think that's going to get us anywhere - and I don't know yet whether this is just you being your typical day one assertive self.

 

fair enough. erguing this will allow for scum to hide in it; as much as trying to make the topic the main topic of discussion. so while i find you suspicous, i'll drop the subject for now Aust. i still find your "suggestions" to be set ups for directing people in the future though. you know, planting the proverbial seed and trying to let it take root. i'm watching you Aust, like a hawk.

 

 

Okay, now that I'm finished with my flat renovation (well, rather say semi-finished - there's the cleanup still) and I got a little less work to do, I switch to serious mode :)

 

First, I will Unvote WOMBAT. That vote was never meant to be serious (in all the rush I didn't even realize mine was the 3rd vote starting a possible bandwagon, sorry about that Song/Wombat), and now we should be consolidating.

 

I'll vote once I have a good read on any of the subjects. That will be this afternoon, once I had the time to do a serious re-read.

Sorry about my inactivity so far: by inactivity I mean the lack of any thought put into the game, I've been posing some, sure, but that's not the same thing.

 

I'll try to be more active :)

 

you know, the bolded & underlined part just doesn't set well with me. until now, the only "discussion" you've involved yourself in was to discuss plays from a previous game. so why the need to do a "serious" re-read already? putting too much effort in trying to distract the town, and now that people have caught on or ignored it for the most part, have to go back to the drawing baord with Phelix to try and find another way to distract us from finding scum??

[Red2111]

then we are all on the same page. *thumbs up*

 

i tend to use hyperbole a lot, to make my sentences seem more dramatic and what-not. im a melodramatic dude. so that is why if i said "you made a bit deal" you probably made a "bit of a deal".

 

i am glad that you have accepted your role as sacrificial lamb and plan to go quietly (it suks lynching poor townies/scums for no reason while they are all like "wtf! what did i do! dont lynch me, plz!". kind of fun, though. if you have an important role, speak up now.

i almost hope that you arent the sacrificial lamb, phelix. you are so nice. :)

 

we could always lynch Aust, or csarmi, instead or krak.... he voted for me

 

blackie, i'm starting to think you're just one of those players i find scummy. but this entire post reaks of scum!! especially the bolded part!

 

you're glad if he is town that he's accepted being sacrificed then you follow it up with role fishing when he's got, what, like not even half of the needed votes on him for a lynch. *shakes head*

 

 

 

 

 

And if I have a role I can't say I do. Alanna's rules forbid it. Then I'd just get modkilled instead of mob-killed. I could tell you my character though. The rules permit that... though, my character is fairly well known, so it might be a tell as to which side of the alignment I fall on. Wanna know anyway?

 

 

 

actually, we can revela our roles & characters. just not alignments or team members. you just can't quote your role or character name from the role PM.

[Phelix]

You agree with me, but you think it's suspicious that I brought it up - I don't follow the logic in that at all. When you voted for me, I had only made one short post mentioning this- hardly taking the lead - so I don't buy your initial reason for voting for me and now this inconsistency with agreeing with me at the same time- it really looks like you're trying to maneuver around his issue and there have been a couple slips now.

 

I don't like Krak's random vote and then disappearing - but right now you're standing out the most to me.

 

vote Phelix

 

Point of fact, Aust, you made your original post mentioning it, and then when Meesh brought it up you defended it explaining your desire to put pressure on the scum and attacking her for targeting you.

 

I actually don't like Aust's point; it seems set up to cast suspicion on whoever the first person is to vote for serious reasons, which doesn't seem like a Light-loving move to me. Black Ajah getting all ready to point fingers? Just might be.

 

Speaking of serious voting, I might as well head it off. I don't have anything to add to the banter except that Bieber is a girl, so since I have nothing to do today but play mafia, let's get down to business.

 

unvote

 

vote Aust

 

Well Meesh - I threw that comment out there because undoubtedly the mafia are feeling very uncomfortable with this stipulation that all scum be on the lynch in order to get their NK. I wanted to see who reacted strongly to that. Interesting that rather than discuss things you jump right into a vote. We have no deadline today - we have some time to take a look at things.

 

 

So, the way I read it, you bring up the idea initially with the expressed intent of manipulating people, and then when called on it, you tried to cast suspicion on that person.

 

Whether or not you buy it, the way you brought up the issue made me suspicious, so I voted for you.

[Krakalakachkn]

or krak.... he voted for me

 

 

Where the deuce did I vote for you?

[Alanna]

Vote Count:

Aust (3) - Meesh, Krak, Phelix

Krak (1) - Talmanes

Meesh (2) - Leelou, Thorum

Red (2) - Player, Wombat

Talmanes (1) - Drew

Phelix (5) - Berf, Song, Blackhoof, Tynaal, Aust

 

Not Voting (4): Red, Curt, Mav, Csarmi

 

With 18 alive, it takes 10 to lynch.

 

Should be all fixed and updated.