894 replies to this topic

[Aquinas]

I think you and Martino have the same question, I'll get to that in a second.



Coming to someone's defense that I think is a townie is my obligation to the town. If we lynch the wrong person today we will be starting the next day in a big hole. I don't want us to make a mistake. If it's ok to voice our suspicions of others, is it not just as ok to voice our opinions if we think they are innocent. I presented good reasons why I think he has a good chance of being a townie.




I cannot tell you if I am for it or against it because I don't have all the facts. I will however give you scenarios and what I would do for each.

Strong Doc could be a psychiatrist or something similiar. This could very well be a plausible scenario given our setting, a mental hospital.

A psychiatrist's night action is that he can choose one post to send to Mole. Mole would then tell him if that post is true or not.

Let's say someone posted, "Nerau is scum". The psychiatrist would send that post to Mole and Mole would tell him yes that is true, or no it is not.

If that is what a Strong Doc can do then he could know the alignment of 2 other people, plus himself.

If the town was close to lynching someone the doc knew was innocent then I would support the doc role claiming. This would also greatly help narrow down the list of possible suspects, another reason to support the role claim in this scenario.


Now if the strong doc is just a normal doc who can only protect others at night then I would only support him role claiming when there were 8 people left alive. Since it would be most likely 5 vs 3 a wrong lynch would mean the town would lose. The wrong lynch and a night kill would put it at 3 vs 3 and scum automatically win. This makes 5 vs 3 a do or die situation and the doc should role claim to help narrow the list of suspects down.

Any other situations I would not support the role claim.


For all we know, Kaziocore (sorry for picking on you but you are obviously the newest player) could be the strong doc but not know how to best utilize his role. Having these discussions make it easier for our newer players to learn how to best use their roles.

Again, I never asked the doc to role claim.

I'm not convinced. This entire post is a straw man argument for the question I addressed to you. Something like, what are your opinions? Do you condone this strategy etc etc. I don't care right now what roles could still be out there. Odds are its just the strong doctor left. The nature of that role is not what I asked for. I asked for your opinion on whether or not you condone role claiming as you purposed. But okay, maybe what your said wasn't crazy left field in addressing my question. However, you seem a bit dodgy to get a solid yes or no to role claiming out there. I don't care if you don't have all the facts. No one does. I never asked you to. Just give us your opinion on this theory. You certainly have defended both sides so pick one. If you think the doctor should role claim right now, say so. No one knows what the strong doctor knows and they can't tell us without role claiming. Do you think the pros outweigh the cons or not because you've illustrated quite a few of each. You asked us

I would like to hear everyone's thoughts on this please. Did I miss something, is it a good idea, is it a bad idea, what else should we consider?

So I want to know definitively right now, considering all that you have said: Is it a good idea or is it a bad idea for the strong doctor to role claim? Would you recommend the doctor role claims right now?

VOTE COUNT
Falzis (3): KevinH, Theophilos, CanucksDynasty
Sir Jesus (1): Electric Mango
Electric Mango (1): Martino
KevinH (1): Falzis

Not Voting (4): Narsis, Kaziocore, Aquinas, Sir Jesus

Edited by molestargazer, 16 July 2009 - 06:47 PM.

[Electric Mango]

So I want to know definitively right now, considering all that you have said: Is it a good idea or is it a bad idea for the strong doctor to role claim? Would you recommend the doctor role claims right now?

Since I don't know what the doc knows and you're asking me to make a blind judgment without all the facts my answer is.........

No, I would not want the doc to role claim.

[KevinH]

Since I don't know what the doc knows and you're asking me to make a blind judgment without all the facts my answer is.........

No, I would not want the doc to role claim.

I'll agree with that!

If there happens to be a truth-confirming role...

I am townie and Falzis is scum.

[Electric Mango]

@ Mole - Can we get a prod on Martino please

[CanucksDynasty]

I'll agree with that!

If there happens to be a truth-confirming role...

I am townie and Falzis is scum.

Not sure how that would work.
IF it came back NO...what would that mean?
NO, KevinH is not at townie or NO, Falzis is not scum?

IF anything it should be broken up.

I am townie.
KevinH is townie.
Falzis is townie.
Martino is townie.
EM is townie.
Narsis is townie.
Kaziocore is townie.
Aquinas is townie.
Theophilis is townie.
Sir Jesus is townie.

[Martino]

@ Mole - Can we get a prod on Martino please

That won't be necessary; I'm still around. I just didn't find your defence strong enough to unvote. Your basically saying that you have no opinion regarding the strong doc roleclaiming because you don't know what his role is exactly. Wouldn't it make sense that the weak reffered to the power of the doc role? And the doc role is always related to protecting players from night kills. So then there would be no reason for the doc to roleclaim. Which is why I think you were rolefishing and not trying to help the town.

Now, you say that the strong doc is perhaps not a doc but a psychiatrist. But why would mole call the psychiatrist a strong doc? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Not sure how that would work.
IF it came back NO...what would that mean?
NO, KevinH is not at townie or NO, Falzis is not scum?

IF anything it should be broken up.

I am townie.
KevinH is townie.
Falzis is townie.
Martino is townie.
EM is townie.
Narsis is townie.
Kaziocore is townie.
Aquinas is townie.
Theophilis is townie.
Sir Jesus is townie.

In fact, even that won't work. As a townie, I only know my own alignment. So if I add a statement like KevinH is a townie. Then it could no longer be used to investigate as I don't even know myself if that statement is true or false. So if we are going to do this, we should only add the statement about ourselves:

I am a townie.

[Falzis]

I thought as much.

As per your question, the two I would pick of the 3 I suspect right now would be EM and Sir Jesus. Kaziocore the least because the case against him is built more on negative evidence (what he isn't doing) more than on positive evidence (what he has done).

[Falzis]

EBWOP: I am townie.

[KevinH]

The MSG Secure Hospital for the Criminally Insane (MSGSHCI)
"We don't call them inmates, we call them patients."

I think there might be more tied into the theme.

I normally think of an insane cop as always getting the wrong result. Maybe something similar would have happened here if the cop didn't get night-killed right away.

We assume there is a strong doc because we know there was a weak doc. Maybe the description weak was just meant to contrast it with normal in other games.

.
.
.

Note to those that will scream "scum-tell for role-fishing": please tell me how the scum will benefit before pointing the finger at me.

[KevinH]

So if I add a statement like KevinH is a townie. Then it could no longer be used to investigate as I don't even know myself if that statement is true or false. So if we are going to do this, we should only add the statement about ourselves:

I am a townie.

Assuming there are a limited number of queries, it's more efficient to do it in groups.

The statement could be "Nerau-Narsis, Kaziocore, and Aquinas are townie."
If it's true, you have cleared 3 people.
If it's false, you can lynch with a least a 1 in 3 chance of catching scum.

[Falzis]

How does it benefit us to second guess power roles anyway?

[Falzis]

Assuming there are a limited number of queries, it's more efficient to do it in groups.

The statement could be "Nerau-Narsis, Kaziocore, and Aquinas are townie."
If it's true, you have cleared 3 people.
If it's false, you can lynch with a least a 1 in 3 chance of catching scum.

I think Martino's point was that we only know our own alignment that's why putting statements for other people's alignment won't help if the doctor/psychiatrist only detects truth or lies from that player.

[CanucksDynasty]

I thought as much.

As per your question, the two I would pick of the 3 I suspect right now would be EM and Sir Jesus. Kaziocore the least because the case against him is built more on negative evidence (what he isn't doing) more than on positive evidence (what he has done).

We know soj was a townie.

IF we presume that you (Falzis) are townie...then that means it would not matter to SJ (if he is scum) who he placed his vote on as a townie would get lynched. IF that is the case...I don't see why SJ would need to be the last vote on soj. EM and Kaziocore were in the middle of the votes and would garner more suspcion from me.

[Falzis]

My suspicion of SJ is based on his proposition to vote off Nerau (now Narsis).

[Narsis]

acutally, it wouldn't even matter that SJ put his vote on soj, soj would still have died unless someone voting for soj withdrew his vote, or one of the inactive players voted for Falzis. however, considering the case against soj, i doubt that anyone would have switched.

so in my opinion it would put the suspicion more so on those that voted earlier.

[Narsis]

My suspicion of SJ is based on his proposition to vote off Nerau (now Narsis).

but why would that make him suspect? Nerau could easily be mafia. in fact i would almost say more so then townie since he caved under pressure.

imo, mafia would want to leave an inactive player alone since they couldn't hurt them by being inactive. i think that the mafia would have been looking for an active player to lynch, or at least someone semi-active(*cough*Kaziocore*cough*).

[Falzis]

So you could be easily mafia? And what caved under pressure?

"imo, mafia would want to leave an inactive player alone since they couldn't hurt them by being inactive."

Well now that you say it, it does seem a pro-townie point for SJ. The reason why I suspected SJ was because I thought he was scum trying to play on people's willingness/preference to lynch inactives (same reason I gave a while back).

But Kevin's reasoning supporting SJ's proposition still doesn't fly for me.

[Falzis]

however, considering the case against soj, i doubt that anyone would have switched.

Why do you doubt anyone would have switched (and just to clarify, what case, my "weak" case?)

BTW, since you are here, and you can step in mole if this is out of line (since you just said no asking on the weak doc role), could you tell me why you believed in my case against soj and voted with me?

And would you have voted for KevinH or me if the soj case wasn't made?

[KevinH]

OK, I'll expand a bit.
Sure, the scum would prefer that they have an active player and it's a disadvantage to them if they have a inactive player.
However, any lynch that kills a scum is a good lynch.

The point I made is that an inactive scum doesn't stop the night kill.
I don't feel it was "glossing over" an obvious fact when my goal is to lynch any scum I can.

But Kevin's reasoning supporting SJ's proposition still doesn't fly for me.

I also want to emphasize that non-voting inactive townies could really hurt us. Suppose a power-role player comes out and makes a convincing case that they know exactly who is who. The scum goes "uh-oh" and gang up and lynch before the townies can respond (been there; done that).

[Narsis]

So you could be easily mafia? And what caved under pressure?

"imo, mafia would want to leave an inactive player alone since they couldn't hurt them by being inactive."

Well now that you say it, it does seem a pro-townie point for SJ. The reason why I suspected SJ was because I thought he was scum trying to play on people's willingness/preference to lynch inactives (same reason I gave a while back).

But Kevin's reasoning supporting SJ's proposition still doesn't fly for me.

i was speaking from an objective point of view. earlier Nerau quit(asked for replacement and subsequently went inactive) due to pressure by me and EM. the fact that he caved under the pressure and quit, shows that he was taking pressure, enough to cause him to quit. if he was a powerrole, then he likely would have claimed, leaving the options that he was townie or mafia. he really could have been either, but caving under pressure is something more often attributed to newer mafia then to a townie.

that said...from my point of view he was, and still continues to be as played by me, a townie.

Why do you doubt anyone would have switched (and just to clarify, what case, my "weak" case?)

BTW, since you are here, and you can step in mole if this is out of line (since you just said no asking on the weak doc role), could you tell me why you believed in my case against soj and voted with me?

And would you have voted for KevinH or me if the soj case wasn't made?

umm...i have to go now and won't be back until late tonight so i'll answer tomorrow when i have more time.

I also want to emphasize that non-voting inactive townies could really hurt us. Suppose a power-role player comes out and makes a convincing case that they know exactly who is who. The scum goes "uh-oh" and gang up and lynch before the townies can respond (been there; done that).

but the point is that it doesn't hurt the scum, so no reason for them to kill him.