Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Sorry, the voting thing was a blankt statement for bishop and LL, I still think that you're playing the better part of caution though.

I am being somewhat cautious as it is difficult to locate who is scum and who isn't when people are trying to get there bearings. Of course I could argue we get on with it and axe someone if it would make people feel better.

BrotherStynier wrote:I am being somewhat cautious as it is difficult to locate who is scum and who isn't when people are trying to get there bearings. Of course I could argue we get on with it and axe someone if it would make people feel better.

If we axe someone better reads might be available on people on the next day.

Or we might axe an innocent... as is most probable to happen.

Which is true.

But it is also already been said that we are likely to hit an innnocent.
But we've got to make use of the rest of the day phase yet.
If we don't vote for someone then the person with the most at the time gets lynched. Thats IGlanister atm.
Or would you rather no lynch?

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I suspect Drk_Oblitr8r, reason pending...

I suspect you, reason withdrawn

halonachos wrote:In fact, if Drk_O is the inquisitor, he's not doing a very good job of it.

LIES!!! I IS THE GREEEEEEEEEEEEETEST INQUISITOR EVVVVOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRR

but seriously, ohhh nose. If I was the Inquisitor, I'd definately be crazy like normal.

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:Drk_Oblitr8r needs to post more, since I want to get him... A BRAND NEW CAR, COME ON DOOOOOOWWWWWNNNN

Ok, thats "D r" no, no a, no-no I'm NOT a Doctor "k underscore O" not zero, not o "O" Good?

Good, when does it arrive?



... Serious post coming. I'm ending the RVS now, if it hasn't ended. Get those random votes out of your system. All of you, vote for everyone else... NAO!!!

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:Unvote: BishopGore

I'm going to try something alittle different.

Paul and Lan, you're both voting for no lynch.

I'm going to vote for one of you.

So, explain why I shouldn't vote for you, and explain why you continue to vote no lynch.

This was a trap.

Not entirely on just Lanny and Paul, but for everyone(although manly Lanny and Paul anyway). I didn't pick Lanny and Paul because they were voting "No Lynch" I picked them because I'm relatively new to traps, and wanted to keep my sample size small, and they have many things in common. One of those is that they're both new, so I figured I could catch others in the trap as well. Also, I'm concerned that if I had too many people that the trap would largely go unnoticed.

The entire purpose of this trap was to to try and gauge their reactions, how they think, how much faith they have in their decisions and to try and see if anyone will rally against/with me on this.

Results?

Immediately, Paul explained that he had no/little faith in his reasons for voting.

TherVadam and gnd arguibly jumped into voting for lanny to encourage him to explain why

Lanny responded very well, almost. He spelt my name wrong, BAD! Also, I probibly don't think this needs saying now, but I generally know what I'm doing.

Ohh wait. Lanny didn't respond well! He went from

IGLannister wrote:I am very deeply entrenched in my beliefs, thank you for noticing. As to my no lynch vote, I'm not one to randomly cast a vote just because it makes me look suspicious if I don't. I don't like my votes being wasted, especially if there's a possibility it might be the end of the road for an innocent.

to "I'm not using my vote to stop someone from dying!"

Votes can be used to kill players, true. But you voted to not kill anyone. Now you're not. I hope I explained this well.

At this stage, I introduced a countdown. I never had any intention of meeting it, I was applying the pressure a time limit creates.

Paul unvotes, demonstrating the lack of faith he explained earlier. *sigh*



So, what did I learn?
They're both more similar than I thought.
There maybe be a connection between TherVadam and dd, I mean gnd.
I implemented the trap alittle too early.
I'll Vote: Lanny because you let me down

Not enough time for a vote log update today or tomorrow.
If I can fit in in tomorrow then I will, but at the moment it looks like the vote log will be updated Monday.

halonachos wrote:First I would like to ask not_u for a translation.

For this?

n0t_u wrote:

halonachos wrote:The best part is, my baneblade was also in reserve.

Oh, and eldar cannot hold a defensive line worth diddly.

Nil ann ach cleasai, agus tá an iomad measa aige air féin.

The trickster thinks too much of himself.

It seems that Drk_O has activated his trap card too early...

Gratz! You have revealed that two new players have no faith in their votes in the random voting stage, you sir are a prodigy!

I don't see the connection between TherVadam and gnd though, care to go deeper? (Genuine curiosity actually...)

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I don't see the connection between TherVadam and gnd though, care to go deeper? (Genuine curiosity actually...)

I pretty much explained it as in depth as I have. They both voted for Lanny for the same reasons adjacent to each other

New panda pic Drk_O?

Ok, let me put that better, who is gnd?

VikingScott wrote:New panda pic Drk_O?

OH U

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:Ok, let me put that better, who is gnd?

ginger_nid_dude

In all fairness, he hasn't posted since page 6!

OK alot (kind of) seems to have happened in my absence (of a couple hours lol), in the form of two major responses.

Halonachos: Actually, not much to say here. I would enjoy knowing what you think of me. This is actually my first mafia game, but at the beginning, I wanted to stay away from the multiple claims of being innocent townies because... it just didn't sound right with me. So many new people, all just clamoring for innocence. Anyway, I thought you had a very coherent post, but the point about the Inquisitor being quiet was iffy. From my understanding after watching one mafia game before this one, there is no good time to unveil being the inquisitor. Not_U tried it at the beginning, and was promptly night killed, and from what I understand, later on unveiling being the Inquisitor is mirrored by most participants and is just another claim.

Drk: I don't know. I can obviously make claims as to not having any special alliance with ginger_nid, but I don't how what my credibility is to you at this point, and obviously there is no way to defend myself without making myself look obvious, however, we can see that ginger_nid_dude wasn't actually agreeing with me. Clearly,

I agree with dark O. A vote for no lynch is bad unless you have an interesting standoff situation like last game.

To motivate you a bit Vote:IGLannister

, he was agreeing with you.

In all honesty, I have to say: Before these posts, I had still had you pretty low on my scale of who not to trust, and perhaps this is simply me being touchy about being accused, but the fact that this comes directly after halonachos' speech about lumping people together, I cannot help but think that you have some dirty link that you're trying to conceal. I don't know who it's with, although linking me to ginger_nid_dude when you're linked to him would've been pretty brilliant, but for the moment, I think that I will Unvote: IGLannister and Vote: Drk_Oblitr8r

BT dubs: I'd like to know Inquisitor's opinion of me as well.

TherVadam wrote:BT dubs: I'd like to know Inquisitor's opinion of me as well.

New guy on the block.

We'll get Drk_O yet!

Once a Inqusitior announces himself he has literally killed himself, he won't survive another day phase, he has to make sure that he's defintelly got a baddie before annoucning himself.

Lord-Loss wrote:Once an Inqusitior announces himself he has literally killed himself, he won't survive another day phase, he has to make sure that he's defintelly got a baddie before annoucning himself.

I think he was talking about my name, not the role!

Inqusitor@ I was replying to Nachos apage back where he talks about everything falling into line once he gueses who the Inqisitor is.

Although, if inquisitor is the inquisitor, then he's also dead once he reveals himself.

Also, the inquisitor can reveal himself once the majority is no longer anti-town. If he's really sucked though, chances are people would think he was lying, and they would lynch him. So yes LL, I would agree with you on that point.

Thervadam; You seem to have a handle on this, but I think that you're acting a bit like a GM. Although my opinion is about as good as an illiterate baboon missing an eye in this case.

vote Drk_Oblitr8r.

sorry I let you down...

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I don't see the connection between TherVadam and gnd though, care to go deeper? (Genuine curiosity actually...)

I pretty much explained it as in depth as I have. They both voted for Lanny for the same reasons adjacent to each other

You suspect GND and Thervadam, but voted for IG. I can make some pretty good straw-man logic, but you sir are a master. Unless you place IG in that same group, in which case I can say that I would agree with your logic there. I like grouping.

Although I would think that you would vote for a person you suspected to be in a group. A different tactic than one I would use I guess, but seeing as though you are the veteran, I'll see how this works.

TherVadam wrote:
Drk: I don't know. I can obviously make claims as to not having any special alliance with ginger_nid, but I don't how what my credibility is to you at this point, and obviously there is no way to defend myself without making myself look obvious, however, we can see that ginger_nid_dude wasn't actually agreeing with me. Clearly,

I agree with dark O. A vote for no lynch is bad unless you have an interesting standoff situation like last game.

To motivate you a bit Vote:IGLannister

, he was agreeing with you.

In all honesty, I have to say: Before these posts, I had still had you pretty low on my scale of who not to trust, and perhaps this is simply me being touchy about being accused, but the fact that this comes directly after halonachos' speech about lumping people together, I cannot help but think that you have some dirty link that you're trying to conceal. I don't know who it's with, although linking me to ginger_nid_dude when you're linked to him would've been pretty brilliant, but for the moment, I think that I will Unvote: IGLannister and Vote: Drk_Oblitr8r

I was kinda worried about your initial reaction, but I didn't say anything about gnd agreeing with you. He voted for Lanny just after you did (well, 44 mins after you did ^_^")

I think I'm having trouble finding Haloz post in which you spoke. Is it the one with his plan? I think I skimed through it, but I don't really think I payed much attention to it til just now.

And to clarify, I'm not linking you to gnd, I'm linking gnd to you. It's different enough.
You haven't really done anything to link yourself to gnd, but gnd has. You can totally thank him for it later.

IGLannister wrote:vote Drk_Oblitr8r.

sorry I let you down...

It's ok, I let me down too...

halonachos wrote:

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:I don't see the connection between TherVadam and gnd though, care to go deeper? (Genuine curiosity actually...)

I pretty much explained it as in depth as I have. They both voted for Lanny for the same reasons adjacent to each other

You suspect GND and Thervadam, but voted for IG. I can make some pretty good straw-man logic, but you sir are a master. Unless you place IG in that same group, in which case I can say that I would agree with your logic there. I like grouping.

Although I would think that you would vote for a person you suspected to be in a group. A different tactic than one I would use I guess, but seeing as though you are the veteran, I'll see how this works.

Maybe I'm onto something

As Bishop said before, if people aren't voting for you, then you're not doing it right.

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:As Bishop said before, if people aren't voting for you, then you're not doing it right.

Then I plan to screw up all game!

@Drk; I do think that you are up to something, in fact I think I know exactly what you're up to. I don't want to ruin it for you by saying what I think it is though.

Future developments in this game should be quite amusing.

Can anyone believe that its been an entire week and no strong suspicions have been really raised. I mean, each individual has their own, but no group consensus has been reached.

Although syphonius seems to be relaxing a bit more now that the suspicion has been drawn off of him.

Oh and I guess bishop has been busy lately, or he got tired and decided to let Drk to take over his job of probing.

Although the fact that GND hasn't posted anything means that he is quite comfortable or quite busy IRL. Too many possibilities to look at, but I am looking at Bishop, GND, Syphonius, LL, IG, ferrett, and paul. I'm not listing those in any order of suspicion, just people I thought of first.

You guys can read into it what you will, in fact, I want you to read into it. What do you guys think about me placing you in the light?