Support NeoGAF

[Kalor]

I've been thinking my vote against egruntz and I've been between two minds.

On one hand he seemed to be accusing certain people of filler and not accusing others who also had filler.

On the other his later posts read like someone who is a town member and just want town to play at a "higher" level with less talk about mechanics and more about the actual accusation process. This is the line of thought I've been slowly coming around to when I read more of their posts.

Vote: kalor

First to vote egruntz just seems too eager. His suspicions are shallow based mostly on lack of posting. Which makes them easy to sidestep later. I think he is blending.

I realize that being the first to vote for egruntz makes me appear suspicious and my reasoning throughout the game has been shallow but I voted purely based on what I thought at the time. I did mentionthat I was open to changing it and just wanted to see where peoples votes were but I understand why you suspect me. If egruntz turns out to be town I will bear the burden of starting the vote against them but I have a feeling that the vote would of went this way anyway.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

I don't think egruntz is Mafia but since they haven't clained I don't think they have a role either.

I'm going to stick to my convictions here. I think a no lynch today would be a mistake.

Vote: Egruntz

 

[johnnyquicknives]

I'm pretty sure in his sign off "this is what I get for playing with noobs" post he is claiming he's the cop by mentioning having nothing to report.

I already had some thoughts on might be a cop so if it does turn out to be egruntz then theres a bunch of stuff I'll need to revisit.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Vote:egruntz

Technically the date has passed, but since crab hasn't posted we may yet have time...

Days are only approximate, they depend to an extent on when I come online and check the thread. They'll always be correct to within a few hours or so, though. That said, we have now reached the end of the day!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Vote Count |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

egruntz: 11 / 14 [Kalor, Timeaisis, Rembrandt, johnnyquicknives, Karkador, irfaanator, pants, Zippedpinhead, StayDead, El Topo, Lord of Castamere]

johnnyquicknives: 2 / 14 [egruntz, Duress]

No Lynch: 2 / 14 [traube, ultron87]

Kalor: 1 / 14 [Ward]

No option reached a majority. At the deadline, egruntz, the Ordinary Tourist, had a plurality of the votes, and was therefore lynched.

Night 2 has begun. Night 2 will end on Wednesday 21st January at approximately 23:00 GMT.

Please do not post in this thread until Night 2 has finished.

I will also prod a number of players who haven't posted in the last 3 real life days, so again we may experience a slightly longer night delay. EDIT: More specifically, Amirox, MattyG, and QuantumBro.

 

[Amir0x]

Night 2 is over, right, 23:00 GMT on Wednesday is 6:00PM(EST) correct? That's what google tells me!

Just want to know so I can confirm in topic I'm still here and participating now, just forgot to subscribe so it left my mind. I'm a busy guy!

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Night would be over, but we're still waiting on prods; you'll have to remain ssh for now.

 

[Amir0x]

Gotcha. Still trying to get used to playing this on the forum.

*zips up mouth*

 

[Zippedpinhead]

any news on when the night ends?

 

[nin1000]

every time I see the thread updated my heart jumps up, as soon as I look something inside of me dies.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Right, finally everyone with night actions and/or prods has managed to get their night actions and/or prod responses in and I'll update very shortly. I do want to express a teeny bit of disappointment though - there are clearly people here very keen to play and when I have to chase certain people up night after night it's not very fun for them! To everyone who has kept up their posting properly and got their night actions in on time, well done. To the others... come on, don't be unfair.

Sorry for having to grump, but I don't want to have a third night over-run and ESPECIALLY not to almost have to replace one of you guys. Let's aim to make the next one a clean deadline, yeah?

EDIT: Partly as a courtesy and partly to prevent people using "it wasn't on my subscription list" as an excuse ( ), I'll PM everyone at some point this evening telling them that this post is up and asking people just to keep the above plea in mind.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

To escape the overwhelming sense of dread that had pervaded the hotel rooms - not to mention the bloodstains - someone suggested that the hotel tourists walk along the beach. While it was shut at both ends by high-rising cliffs, there was at least some small possibility of escape, and if not - the weather was gorgeous and the sand, sea and sun could quite make one forget the gruesome series of murders.

The stroll was pleasant enough, although sadly confirming no escape was to be had, when one of the tourists noticed that a large patch of sand close to the hotel was a rather strange tone, appearing almost rusted, and on closer inspection had been recently disturbed. After scooping away more and sand, a figure gradually emerged from the depths, bulging eyes attesting to the fact it had been buried alive. Duress, the Real Tough Guy, clearly hadn't had a pleasant night.

Night 2 has ended. During the night, Duress was killed.

Real Tough Guy

Welcome!

You are a Real Tough Guy.

You are aligned with the Tourists.

You ain't scared of these mafia fellers when you got these big guns! Pectoral A and pectoral B can deal with the hype, the heat, and even a few knife-edges! You can survive being target by an action that kills in the night phase once per game. You will be informed when this ability has been used up.

You win when only Tourist-aligned players remain.

Day 3 has begun. Day 3 will end on Sunday 27th January at approximately 14:00 GMT.

You may now resume posting.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Meanwhile, a slip of paper is blown across the beach and caught by one of you. It reads:

Dear Journal,

The first day has been rather odd, to say the least. With all the stress I've been dealing with due to the general fucking circumstances--y'know, anonymous killers at large, death at our door--I spent my last night at the bar, drinking away. "Fill 'er up," I said. "Filler 'er up." Guess some people paid close attention to my stumbling, slurred self. They have these claims that I've made false accusations. Filler, they say. Idle labeling of their communal discussion. Well, I don't remember any of it. Seems to be nothing I can do about it, though. I have to go confront them. We're choosing someone to kill soon. I have a feeling it will be me. I should have stayed away from the alcohol, god dammit.

My last words: don't be against close scrutiny, fellow townsmen. The killers know they're a single slip up from the noose. The pressure will break them soon enough.

For the better good, I sign,
egruntz
Townie

 

[StayDead]

So Duress must've got attacked the first night as well but survived as:

You can survive being target by an action that kills in the night phase once per game.

Unless I'm a complete idiot he should've survived the actions of the night had he not already used up the power.

 

[nin1000]

Again one of us had to die. R.I.P Duress. I just want to point out that he followed his gut and was suspicious towards Jonnyquickknives.
I hope we will be a lot more successful today.

 

[Palmer_v1]

That should mean another kill was blocked last night, right?

 

[ultron87]

So Duress must've got attacked the first night as well but survived as:

Unless I'm a complete idiot he should've survived the actions of the night had he not already used up the power.

I guess he also could've been the target of two separate killing actions during this night.

 

[Kalor]

The fact that Duress was likely attacked on the first night is interesting. If there are more killing roles besides the mafia it seems odd that both of them might of attacked Duress last night.

Of course with this particular point we can't do much else besides wait and see if more one person dies tomorrow.

 

[Timeaisis]

RIP Duress.

This is a really interesting turn of events. Duress wasn't even on my radar for a night kill.

 

[AbsolutBro]

I guess when they attempted to kill Duress the first night they must have decided to finish him off. It's curious though, because there was only one mafia kill last night, so either there's another Tough Guy out there, or all the mafia opted to kill the same person.


RIP Duress
and
RIP Egruntz

It does raise some questions about those who focused in on egruntz, and I suspect we'll see a few "revenge votes" or whatever you want to call them.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

I guess he also could've been the target of two separate killing actions during this night.

I think this is the likely event.

With a surgeon/doctor in he tourists, since he was not outed yesterday, he probably elected to save the same person last night (just in case there were two mafia kills)

With duress dieing tonight we (the tourists) know two things.

1: the mafia have some way of striking twice in one night, they might not be able to do it every night, but at least once they could kill/target two people.

2: duress got either 1 vote last week and another this week, or two votes this week. This tells us that either the main body of the mafia just so happened to target the doctor's save THIS week, and the second killer targeted duress again (a possibility), another variant of this is that the second killer who targeted duress last week either can't target each night or could only target once a game. or finally that the mafia agreed to double target duress this week, that way no matter a doctor save he would get killed. The doctor wasn't targetting him and he died after no votes last week.

Duress was either a calculated risk for two votes in one night (my most likely thought) or some variation of two votes across two nights. This kill tells the mafia that we have a doctor, as two nights we only had one person die (even though one of them could take two hits).

I'll post more later after I think this through more

 

[StayDead]

Don't forget the person who attacked Duress could just be a vigilante role which doesn't have to be affiliated with the Mafia and they just got lucky in him being targeted by the vigi and the mafia.

 

[johnnyquicknives]

Morning Guys.

So, everyone clear on what happens if you vote for me, yeah? Cool.

 

[AbsolutBro]

I was rereading and man, we are 2 for 2 on town-aligned special roles lost. Duress the Tough Guy and Barrylocke the Old Colonel.

 

[pants]

Duress being the tough guy gives us a bit more to work with at least. So we know two separate night actions would have had to have been used on him, it makes my theory of two night killers way more likely.

 

[Foshy]

Duress being the tough guy gives us a bit more to work with at least. So we know two separate night actions would have had to have been used on him, it makes my theory of two night killers way more likely.

I'd say it's confirmed at this point. If this is a fairly classic setup, I'm gonna assume we're dealing with a mafia group + a single killer who's on his own.

I'm gonna try and reconstruct what happened here.

Night 1 Targets - Duress, Barry
Night 2 Targets - Duress, ?

The reason why Barry was killed in the first night is fairly obvious. Duress was targeted for being inactive.

Now, when the kill didn't happen, would the mafiosi/the killer get a report on why it hasn't gone through? In the games I played before, they usually don't.

So, their first logical assumption would be that Duress got protected by the doc. However. Why should the doc protect somebody who hasn't said a single word yet? That seems very unlikely. They probably realized this too, guessed his role and attacked him again this night.

Now, for the other killing party. They had a clear motive in the first night: go for the loudest player. They have shown that they have no problem with making bold moves, as long as it silences people who are uncomfortable. This makes me think of 2 possibilities.

The one that comes to mind first: they went for one of the louder people again and got blocked by the doc this time. Who could it have been? Timeaisis? Palmer? Pants? Me? I don't feel like there's an obvious answer here. The probability of the doctor guessing correctly isn't very high at this point of the game. If he did, great job. But I don't think it's that.

The other possibility seems much more interesting to me. Duress was the only one who went with egruntz and voted johnnyquickknifes. No, he didn't give much of a reasoning. But more importantly, he hadn't really gained anyone's trust and also had various people pointing fingers at him. Killing him was a safe option, and makes people who doubted him before more suspicious.

Plus, reverse psychology. "Come on, the mafia wouldn't seriously kill someone who pointed the fingers on them. They can't be that dumb." That's what they want us to think, right?

So, my take on this:

• The lone killer went for Duress in both Night 1 and 2.
• Mafia went for Barry in Night 1 and Duress in Night 2.
• I believe johnnyquickknives is a mafioso.

Mafia and killer might be switched. I just feel it's more likely that the killer would go for a quiet target first to avoid controversy.

 

[Foshy]

Please read my previous post carefully and don't just go with the summary, because I want you to see my thoughts that led up to it. If anything doesn't add up, tell me of course.

 

[Zatoth]

Well, this got really confusing all of a sudden.

I think Foshys assumption about what happened during the nights isn't too far off.

But still possible that it is not a single killer, but an assassin amongst the Mafia.

Still interesting that there was only one kill this night. Someone probably got saved by a Doc or received the same or similar role as Duress, I guess.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

Please read my previous post carefully and don't just go with the summary, because I want you to see my thoughts that led up to it. If anything doesn't add up, tell me of course.

I think you and me are on the same page with the mafia targets. Some combination of two killers targeted Barry and Duress over the course of two nights.

Possibilities based on the fact that there are two killers:
1: It's possible that the single killer can't kill every night, not likely but possible.
2: It is possible that the doc happened to guess right on who the mafia was going to kill last night.

Pure speculation possibilities:
3: That there might not be a mafia equivalent of the policeman in this game.

With possible facts 1 & 2, I think that the single killer led the rest of the mafia in targeting Duress to see if they could identify if he was saved by a doctor or some other power. This left the single killer open to target someone else, or to not target anyone based on being unable to kill every night. Why bother agreeing to kill a random, if you can say "target this guy because he didn't die last night, and if we kill him we might find out why."

Possible fact 3 is pure speculation, I think that a mafia informant (for lack of better term) would target high visibility non-mafia targets from the thread and is either turning up empty or he doesn't exist.

 

[Timeaisis]

Great post, Foshy. I definitely thought of the whole "reverse psychology" situation with Duress voting for johnnyquicknives, so you're not alone there. However, I'm not convinced in that. There are a bunch of possibilities for what went down. Duress being a Tough Guy definitely makes this more complex.

One thing is certain, however. There were at least 3 votes across two nights (one hit on Barry, and two on Duress), meaning we do indeed have a killer role (vigilante,etc.), or that they mafia can somehow target two people.

Having a night killer means there was a potential of 4 hits that could have been spread over two nights. However, only one person died on both nights and not two. We've only had two deaths out of the possible four.

That can mean three things:

1. We have a doctor, who has successfully protected someone
2. Both the mafia and the killer role targeted the same person on either N1 or N2
3. The killer role chose not to target anyone on N1 or N2

At first glance, #3 would make sense, for a vigilante or night killer to not target anyone day one. They had nothing to go on, like us, and instead decided to refrain from killing. The problem #3 is that it requires the Mafia and killer role to target the same person one night. Essentially, if #3 is true, #2 is also true (see below).

With that in mind, we can outline what may have possibly went down during the last two nights. There's definitely a lot of combinations, but I'm going to list out what I believe are most probable Feel free to discuss and point out issues.

Night Targets - One Mafia hit and one Vigilante hit
Night: Mafia's target, vigilante target [??? means someone we don't know]
Remember that Duress requires to hits to die.

Possibility #1
N1: Barry, None
N2: Duress, Duress
Comments: Unlikely that Duress was targeted by Mafia and a vigilante the same night.

Possibility #2
N1: Barry, ??? (Protected by Doc) [not Duress]
N2: Duress, Duress
Comments: Unlikely that Duress was targeted by Mafia and a vigilante the same night. Also, doc required to protect a player N1.

Possibility #3
N1: Barry, Duress
N2: Duress, Duress
Comments: Requires double target, as in #1 and #2.

Possibility #4
N1: Barry, Duress
N2: ??? (Protected by Doc), Duress
Comments: Requires a doctor to protect.

My initial thoughts is that P4 is the most likely to occur. This is because I see no reason for Mafia to target Duress on Night 2. Of course, they could just be trying to throw us off.

Thus, I feel strongly that

• We have a Doctor
• Someone was protected last night
• We have a vigilante

Feel free to comment or criticize. I'm sure that I'm missing something. The fact that Duress was Tough Guy make the last two nights have many, many possibilities for how they went down.

 

[johnnyquicknives]

Foshy is 100% right. If I was Mafia killing the only other person who voted for me would be so stupid on my part that it would be a reasonable double bluff, which turn makes it a good mafia move, which makes it a good double bluff, etc, etc, etc.

This makes me saying anything more on the matter pretty worthless, so unless anyone wants me to comment on something specific about it I probably won't.

I would highly recommend that everyone goes back over the last few pages (particularly page 8, where the major posts were made) and looks through everything in light of the deaths. I totally stand by my reasoning there, and maintain that killing egruntz was the right choice at the time.
Duress hasn't posted anything worthwhile for me to comment on, gut feelings are gut feelings and thats fine (I basically said a similar thing about Amir0x at one point, although I didn't end up throwing my vote that way).

I do have one fairly major thought which has been niggling at me since the start of Day two that I have swung back and forth over. I'm going to do a bunch of re-reading and see if I can get my thoughts on it in order, and back them up properly

 

[AbsolutBro]

particularly page 8

But there's only 5 pag- oh...

oh...

 

[Palmer_v1]

Can we lynch based purely on his 50ppp preference?

For real though, people are talking about a vigilante, and I want to verify the rules for them I found are valid. From https://epicmafia.com/role/128:

Visits one person every night.
Kills that person.
If visiting the same person as mafia, the Vigilante dies.
If shot by the mafia, Vigilante fails to kill.
Sided with the village.

Is there any chance our game is sung a different variant?

 

[johnnyquicknives]

it could also potentially be a neutral role like a serial killer.

Can we lynch based purely on his 50ppp preference?

About half my browsing is on an old ipad that just gives up if you suggest it shows you 100 posts with gifs

 

[irfaanator]

Can't another possibility be somebody triggering since we lynched a person last night. We lynched nobody the first night which could explain the only 1 kill, then the 2nd night somebody's ability is triggered due to the lynch and kills duress.

So I would go with timeasis theory 1 but again unlikely he was targeted twice in one night

N1: barry
D2: egruntz-triggers some ability
N2: Duress, Duress

 

[nin1000]

just fyi

Day 3 has begun. Day 3 will end on Sunday 31th January at approximately 14:00 GMT.

Crab made a small mistake, so we have still a lot of time to discuss.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Is there any chance our game is sung a different variant?

While I may use roles which overlap with other commonly cited games, I also may not. Part of the mystery revolves around figuring out what roles are doing and why; I wouldn't rely on outside sources. This isn't intended as a clue either way, it's just reminding you that this is its own self-contained game and references to other things are probably not going to be useful.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

Thus, I feel strongly that

• We have a Doctor
• Someone was protected last night
• We have a vigilante

I agree on item 1, and 2 has a pretty good chance of having happened assuming the second killer can target every night.

However, I have to disagree that there is guaranteed to be a vigilante, A vigilante being a tourist that kills at night. I stand by my assumption that it could also be a Mafia hit man type character. This character who has an option to kill a character similar to a vigilante, but is mafia aligned and they might or might not have some sort of limitation to this kill (every other night or once per game both of which fit with the amount of night time killed people).

My thoughts on it being a vigilante. For the vigilante, I don't think that targeting the same character benefits him as much as it would be for a mafia character to target the character. Having a mafia character with an additional kill (with limitation) also allows that special mafioso to guide the rest of them to kill Duress on the second night.

For the Mafia hit man, even if they could only kill once, it would make sense to target the skill the first night. Two deaths the first night would have freaked all of us into voting quicker on the first day and then after that the doctor would assume they had saved a character on the second night. this could get the doctor to "lock" his save on that character from the second night on with this reasoning "oh the mafia MUST have targeted him, so I know he is not mafia AND that they want him dead". That way even if they COULD NOT target anyone else for instant death, they would have effectively neutralized our doctor.

This same neutralization thought process is why I don't think it benefits a vigilante to kill the same character the second night, after assuming that the reason your target did not die is because of the doctor. As a tourist you would not want your doctor always saving the same person. so by switching targets, even if you killed a tourist, you would still convince the doctor to switch their save target.

Just a thought experiment, I just think we have to assume that the second killer could influence the mafia at night. To think otherwise might leave us vulnerable.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

Just a thought experiment, I just think we have to assume that the second killer could influence the mafia at night. To think otherwise might leave us vulnerable.

Double posted to bold my TLR. Crab has admitted that the standard character types might not be present with the same rules.

 

[Palmer_v1]

The list of people that voted for egruntz, in order, I believe:

Kalor
Timeaisis
Rembrandt
johnnyquicknives
Karkador
irfaanator
pants
Zippedpinhead
StayDead
El Topo
Lord of Castamere

Obviously a lot of these are tourists who just chose incorrectly, but I'd think a few of our Mafia are in this list as well, once they knew they could hide amongst the herd. As before, my first pick would be irfaanator. I'd like to go through each of them later on though, to see if anything else piques any suspicions.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Damn 2 power roles down... I guess we can take solace in the fact that there hasn't been two deaths yet in a night.

I'm upset that egruntz wasn't Mafia, but I stand with the decision to lynch. Continued no lynch is a luxury we do not have. We have to make the best decisions in the worst of times.

 

[Foshy]

Can we lynch based purely on his 50ppp preference?

For real though, people are talking about a vigilante, and I want to verify the rules for them I found are valid. From https://epicmafia.com/role/128:



Is there any chance our game is sung a different variant?

I was thinking more of a Killer, which would be on his own and not sided with the tourists nor mafia.

Must visit one person every night.
Kills that person.
Wins if alive alone or among the final two.

If it's a town-sided vigilante, which is also a possibility, he'd better more careful to avoid killing our own people.

 

[irfaanator]

The list of people that voted for egruntz, in order, I believe:

Kalor
Timeaisis
Rembrandt
johnnyquicknives
Karkador
irfaanator
pants
Zippedpinhead
StayDead
El Topo
Lord of Castamere

Obviously a lot of these are tourists who just chose incorrectly, but I'd think a few of our Mafia are in this list as well, once they knew they could hide amongst the herd. As before, my first pick would be irfaanator. I'd like to go through each of them later on though, to see if anything else piques any suspicions.

well your first pick would be wrong

 

[Timeaisis]

I agree on item 1, and 2 has a pretty good chance of having happened assuming the second killer can target every night.

However, I have to disagree that there is guaranteed to be a vigilante, A vigilante being a tourist that kills at night. I stand by my assumption that it could also be a Mafia hit man type character. This character who has an option to kill a character similar to a vigilante, but is mafia aligned and they might or might not have some sort of limitation to this kill (every other night or once per game both of which fit with the amount of night time killed people).

My thoughts on it being a vigilante. For the vigilante, I don't think that targeting the same character benefits him as much as it would be for a mafia character to target the character. Having a mafia character with an additional kill (with limitation) also allows that special mafioso to guide the rest of them to kill Duress on the second night.

For the Mafia hit man, even if they could only kill once, it would make sense to target the skill the first night. Two deaths the first night would have freaked all of us into voting quicker on the first day and then after that the doctor would assume they had saved a character on the second night. this could get the doctor to "lock" his save on that character from the second night on with this reasoning "oh the mafia MUST have targeted him, so I know he is not mafia AND that they want him dead". That way even if they COULD NOT target anyone else for instant death, they would have effectively neutralized our doctor.

This same neutralization thought process is why I don't think it benefits a vigilante to kill the same character the second night, after assuming that the reason your target did not die is because of the doctor. As a tourist you would not want your doctor always saving the same person. so by switching targets, even if you killed a tourist, you would still convince the doctor to switch their save target.

Just a thought experiment, I just think we have to assume that the second killer could influence the mafia at night. To think otherwise might leave us vulnerable.

Good points. However, I still do feel strongly it's a vigilante. Or as Foshy pointed out, a neutral-aligned Killer type role. I do not think it's a mafia hitman.

My reasoning is thusly:
Duress had to be targeted twice, meaning he was either targeting twice in one night, or (at least) once in N1 and once in N2. Note that I'm assuming the Hitman and the Mafia are aligned and can communicate.

Mafia Hitman For Duress to Die
Night: Mafia's target, Mafia Hitman target [??? means someone we don't know]

Possibility #1 - Hitman did not attack first night, or could not attack yet
N1: Barry, None (either chose not to target anyone, or is limited to kills, as you stated)
N2: Duress, Duress
Comments: Improbable that the Mafia would know Duress was a Tough Guy. There's no reason for them to target him twice on one night.

Possibility #2 - Hitman attacked someone else first night, who was protected
N1: Barry, ??? (Protected by Doc)
N2: Duress, Duress
Comments: Same as above.

Possibility #3 - Hitman attacked Duress N1, then again N2
N1: Barry, Duress
N2: ???, Duress [or vice-versa]
Comments: Would require the hitman to first target Duress N1, realize he didn't die, and target him again.

I do not think P1 or P2 are likely. The reason for this should be fairly obvious. Essentially, there is no way the mafia would know Duress was a Tough Guy, so there's no reason to target the same person twice in one night.

That leaves P3, Duress was targeted once by the hitman on N1, and again on N2 (alternatively, he could havebeen targeted by the mafia, but it doesn't matter). The problem here is that Duress wasn't active much D1, had not yet accused anyone, had not been accused, and overall had no real reason to be targeted yet.

Of course, it's possible that they targeted him N1 to throw us off, but to again target him N2 after he did not die seems like throwing away a hitman kill on someone who isn't really that dangerous to them. Duress didn't turn around to become a power player on D2. If I were a hitman and tried to go for Duress N1, only to fail, I would probably instead co-ordinate with mafia to put hits out on two power players instead of trying to go for Duress again. As in, it would be in their best interest to pick a two out of:the vocal or dangerous players (one hitman hit and one regular mafia vote) to at least guarantee one dies, instead of going for Duress again and potentially failing (they did not know why he did not die in N1, remember).

Because of this, I think it's altogether more likely that Duress died from a vigilante or killer role as opposed to a Mafia hitman.

 

[Zippedpinhead]

Good points. However, I still do feel strongly it's a vigilante. Or as Foshy pointed out, a neutral-aligned Killer type role. I do not think it's a mafia hitman.

I had not thought of the possibility of a neutral-aligned killer type role. Truthfully I think that makes more sense than just a vigilante. And I do agree that the single killer likely targeted duress both nights in either instance (as opposed to mafia killing him second night, that only makes sense if the second killer can influence the mafia).

OK, if it is a vigilante tourist, do you think that this person would want us to target inactive players during the day phase? based on his actions at night, it appears that he targeted an inactive/low activity player. That kind of Modus Operandi might have bleed through to the day phase.

 

[Kalor]

OK, if it is a vigilante tourist, do you think that this person would want us to target inactive players during the day phase? based on his actions at night, it appears that he targeted an inactive/low activity player. That kind of Modus Operandi might have bleed through to the day phase.

The idea of the vigilant tourist trying to push their MO in the day phase is interesting. Of course I was the first person to mention it but at the time I thought it was a good way of lynching on D1 and not harming a active player. I went through and found everyone who mentioned that they were in support of lynching an inactive and wrote anything noteworthy about their posts. I might be missing a few but I think I got everyone.

Lord of Castamere

traube (First person to agree with the idea of lynching an inactive)

Kalor (First to bring it up)

pants

Staydead

johnnyquicknives

 

[Zippedpinhead]

The idea of the vigilant tourist trying to push their MO in the day phase is interesting. Of course I was the first person to mention it but at the time I thought it was a good way of lynching on D1 and not harming a active player. I went through and found everyone who mentioned that they were in support of lynching an inactive and wrote anything noteworthy about their posts. I might be missing a few but I think I got everyone.

Lord of Castamere

traube (First person to agree with the idea of lynching an inactive)

Kalor (First to bring it up)

pants

Staydead

johnnyquicknives

Interesting list.

Staydead was a replacement player, I have previously said that I thought it unlikely that characters with night actions would want to be replaced so I, personally, think he is likely not the vigilante. The rest of the list is very, very interesting. \\

Remember everyone, that if we have a vigilante, we don't want to kill the vigilante, or even try to give the mafia ideas on who to kill (because a vigilante is still a tourist). Only a Stand-alone serial killer character would we actually want to kill.

Does anyone have thoughts on likely mafia targets last night that got saved? If we can think about who was likely saved, it may open us up to a potential mafia person who targeted them on the last day cycle.

 

[johnnyquicknives]

I agree with timeasis' reasoning that out of the three suggestions a mafia hitman seems the least likely at this point.

A killer is the most difficult to predict behaviour-wise at this point so its hard to judge.

I think out of the proposed suggestions the most likely scenario is that theres a vigilante and they decided to kill an inactive on night one. Duress was in the relatively small group of inactives so was chosen and lost his first life. On night 2 I think he was then targeted by the mafia and killed.

 

[QuantumBro]

Sorry about not voting during day 2, I lurk way more than I post. Has the cop revealed themselves yet?

Possibility #4
N1: Barry, Duress
N2: ??? (Protected by Doc), Duress
Comments: Requires a doctor to protect.

This sounds like the most likely option given what's happened.

The list of people that voted for egruntz, in order, I believe:

Kalor
Timeaisis
Rembrandt
johnnyquicknives
Karkador
irfaanator
pants
Zippedpinhead
StayDead
El Topo
Lord of Castamere

Obviously a lot of these are tourists who just chose incorrectly, but I'd think a few of our Mafia are in this list as well, once they knew they could hide amongst the herd. As before, my first pick would be irfaanator. I'd like to go through each of them later on though, to see if anything else piques any suspicions.

I agree that there are a few mafias among this list.

As of right now, johnnyquicknives is my biggest target. If that doesn't change within a few hours, I'll vote him sometime tonight.

 

[StayDead]

I'd just thought I'd let it be known now incase I forgot I won't be super active for the next 4 days as It's the final few days before I move house. I'll keep up when I can.

 

[QuantumBro]

Good news to johnnyquicknives, you are no longer my #1 suspect. I now suspect Kalor is Mafia.

The main reason for my suspicion is that you were the starting vote for Egruntz's lynching, so I decided to look at all of your posts in this thread.

Nothing big stood out on day 1, except for this post...

I've been between the two crowds but we could vote for an inactive person. We could wait until the weekend and select from a list of whoever hasn't posted from the start.

In terms of anyone being suspicious no-one has really stood out to me so far as we haven't had much to talk about.

A quick note, killing an inactive tourist only helps the Mafia win faster. There should be no reason anymore that we should kill an inactive member. You were also the first person to bring up the idea of killing an inactive member, but you did admit to this in your list that I will get to later.

After Barry died, you posted this...

It's a shame that we've lost Barry so early. His ability had the opportunity to be useful. I can think of possible three reasons for his death.

1. He pointed the blame at one or more of the mafia members and if he connected the dots once he could do it again.
2. It was a random kill.
3. They killed the one who was talking the most.

If the mafia does have special roles, we won't see that influence kills until Night 2 or todays lynching round since they should only be getting information now.

I've bolded the part I find confusing. How does you know the special roles did not get their information till then. I'd like for you to explain this, even if it's just misunderstanding on my part.

Then came the vote for Egruntz...

I have to agree with you on this. While some of the posts could be defined as "filler" others were normal actions for a game such as Palmer's unvote to let Barry post his thoughts.

I've been changing my mind a lot about who I suspect. egruntz seems like a experienced player and that factor makes me trust them and also suspect them at the same time. Reading their long post it just felt like accusing people purely because they have been actively posting in the thread.

Some people have mentioned throwing out votes so we can get voting habits so I'm going to vote now. I'm not committed to this vote so I'm willing to change it at any point but it is purely because I'm curious to see what other people would vote.

VOTE: egruntz

You look like you're only voting for egruntz because of what Timeaisis said. You also establish a defense in this post which is "I didn't think I would get him lynched, I only wanted to see how every one else would vote."

Someone even calls you out before the day is over...

I've been thinking my vote against egruntz and I've been between two minds.

On one hand he seemed to be accusing certain people of filler and not accusing others who also had filler.

On the other his later posts read like someone who is a town member and just want town to play at a "higher" level with less talk about mechanics and more about the actual accusation process. This is the line of thought I've been slowly coming around to when I read more of their posts.




I realize that being the first to vote for egruntz makes me appear suspicious and my reasoning throughout the game has been shallow but I voted purely based on what I thought at the time. I did mentionthat I was open to changing it and just wanted to see where peoples votes were but I understand why you suspect me. If egruntz turns out to be town I will bear the burden of starting the vote against them but I have a feeling that the vote would of went this way anyway.

You're quick on the defense here, especially since you don't know whether egruntz is Mafia or not. The bolded part is especially suspicious since it's saying,"I pretty sure egruntz is not Mafia, but you can't blame me if he dies, because he would've been lynched anyway."

So we lynch egruntz and he turns out to be an ordinary villager. You must be sorry about this...

The fact that Duress was likely attacked on the first night is interesting. If there are more killing roles besides the mafia it seems odd that both of them might of attacked Duress last night.

Of course with this particular point we can't do much else besides wait and see if more one person dies tomorrow.

or not. You just ignore that it happened and jump on the confusion bandwagon.

And that's everything I found that added suspicion. But I'd like to take a look at the list you made.

The idea of the vigilant tourist trying to push their MO in the day phase is interesting. Of course I was the first person to mention it but at the time I thought it was a good way of lynching on D1 and not harming a active player. I went through and found everyone who mentioned that they were in support of lynching an inactive and wrote anything noteworthy about their posts. I might be missing a few but I think I got everyone.

Lord of Castamere

traube (First person to agree with the idea of lynching an inactive)

Kalor (First to bring it up)

pants

Staydead

johnnyquicknives

I checked and found examples for all the people you listed. However, you did leave out one member, intentionally or not, Timeaisis.

This post is saying we should lynch an inactive member, without using those words...

They aren't guaranteed tourists, though. Not by a long shot. Just because they have been quiet and needed to be proded does not mean they aren't mafia. Lurking is a legitimate mafia strategy.

I think lynching one of them makes the most sense, to be honest. We have the least to loose and the most cause for suspicion. Everyone else we've pointed fingers at lot more speculative and psychological.

Here's the possibilities if we lynch one of the non-participators
1) If they are town, they haven't really participated much anyway, so we haven't lost a valuable teammate
2) If they are mafia, hooray
3) They were a power role, shit

1 of these is good. 1 is neutral. 1 is bad.

Compare that with lynching anyone else that has seemed suspicious. Take, for example, nin, who lots of people seem suspicious of right now. If we lynch nin, here's the possibilities:
1) He was town. We lost an ally and someone who would've helped us ID scum by, at the very least, process of elimination.
2) He was mafia, woo
3) He was a power role, shit

2 of these are bad news. 1 is not.

Here's the important thing about accidentally lynching a townie that has not been participating: they aren't being proactive in the game. They may be "town" but they haven't done anything pro-town since the game started. Essentially, we wouldn't be lynching a teammate, we'd be lynching a bystander.

I know some were saying we could no-lynch day 2, but that's usually a pretty bad plan. Sure, we don't have a helluva lot of information, but there's no guarantee we'll have any more day 3 either, seeing as how we haven't heard from our power roles at all yet. If we keep sitting on our hands, mafia will just pick off those of us who are trying to move the game forward, and try to force us into a stalemate each day, which is the worst thing we can possibly do.

tomakasatnav has a total of three posts. One of which is an interest in the game starting. The second is saying he slept through day 1, and the third is saying he agrees with the no-lynch day one. That's it.

I say if we vote for anyone, it's him.

And with all that written down, I'm going to vote and eat some breakfast, it's going to be a long day.
VOTE: Kalor