Felt vs. MC: Mafia Day 2 Thread

[Trepa Mayfield]

The background music, which had previously fallen silent for sleepy-times, suddenly started up again much, much too early, causing a up-beat and curious jazz theme to float around the mansion as the members were woken up, bleary-eyed and blinking. Everyone convened in the main foyer to determine goings-on, which were conveniently stacked in the middle of the room.

By goings-on, of course, I mean DEAD bodies.

Firstly, there was Special Ed, who looked fairly ordinary, except for being dead. Peekercpa, on top of him, was a lot more gruesomed. Holes, everywhere. That's what you get for being a gangster--live fast, die hard. On top of peeker was...wait, no, there was no one on top of peeker. Your eyes must be playing tricks on you.

Special Ed, who was Matchsticks (Town Freezer) is DEAD
peekercpa, who was Spades Slick (Third Party Undecided/Town Vig/Scum Roleblocker), is DEAD

Whom shall you kill?

*A freezer is a mass roleblocker. Named after Mr. Freeze in Batman mafia on Idle's board, memorably played by Hoopy Frood
**An undecided player is a player who can choose their allegiance in some manner or mechanism. Bullseye, from Story's Civil War game, is the only other instance I remember of that role (and I think peeker played him too. How odd.)
***Day will end Sunday, Feb 27 at 10:35 PM MDT as usual.

[Trepa Mayfield]

Vote Count:

Placeholder (1): Idle Thoughts [Day 1]

Voting in the Future: None

Voting in the Past: None

Voting from the Future: None

Voting from the Past: Idle Thoughts [Day 1]

With these votes no one will be lynched.

[Total Ulla]

Wauw - that's odd. I have never heard of an undecided player is a player who can choose their allegiance in some manner or mechanism.

I can't imagine how that works

Wonder what other surprises is waiting for us in this game

[BillMc]

So my theory about folk being able to choose alignment was correct

Originally Posted by Total Ulla

Wauw - that's odd. I have never heard of an undecided player is a player who can choose their allegiance in some manner or mechanism.

I can't imagine how that works

Wonder what other surprises is waiting for us in this game

hmmm...I seem to recall in one of your games, Ed got to choose his alignment on Night0

[Total Ulla]

He did - but that was before the game began. And he didn't have any power.

I have been trying to figure out a way to let people play without an alignment - but I have never figured out how to balance it completely.
So I'm very keen on seeing (after the game is over) how it was balanced.

The thing I can't help but be confused about is that Rule #14 implies that Peeker had one or both wincons - how can he then also be listed as a 3rd party in toDays-color?

And I can't read from the color what wincon he was playing to achieve. Because Rule #14 sounds like there isn't a 3rd party wincon... So what was he? Town or Scum or Undecided??

[BillMc]

Originally Posted by Total Ulla

He did - but that was before the game began. And he didn't have any power.

I have been trying to figure out a way to let people play without an alignment - but I have never figured out how to balance it completely.
So I'm very keen on seeing (after the game is over) how it was balanced.

The thing I can't help but be confused about is that Rule #14 implies that Peeker had one or both wincons - how can he then also be listed as a 3rd party in toDays-color?

And I can't read from the color what wincon he was playing to achieve. Because Rule #14 sounds like there isn't a 3rd party wincon... So what was he? Town or Scum or Undecided??

A true 3rd party can win with town or win with scum.

Rule #14 does not preclude the 3rd party having both wincons

"14. There are no players without either a town or a scum win condition."

[Special Ed]

Why did I have to be on the bottom?

[BobArrgh]

Crappy news about peeker and Ed.

If peeker had decided to be Town, he would have been a Vig? Does his death signify that there are no other Vigs in the game? Similarly for the Scum Roleblocker.

It seems to me that in a game this size, doubling up on roles would give one side a big advantage.

[peekercpa]

well bollux all. gd my shelf life is beginning to look a lot like bill's.

[peekercpa]

Originally Posted by Special Ed

Why did I have to be on the bottom?

what goes around comes around.

[Zeener Diode]

Sorry peek (if you were aligned with Town; if you weren't, then woot.)

And Ed, though I was dogging you all game, I admit I was wrong to think you were Scum.

Moving on...

We still have the issue about Romanic being a Miller. Do we do our duty as Town and lynch him? I don't want to lynch a Town power, and if both he and Idle are Masons that makes the choice more undesirable.

[Zeener Diode]

NETA: As a cautionary tale: In SisC's Dr Seuss I was a Watcher and I saw Renata NK BillMc on Night 1. I chose not to reveal because I didn't want to derail the lynch train Giraffe started against (I forget who), and planned to reveal my knowledge at Dawn 2. Then I was NKed Night 2. Town lost valuable information on a Scum player.

If you are Town power and have vital information, you might want to share it toDay. I wish I had done that.

[Idle Thoughts]

I got a PM that says:
Title: During the Night

"You awake feeling very lucky to be alive!"

I'm going to assume this means I was tried to be Night killed (unless I get this message every Night)

[SisterCoyote]

It will be interesting to see if you do.

[moody mitchy]

Originally Posted by BobArrgh

Crappy news about peeker and Ed.

If peeker had decided to be Town, he would have been a Vig? Does his death signify that there are no other Vigs in the game? Similarly for the Scum Roleblocker.

It seems to me that in a game this size, doubling up on roles would give one side a big advantage.

I think it would more likely have meant a TOWN Vig as well as a 3rd party SK/PFK (though I don't know how this would tie in with the win cons stated in the rules)

As he never made it through the Night I don't feel we'll find out what he had chosen if any... I don't know if there was any time limit as to when he could choose... And as he got killed during Night 1. Even if he had chosen TOWN vig... I'm not sure his action would have gone through... but then again maybe it would because as a Doc... If you protect someone but get killed yourself... the protection usually works doesn't it ?

Oh Zeener Diode I'm trying to work out whether your post is just blatant fishing or you really do want TOWN powers to open up Day 2 and reveal what they have just in case they get killed....

No harm in me saying though... as I'm the only player that's actually claimed a non twisty role..... I protected myself last night.

What are peoples thoughts on the 2 deaths overNight... one SCUM.. the other ??

[SisterCoyote]

as a Doc... If you protect someone but get killed yourself... the protection usually works doesn't it ?

That depends on how the mod resolves action order.

[moody mitchy]

Originally Posted by SisterCoyote

That depends on how the mod resolves action order.

That's what I thought and why I questioned my own statement...

Also with a little further thinking... It could be possible that with Peekercpa no longer with us. Although we , as far as we know don't have a TOWN vig.... SCUM by the same measure are likely not to have a roleblocker.

As in my role I could have been blocked but not tracked / watched as I didn't need to leave the house to do the fixing.. I consider this a bonus.

[Idle Thoughts]

Actually, three killing roles if you count my message as an attempt on me.

[moody mitchy]

Originally Posted by Idle Thoughts

Actually, three killing roles if you count my message as an attempt on me.

Yes that's an interesting one...

With the 3 deaths and 3 players having claimed or spoken about...

Me... Doctor

Romanic Mason/Miller

Idle Thoughts Some sort of power

Peekercpa Town Vig/ Scum Roleblock / Third Party undecided...

Special Ed Town Freezer

Red Skeezix Town Tracker

That's 6 powers so far in the game... and I haven't been able to locate a sample vanilla PM in the rules thread.... could we be looking at an all power set up?

[Idle Thoughts]

Vote Zuma

He was last active (on the boards) yesterday but hasn't posted in a game thread since the 17th (after voting for me for--and again, I think it's pretty crappy/weak reasoning--not claiming on Day One).

[Giraffe]

Originally Posted by Idle Thoughts

Actually, three killing roles if you count my message as an attempt on me.

That seems like a bit of a leap, don't you think? All your message says is that you feel lucky to be alive. Given that your role PM specifically mentions luck as a power of yours:

Originally Posted by Claimed Role PM

Your powers allow you to get really lucky, subtly altering the timestream until events become more favorable to you. How this will play out in the game you don’t know.

It seems like a stretch to assume feeling lucky to be alive automatically equates to an attempted kill last Night.

[Idle Thoughts]

Now see, to me, just because my role says I'm lucky wouldn't mean I'd have to get a PM after every Night I'm still alive basically saying "You're lucky to be alive!" with added emphasis, but you could be right. If I live to see Tomorrow, I'll let everyone know if I get another.

[Giraffe]

I'm just saying, if your role is what you claim, then perhaps there are Days in which you wake up with your luck power "turned on" and this PM indicates that toDay is one of those days.

However, I'm having a very hard time seeing what "luck" even means in a game like this. Unless, as you speculate, someone else has a random chance of killing you and Hypnagogic busts out the 12-sided dice each time to see if they succeed. Confusing.

[Giraffe]

In more general terms, the peeker role reveal is very interesting. There may be other players who have had or will have the opportunity to pick a side. Perhaps this is the purpose of Romanic's one way communication with Idle? He gets to feed him info on how to set their alignment? He gets to choose their alignment and tell it to Idle?

I just can't shake the feeling that the least likely explanation for those two is them both being Town. Something's up with that situation there.

[Giraffe]

Yep, something's up. I'm going with my gut on this one:

[Zeener Diode]

Originally Posted by Giraffe

Yep, something's up. I'm going with my gut on this one:

vote Romanic

You're certain you'd like to see a potential Mason lynched?

[Zeener Diode]

moody: No fishing intended. Like I said, I posted that as a cautionary note. If someone has information on Scum that can help Town, please do not hesitate to share it.

[SisterCoyote]

Originally Posted by Zeener Diode

moody: No fishing intended. Like I said, I posted that as a cautionary note. If someone has information on Scum that can help Town, please do not hesitate to share it.

OTOH, if said person is successfully laying low so far, we may not want them to bring themselves to anyone's attention: Scum, Town, or otherwise.

There's a possibility that Peek killed Ed last Night, too, and was killed by Scum in turn.

BRB I want to check something.

[Zeener Diode]

Originally Posted by Idle Thoughts

I got a PM that says:
Title: During the Night

I'm going to assume this means I was tried to be Night killed (unless I get this message every Night)

But you still don't know what your mystery power is? Could it be some sort of protection?

I seem to recall getting a message like that when I played an earlier mafia game (was it NSFW? Disney?) which meant I'd been poisoned. I was the doc and self-protected that Night, but by the next Night I was dead.

[SisterCoyote]

Originally Posted by SisterCoyote

BRB I want to check something.

Regarding this: Nevermind. For some reason I thought someone else had claimed Spades. Too many mafia games in my head, I guess.

[Zeener Diode]

Originally Posted by SisterCoyote

OTOH, if said person is successfully laying low so far, we may not want them to bring themselves to anyone's attention: Scum, Town, or otherwise.

That was my intention in Dr Seuss and I ended up NKed the next Night. Either someone saw me seeing Scum, or took a lucky shot.

Like I said, I'm not asking anyone to reveal their roles. But if they saw who killed Ed (and if it were Scum), please share this info ASAP.

[Idle Thoughts]

Originally Posted by Zeener Diode

But you still don't know what your mystery power is? Could it be some sort of protection?

I seem to recall getting a message like that when I played an earlier mafia game (was it NSFW? Disney?) which meant I'd been poisoned. I was the doc and self-protected that Night, but by the next Night I was dead.

Nope. The only thing I can think of/guess is that I can survive Night kills..either indefinitely, only once, or maybe there's some kind of percentage thing each Night.
I don't know if I buy the "luck being turned on" thing, sorry. My initial PM says "Your powers allow you to get really lucky", which sounds like something I or others do has to trip it off first or that it's something I have with me at all times. If it's the latter, then I wouldn't have to have my luck "turned on"..and if it's the former, I didn't do anything during the Night, so my assumption is that someone elses action tripped something off.

[Romola]

Originally Posted by Idle Thoughts

Now see, to me, just because my role says I'm lucky wouldn't mean I'd have to get a PM after every Night I'm still alive basically saying "You're lucky to be alive!" with added emphasis, but you could be right. If I live to see Tomorrow, I'll let everyone know if I get another.

It still doesn't necessarily mean 3 killing roles though, there could be two and one of them may have been redirected from you.

[Romola]

I wonder if it's possible for roles like Peeker's to be fluid? I mean, if they can change their alignment at will. So each night they choose an action from their 3 potential roles, but could take one from one of the others the next night, depending on how the wind is blowing? And make a final choice if they survive to endgame? Ulla mentioned trying to find a way to allow players not to have alignment or to have fluid alignment.

Of course, Peek's could have been the only role of this kind, but it's worth bearing in mind. I'm thinking particularly of Romanic here. Romanic, I guess you are likely to say 'Yes' to this, whatever the true situation, but did you post your entire role PM?

[Giraffe]

Originally Posted by Zeener Diode

You're certain you'd like to see a potential Mason lynched?

Um, I guess so? This is only the second game I've played that had Masons, and the first with non-traditional Mason roles, so maybe I'm missing something: what value do you think Romanic brings to Town if his role is as he says it is?

As far as I can tell, the value of Masons lies in their ability to have a confirmed Town ally to look for scum with, and in the fact that if they claim, they can absolutely confirm the identity of the other upon their death. Neither of those things applies here. So what is the loss to Town if I'm wrong and Romanic is in fact Town? (Beyond the obvious fact that it's best not to lynch Townies, of course.)

[Romanic]

Originally Posted by Romola

Of course, Peek's could have been the only role of this kind, but it's worth bearing in mind. I'm thinking particularly of Romanic here. Romanic, I guess you are likely to say 'Yes' to this, whatever the true situation, but did you post your entire role PM?

I posted the complete PM, even the first line, which might not have been part of the PM:

I swear this was random.

Maybe HB wrote it because I've got the worst role.

[Trepa Mayfield]

4 days, 3 hours and 30 minutes until the end of Day 2.

Vote Count:

Zuma (1): Idle Thoughts [Day 2 Post 20]
Romanic (1): Giraffe [Day 2 Post 25]
Placeholder (1): Idle Thoughts [Day 1]

Voting in the Future: None

Voting in the Past: None

Voting from the Future: None

Voting from the Past: Idle Thoughts [Day 1]

With these votes Romanic will be lynched.

[Romanic]

I felt used yesterDay when I saw that Red was a Town, because I made the first case on him, and people followed behind, ultimately lynching a pro-Town role.

Scums would definitely know that he wasn't lying, and would jump at the opportunity to lynch a claimed tracker, if Townies are heading this way.

@Bill:

On post #315 yesterDay, the tally was

3 Idle Thoughts (zuma, Lucifer, Lucifer/D6)
3 moody mitchy (Red, Bob, Giraffe)
3 Red Skeezix (Romanic, mitchy, Ulla)
2 Lucifer (Romola, Idle)
1 Special Ed (Zeener)
1 Zeener (peeker)
1 Romanic (special Ed)

And you posted this (#316)

Originally Posted by BillMc

I'm torn at this point.
I'm included to believe Mitchy's doc claim
The partial claim from Red really sux.
Lucifer's play is so flawed and anti-town.

If Romanic is truthful, then lynching him confirms Idle.
If Idle is scum, then lynching Romanic would expose his false claim, and he would be lynched.
If Romanic flips town, then Idle is town.
If both are scum, then its a pretty bold play for Romanic to out himself when he was in no danger of being lynched. Lynching a scummy Romanic would put a nail in Idle's coffin, and likewise a scummy Idle would put a nail in Romanic's. As a claimed Miller, he needs to be lynched at somepoint - so if they are both scum - this is the boldest play in a long time.

And Red chooses to revote a claimed Doc, rather than share his full claim.

vote red
vote red from Day 7

Breaking the tie, but also using a future vote to make it 5-3. I am wondering why you chose to do this, instead of making it 4-3?

I think the extra vote is superfluous, you could have waited to see what other players would do.

[BobArrgh]

I'm kind of with you on the whole Mason question, giraffe. In the Dr. Seuss game, I got that the value of the Masonry is knowing that the Masons are who they say they are. But the whole Miller/Mason one-way-communication scenario doesn't look like it is all that useful. I don't have enough insight into your gut feelings, though, to lay a vote down on Romanic or Idle.

[BobArrgh]

Does anyone have a handle on the "voting from the past" thing? If a person voted yesterDay and their vote did not affect the timeline (i.e., their vote did not play a part in the lynch), is it possible for that person to pull their vote forward, or is that too far-fetched? (Pun intended )

Or does the "voting from the past" only work if a person either banked their vote with a placeholder or perhaps didn't vote at all?

[Romanic]

Originally Posted by BobArrgh

Does anyone have a handle on the "voting from the past" thing? If a person voted yesterDay and their vote did not affect the timeline (i.e., their vote did not play a part in the lynch), is it possible for that person to pull their vote forward, or is that too far-fetched? (Pun intended )

Or does the "voting from the past" only work if a person either banked their vote with a placeholder or perhaps didn't vote at all?

As per the rules, I would assume that you need a placeholder to vote in the past. Someone who didn't vote, should be able to bring that non-vote from the past, to use it.

[Romanic]

Allow me to say it again :P

As per the rules, I would assume that you need a placeholder to vote in the past. Someone who didn't vote, should not be able to bring that non-vote from the past, to use it.

[Romanic]

(Post #212, Day 1)

Originally Posted by Ulla

In all honesty it was because I felt the logic was so off. I mean I really still feel voting for someone based on them not claiming is totally BS.

Since I know Moody isn't the BS-type I simply assumed it was written with a tongue-in-cheek-manner.

I'm still pinged by this from Ulla. It doesn't feel natural to assume that moody mitchy was joking when he said that Idle was suspicious for not claiming.

Mitchy's original statement on this was (Day 1, #75):

Oh and I'm suspicious of Idle Thoughts. 2 posts and no claim. Now that's got to be dodgy behaviour.

No hint that he was joking, yet Ulla picks it as a joke, and I'm not sure that I buy her explanation that it was because she "felt the logic was so off".

I think it makes more sense to question someone, if you feel his stuff is BS, than assume he was joking.

[BobArrgh]

Makes sense ... (well, the 2nd one did).

I've spent about 20 minutes over on The Felt wiki, and that is some seriously messed-up stuff. I'm not even sure I understand what type of thing the whole MS Paint Adventures is, but I'm pretty sure this game is about as close as I want to get.

[BobArrgh]

NETA: My #44 was directed at Romanic's #41 and #42.

[Trepa Mayfield]

Originally Posted by BobArrgh

Makes sense ... (well, the 2nd one did).

I've spent about 20 minutes over on The Felt wiki, and that is some seriously messed-up stuff. I'm not even sure I understand what type of thing the whole MS Paint Adventures is, but I'm pretty sure this game is about as close as I want to get.

It's the Finnegan's Wake of webcomics. Or the Ulysses, depending on who you ask.

[Zeener Diode]

Originally Posted by Giraffe

Um, I guess so? This is only the second game I've played that had Masons, and the first with non-traditional Mason roles, so maybe I'm missing something: what value do you think Romanic brings to Town if his role is as he says it is?

As far as I can tell, the value of Masons lies in their ability to have a confirmed Town ally to look for scum with, and in the fact that if they claim, they can absolutely confirm the identity of the other upon their death. Neither of those things applies here. So what is the loss to Town if I'm wrong and Romanic is in fact Town? (Beyond the obvious fact that it's best not to lynch Townies, of course.)

I'd like to get a consensus of all players on the Miller-is-Mason issue: if Romanic were simply a Miller there would be no hesitation to lynch. Town sees Miller as possible Scum trying to cover their true alignment, and a pro-Town Miller would understand the conundrum and voluntarily vote to lynch themselves.
But a Mason who is a Miller is a different story. Masons have value in the endgame and vote in a bloc, offsetting a potential Scum bloc vote. So far, we know of Romanic and Idle as probable Masons. Should Romanic die it would prove or disprove Idle's alignment. Is the risk of losing a Town, a Mason, worth the validation of another Town?

Now let's look at this game: we have the ability to vote like Masons ourselves, each Day, through banking or place-holding our past and future votes. The risk is only that we stay alive in order to follow through. The downside is that if we're wrong (by banking votes when we ought to vote), we'll pay a heavy price by allowing Scum to roam or lynching Town.

[Giraffe]

Originally Posted by Zeener Diode

I'd like to get a consensus of all players on the Miller-is-Mason issue: if Romanic were simply a Miller there would be no hesitation to lynch. Town sees Miller as possible Scum trying to cover their true alignment, and a pro-Town Miller would understand the conundrum and voluntarily vote to lynch themselves.
But a Mason who is a Miller is a different story. Masons have value in the endgame and vote in a bloc, offsetting a potential Scum bloc vote. So far, we know of Romanic and Idle as probable Masons. Should Romanic die it would prove or disprove Idle's alignment. Is the risk of losing a Town, a Mason, worth the validation of another Town?

You are defending Romanic far more strongly than I'd expect a normal Town player to do. He's not a normal Mason, he's the role he claimed. So talking about the value Masons have in other games is inaccurate and obfuscatory at best.

Could you answer my questions about the value you see in Romanic's actual claimed role to Town? I don't see any, but you obviously do.

Until then, I'm going to operate on the theory that you two are scum buddies and you're trying to help him get out of the corner he's painted himself into with his role claim.

[Giraffe]

NETA: I know it's dumb to use two votes to vote for two different people, since I'm basically voting against myself. Before the Day is over, I'll choose my most likely candidate and either remove a vote or double up.

[BobArrgh]

I'm going to try an experiment.