Buffeminist @ 22/11/2018 23:43

I'm not stupid enough to do that if I were scum with Rose. It was more about Helios being shady to me and Rose not being there to defend herself. If I was scum with her, I would've just stayed on her train when she obviously had the majority.

Why is me sticking to my D1 voting policy (as I have done in virtually every game I've played) so much shadier than the other things that was going on D1?

Spider @ 23/11/2018 1:18

This is only my second game. And my second time playing with Helios. So far each game, Helios tries to accuse me of scum because I make mistakes people shouldn't make. I'm trying my best to catch up. I can't immediately know everything by D1 of my second game ever. I was town first game and I wasn't believed til I died and people saw I was telling the truth. I'm town again.

I haven't accused you so far this game. I pointed out that your vote looked like blind following, which is generally a thing that scum does. I do know you're new to Mafia, so I haven't come at you nearly as forceful as I would have more veteran players for doing these things. I'll save that for a few more games down the road! :)

Buffeminist @ 22/11/2018 23:50

Helios Garabandia @ 22/11/2018 23:47 Buffeminist @ 22/11/2018 23:43 I'm not stupid enough to do that if I were scum with Rose. It was more about Helios being shady to me and Rose not being there to defend herself. If I was scum with her, I would've just stayed on her train when she obviously had the majority. Why is me sticking to my D1 voting policy (as I have done in virtually every game I've played) so much shadier than the other things that was going on D1? With Jamie's claim, why would you keep your vote there? Rose/Jamie were very close and you stubbornly sticking to your policy lynch made no sense at that point.

Jamie claimed in Post #507. By that point, it was 5-3 to Rose, about 5 minutes left in the Day, and the only real action being some shitposting about who should get D1'd, your attempts to get people to vote for me (which Mike did), and Nav coming out STRONG for Rose (which, lol). Also, and more importantly, not 100% sure if I buy a role with a voting restriction that makes you have to be first on a train. Hence me feeling secure in where my vote was.

As for today? I'm not sure yet. Not enough people have posted for me to get any kind of real read...

Mercator @ 23/11/2018 5:49

Howdy, happy African American Friday

Did a double-take, then laughed my ass off. Well played. (:

Also, does anyone want a delivery tonight?

Jamie: Is the only component to your role the vote restriction?

Josh @ 23/11/2018 19:56

my birthday is in 4 hours i have been BUSY

November 24 is my birthday and you cannot have it.

Christian @ 23/11/2018 21:06

Sebclops @ 23/11/2018 20:11 @Christian You were a mod of the WWE Mafia game. You know EXACTLY how this role works. Your feigned questions come off as terrible. I asked Shadow a few questions to clarify the working of my role but he hasn't replied. lol that was a role that I had made up. Why would it work the very same as the one you are claiming to have? So can you just answer the questions and not be an ass about it?

Was this a Town role the last time it was used?

I wonder what 317 will have to say about Jamie's role name claim. Since he seems to be convinced (aggressively so, even) that Jamie is some kinda third party something.

Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:20

I don't like the Nav voters. There's no reason to lynch him if he can prove his role the next day.

proving role =/= proving alignment

That said, yeah, I wouldn't lynch him today. At some point, he'll have to put his role to use. That use will give us a lot more info about his alignment.

Mike @ 23/11/2018 22:03

I'm completely sober Maddie, quit slandering me Also tell me who to lynch

*glares*

Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:22

Helios Garabandia @ 23/11/2018 22:21 Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:20 I don't like the Nav voters. There's no reason to lynch him if he can prove his role the next day. proving role =/= proving alignment True, but do you think that would be a scum role? If it's real, I don't.

In general, I usually lean more scum towards vote manipulation actions, especially if it's one-shot (which I've assumed this one is, because it's 100% broken if it's a multi-use role). This role in particular is more dangerous, and I'm not so sure how I feel about its alignment. It's much more likely this role will get a Townie killed since we're forced to lynch one of the two selected players, but because it's so likely this will kill a Townie, I have to wonder if it's horribly overpowered to give Mafia such a role?

So basically, I have no idea. Hence me not putting a vote here and waiting to see what happens when the role is used.

Christian @ 23/11/2018 22:41

Nav, did you ever say the name of your role? Helios Garabandia @ 23/11/2018 22:35 Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:22 Helios Garabandia @ 23/11/2018 22:21 Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:20 I don't like the Nav voters. There's no reason to lynch him if he can prove his role the next day. proving role =/= proving alignment True, but do you think that would be a scum role? If it's real, I don't. In general, I usually lean more scum towards vote manipulation actions, especially if it's one-shot (which I've assumed this one is, because it's 100% broken if it's a multi-use role). This role in particular is more dangerous, and I'm not so sure how I feel about its alignment. It's much more likely this role will get a Townie killed since we're forced to lynch one of the two selected players, but because it's so likely this will kill a Townie, I have to wonder if it's horribly overpowered to give Mafia such a role? So basically, I have no idea. Hence me not putting a vote here and waiting to see what happens when the role is used. so you're saying the death of a potential townie is worth the risk if it leads to the eventual death of the scum that used the role if the role lead to that townie's death? I know what I'm trying to ask but not doing a good job of it.

Let's try this: Are you asking if it is worthwhile to sacrifice a Townie if sacrificing said Townie gets scum killed?

Christian @ 23/11/2018 22:54

Helios Garabandia @ 23/11/2018 22:49 Christian @ 23/11/2018 22:41 Nav, did you ever say the name of your role? Helios Garabandia @ 23/11/2018 22:35 Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:22 Helios Garabandia @ 23/11/2018 22:21 Buffeminist @ 23/11/2018 22:20 I don't like the Nav voters. There's no reason to lynch him if he can prove his role the next day. proving role =/= proving alignment True, but do you think that would be a scum role? If it's real, I don't. In general, I usually lean more scum towards vote manipulation actions, especially if it's one-shot (which I've assumed this one is, because it's 100% broken if it's a multi-use role). This role in particular is more dangerous, and I'm not so sure how I feel about its alignment. It's much more likely this role will get a Townie killed since we're forced to lynch one of the two selected players, but because it's so likely this will kill a Townie, I have to wonder if it's horribly overpowered to give Mafia such a role? So basically, I have no idea. Hence me not putting a vote here and waiting to see what happens when the role is used. so you're saying the death of a potential townie is worth the risk if it leads to the eventual death of the scum that used the role if the role lead to that townie's death? I know what I'm trying to ask but not doing a good job of it. Let's try this: Are you asking if it is worthwhile to sacrifice a Townie if sacrificing said Townie gets scum killed? maybe. I know the answer to that is yes lol but wanted to understand that that's what you were saying. You said you leaned towards a role like that being scum and that most likely it'd kill a townie.

More specifically, I am suspicious of ALL roles that have the ability to mess with someone's vote.