Day Two -- Monster Manual Mafia

[Friendly_Illithid]

[Onna Role]

No Lynch votes from Roving Mauler , Erinyes , Gelatinous Cube The Gazebo ,
the Mauler has weighed in.
you others have any of the information N1 was supposed to net us?

Originally Posted by Owlbear

My power does not provide me with results. However, I did receive a result from our Mod, and it must have been redirected to me somehow. I can think of no reason to keep it to myself, as such knowledge only benefits Town. I was told The Gazebo is a Monster.

That is all.

Originally Posted by Roving Mauler

I have some weird information, or rather, a lack of information. I know that either:
a) Friendly_Illithid was not sent to kill anybody by their master, or;
b) They were protected by somebody.

-
(The information comes from my power, but I'd rather not go into too much detail about how it works because it could be easily circumvented if described fully.)

Originally Posted by Roving Mauler

I have more information that's not useful in isolation, but might be with more information. Did anybody protect or otherwise visit Illithid? (I don't need to know the power if you don't want to disclose.)

I also have a power that does not provide PM'd results. So if my target was effected I do not know.My target is still a live one btw

[Gelatinous Cube]

*Cube quivers*My target last night was killed. But not by me.

[Owlbear]

Is it just me, or does Onna Roll seem to be trying to out the powers before they're ready to claim?

It might just be me.

[Bahamut]

Originally Posted by vichyssoise please

For the "Bullshit" comment overreaction yesterDay.

As you wish (and not in the Westly sense). Pardon my exasperation.

Originally Posted by Owlbear

Is it just me, or does Onna Roll seem to be trying to out the powers before they're ready to claim?

It might just be me.

I think, in every game I've ever been in, that so-called "fishing" is a null tell, and calling someone out for fishing is a Scum move.



Also, could someone thinking we shouldn't multi-vote please explain their reasoning in small words so I can better understand? We're always going to have a runner-up?

[Onna Role]

-

Originally Posted by Owlbear

Is it just me, or does Onna Roll seem to be trying to out the powers before they're ready to claim?

It might just be me.

That is not my aim.
I was wondering if the players that were keen on No Lynch ( to gain information) had any information to share.

I may not have phrased it quite right

[Owlbear]

Originally Posted by Bahamut

As you wish (and not in the Westly sense). Pardon my exasperation.

I think, in every game I've ever been in, that so-called "fishing" is a null tell, and calling someone out for fishing is a Scum move.



Also, could someone thinking we shouldn't multi-vote please explain their reasoning in small words so I can better understand? We're always going to have a runner-up?

I'll bear that in mind in future games. My bolding.

I'm enjoying the multivotes, myself.

[Erinyes]

Originally Posted by Onna Role

That is not my aim.
I was wondering if the players that were keen on No Lynch ( to gain information) had any information to share.

I may not have phrased it quite right

I have no information to share at this time, but I do have a lot of reading (and thinking) to do. With any luck, I'll have some conclusions later tonight.

[Mad Mage]

Originally Posted by Onna Role

-

That is not my aim.
I was wondering if the players that were keen on No Lynch ( to gain information) had any information to share.

I may not have phrased it quite right

I would hope that if a Hero/scum had been caught then we would be informed, but that's me, some people might not agree with that.

[Mad Mage]

Originally Posted by Owlbear

I'll bear that in mind in future games. My bolding.

I'm enjoying the multivotes, myself.

It seems quite obvious that you enjoy multi votes.

I don't understand why not multi voting would help us either even though I'm not a great fan of it.

[Mad Mage]

Originally Posted by Alan_Tudyk

Jailkeeping also role locks. So why might someone jailkeep Friendly? Perhaps it was a scum jailkeeper trying to prevent an errant death coming their way. Perhaps it is a paranoid monster thinking that friendly should be holstered for the night. There's plenty of possibilities that we don't have time to delve into because we dont have all the motivations of 21+ players.

This post makes me feel as if you want to shut down discussions about why Friendly might not have performed one of the NKs. That would leave 2 unexplained deaths because surely scum performed at least of them.

[Erinyes]

My post 49 analysis missed a 5th post by CPT in the Night thread; I hadn't updated my spreadsheet with Tuesday AM posts (which included Morden's from below).

Some thoughts on the no-shows for today:

Mordenkainen's N1 analysis of the Friendly bandwagon missed post 229 from Day 1, where Purple changed their vote from a policy vote to a meaningful one. It's almost certainly an oversight, but I only bring it up because they said that was the weirdest vote of the bunch. They felt town to me (and I'm surprised to see that they only had 5 posts D1 and 2 on N1; it seemed like more to me.)

Jeopardy Contestant annoys me for a few reasons, the stupidest of which are the lack of an exclamation point in the name and a reference to a $100 clue, which hasn't existed since 2001. Five meaningful posts so far.

Ogre Jelly sure seemed like someone who was trying to read Day 1 in an hour on a phone, but they were honest enough about it to move me from scummy play to just bad play for now.

[Mad Mage]

Jeopardy Contestant hasn't posted at all since D1.

[Erinyes]

Originally Posted by Eater of Socks

Either we all vote our top two suspects at least, or we try to keep it to one person to preserve our population .

Sorry it's hard to type right now, just got a wellness screening and i'm down one finger

I agree with Purple's assessment that multi-lynch is a Day power with an unknown number of uses, if only because of the fact that Zumsand's death was described as a lynch. I don't know if it's monstrous or heroic -- and because of that, I know that I'd trust the mob's judgment over that of a random player.

What we could try to do is manipulate the vote total so that Kali finishes in second place (assuming they keep no-showing). This would deprive our mystery player of a meaningful choice if they can multi-lynch multi-times.

Like Stocaryn said about mass claims, though, this could be harder than herding cats. As of this moment (Jeopardy 2, Owlbear 2, Kali and others 1), it would actually be impossible without altering the votes of Jeopardy and/or Owlbear. (If there were someone who hadn't voted for Jeopardy and Kali -- or Owlbear and Kali, for that matter -- they could vote for those two and get Kali in second. That doesn't seem like a great idea -- maybe we could just say we can only manipulate Kali's vote to try to get them into second.)

It might be hard to pull off, but I think it would have a tangible benefit. Any thoughts?

[vichyssoise please]

Originally Posted by Erinyes

I agree with Purple's assessment that multi-lynch is a Day power with an unknown number of uses, if only because of the fact that Zumsand's death was described as a lynch. I don't know if it's monstrous or heroic -- and because of that, I know that I'd trust the mob's judgment over that of a random player.

What we could try to do is manipulate the vote total so that Kali finishes in second place (assuming they keep no-showing). This would deprive our mystery player of a meaningful choice if they can multi-lynch multi-times.

Like Stocaryn said about mass claims, though, this could be harder than herding cats. As of this moment (Jeopardy 2, Owlbear 2, Kali and others 1), it would actually be impossible without altering the votes of Jeopardy and/or Owlbear. (If there were someone who hadn't voted for Jeopardy and Kali -- or Owlbear and Kali, for that matter -- they could vote for those two and get Kali in second. That doesn't seem like a great idea -- maybe we could just say we can only manipulate Kali's vote to try to get them into second.)

It might be hard to pull off, but I think it would have a tangible benefit. Any thoughts?

Wouldn't it be better to have the second-most Scummy player in second place? That way if the theoretical multilyncher can get the runner-up lynched, it would be the player we think is second-most Scummy?

[Mordenkainen]

Originally Posted by Erinyes

My post 49 analysis missed a 5th post by CPT in the Night thread; I hadn't updated my spreadsheet with Tuesday AM posts (which included Morden's from below).

Some thoughts on the no-shows for today:

Mordenkainen's N1 analysis of the Friendly bandwagon missed post 229 from Day 1, where Purple changed their vote from a policy vote to a meaningful one. It's almost certainly an oversight, but I only bring it up because they said that was the weirdest vote of the bunch. They felt town to me (and I'm surprised to see that they only had 5 posts D1 and 2 on N1; it seemed like more to me.)

You're correct; I completely missed the content of post 229 which changed the grounds of PurpleWorm's vote.

My apologies to all, and especially PurpleWorm.

my main reason for looking askance at the vote was that I am unfond of voting for lurkers in the early game, mainly because lynching them tells us nothing beyond their alignment. If we get to a point where a lurker is the most feasible Hero candidate because we have Monster reads on all hte active players, then give it a shot. (I've been in that position once; I was even right, the lurker was the last Demon - but unfortunately we should have lynched the serial killer first.)

I'm trying to build a vote picture for today before I indulge in any analysis.

[Mordenkainen]

Originally Posted by vichyssoise please

Wouldn't it be better to have the second-most Scummy player in second place? That way if the theoretical multilyncher can get the runner-up lynched, it would be the player we think is second-most Scummy?

I interpreted Erinyes' proposal as a suggestion to remove the lurker without spending a lynch on doing so. I suspect that implementation would prove a real problem.

[Alan_Tudyk]

Originally Posted by Mad Mage

This post makes me feel as if you want to shut down discussions about why Friendly might not have performed one of the NKs. That would leave 2 unexplained deaths because surely scum performed at least of them.

That's certainly not my intent. A theory was proposed, and I provided an alternate possible solution. When holes were poked in my theory, I defended the possibility. I will say that Occam's razor suggests that Friendly was utilized to attack someone.

[Jeopardy Contestant]

Originally Posted by Mad Mage

Jeopardy Contestant hasn't posted at all since D1.

Did you miss me? Must be with all of the attention I’m getting.

I was studying up for the next round of Jeopardy, then overslept my alarm. But I’m here now....

[Eater of Socks]

Originally Posted by Erinyes

I agree with Purple's assessment that multi-lynch is a Day power with an unknown number of uses, if only because of the fact that Zumsand's death was described as a lynch. I don't know if it's monstrous or heroic -- and because of that, I know that I'd trust the mob's judgment over that of a random player.

What we could try to do is manipulate the vote total so that Kali finishes in second place (assuming they keep no-showing). This would deprive our mystery player of a meaningful choice if they can multi-lynch multi-times.

Like Stocaryn said about mass claims, though, this could be harder than herding cats. As of this moment (Jeopardy 2, Owlbear 2, Kali and others 1), it would actually be impossible without altering the votes of Jeopardy and/or Owlbear. (If there were someone who hadn't voted for Jeopardy and Kali -- or Owlbear and Kali, for that matter -- they could vote for those two and get Kali in second. That doesn't seem like a great idea -- maybe we could just say we can only manipulate Kali's vote to try to get them into second.)

It might be hard to pull off, but I think it would have a tangible benefit. Any thoughts?

For a mass claim toDay? I'm not sure of the use, honestly. We don't have much to go on - a claim would be hard to confirm, and it might give heroes easier targets tonight.

I'm fairly sure, since we're in a Pleo game where everyone has powers, that most people have some information they can share after last night - should we ask for that, instead of a role claim?

- Then again, if you don't, people could jump on you too.

[Jeopardy Contestant]

Question- Antonym of useful information

What is useless information?

I have nothing to report.

[Erinyes]

@Eater -- I'm not advocating a mass claim, just suggesting that we manipulate the votes to get Kali in second. Morden appears to get the idea, but thinks that it'd be hard to pull off -- I think they'd be right in a contested vote, but if someone runs away with the vote, it could be something to think about where the second place voter could be someone with just a couple of votes. (vichy may be right, though; I may have tried to solve a problem that doesn't need solving.)
__________________

There's something I really want to know before I vote. I suspect I know the true answer, but I wouldn't be able to disprove a dishonest answer. Therefore, I'm hoping the true answer gets volunteered over the next 12-ish hours.

[Eater of Socks]

Originally Posted by Erinyes

@Eater -- I'm not advocating a mass claim, just suggesting that we manipulate the votes to get Kali in second. Morden appears to get the idea, but thinks that it'd be hard to pull off -- I think they'd be right in a contested vote, but if someone runs away with the vote, it could be something to think about where the second place voter could be someone with just a couple of votes. (vichy may be right, though; I may have tried to solve a problem that doesn't need solving.)
__________________

There's something I really want to know before I vote. I suspect I know the true answer, but I wouldn't be able to disprove a dishonest answer. Therefore, I'm hoping the true answer gets volunteered over the next 12-ish hours.

Oh I'm sure someone out there knows it - and I'm betting they don't want the answer known. We are ALL being a little coy with what we know now (hell, that's half the fun of mafia!).

[Pleonast]

Announcement regarding Kali

While I do not allow substitutions in general, replacing a no-show is acceptable. I need a new player with a new sock. That is, if your sock has already been eliminated, please do not create another sock. I need a player who has zero secret information about this game, which precludes anyone who has already played.

A sock can apply in the sign-up thread http://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=47323
I'll make an announcement on the SDMB as well.

Kali will be mod-killed at the end of Day Three if they gain their third infraction point at that time. Since the lack of a vote mod-blocks all powers, and the mod-kill will reveal their role message, their opposing team can safely ignore the player while they're inactive.

As a reminder, dead socks can request the spoiler URL if they are so inclined.

[Bahamut]

Originally Posted by Eater of Socks

Oh I'm sure someone out there knows it - and I'm betting they don't want the answer known. We are ALL being a little coy with what we know now (hell, that's half the fun of mafia!).

The two of you are either being incredibly coy/magic baggie, or I missed a post somewhere that at least hints at what Erinyes wants to know.

Probably I'm missing something.

[Owlbear]

sine he/she is being Mod-killed.

[Eater of Socks]

Originally Posted by Bahamut

The two of you are either being incredibly coy/magic baggie, or I missed a post somewhere that at least hints at what Erinyes wants to know.

Probably I'm missing something.

I *think* I know what Erinyes is asking about, but I'm not positive. I don't want us losing a good monster over it.

[Bahamut]

Originally Posted by Eater of Socks

I *think* I know what Erinyes is asking about, but I'm not positive. I don't want us losing a good monster over it.

OK. Fair enough, and agreed.

[PurpleWorm]

Originally Posted by Mordenkainen

You're correct; I completely missed the content of post 229 which changed the grounds of PurpleWorm's vote.

My apologies to all, and especially PurpleWorm.

my main reason for looking askance at the vote was that I am unfond of voting for lurkers in the early game, mainly because lynching them tells us nothing beyond their alignment. If we get to a point where a lurker is the most feasible Hero candidate because we have Monster reads on all hte active players, then give it a shot. (I've been in that position once; I was even right, the lurker was the last Demon - but unfortunately we should have lynched the serial killer first.)

I'm trying to build a vote picture for today before I indulge in any analysis.

Oh I forgot about this. I did see your comments in the night thread and meant to respond today, but just plain forgot. Anyway, no problem, it's sorted.

A vote picture? What's that?

[Owlbear]

This is silly. Only five of us have votes down, and EoD is tomorrow.

[Eater of Socks]

Originally Posted by Owlbear

This is silly. Only five of us have votes down, and EoD is tomorrow.

I feel like many people haven't even participated - are they not aware of the deadline?

[Owlbear]

Probably not.

[Friendly_Illithid]

We can always vote fillibuster if we want more time for people to weigh in

[Bahamut]

Filibustering would give us three extra days, don't forget, as the Mod isn't online on the weekends.

[vichyssoise please]

Originally Posted by Bahamut

Filibustering would give us three extra days, don't forget, as the Mod isn't online on the weekends.

Works for me.

[Eater of Socks]

I'm on board.

[Mordenkainen]

Originally Posted by PurpleWorm

I'm trying to build a vote picture for today before I indulge in any analysis.

A vote picture? What's that?[/QUOTE](Snip other topics)

An understanding of the way the votes have built up to the current position.

A quick check reveals that fifteen of the living players have posted Today, although some haven't posted very often (including me, but then I've never been a prolific poster in other games).Kali is the lone non-poster.

So far, I am 0 for 2 with 1 unknown in identifying Heroes (I voted for Zumsandorala, and expressed mild suspicion of Stocaryn in the Night thread). Not an enviable record.

Once more unto the breach ...

[Mordenkainen]

EBWOP: I fouled up in editing out a quote tag I needed, didn't preview and consequently misattributed. Let's try again.

Originally Posted by PurpleWorm

A vote picture? What's that?

(Snip other topics)

An understanding of the way the votes have built up to the current position.

A quick check reveals that fifteen of the living players have posted Today, although some haven't posted very often (including me, but then I've never been a prolific poster in other games).Kali is the lone non-poster.

So far, I am 0 for 2 with 1 unknown in identifying Heroes (I voted for Zumsandorala, and expressed mild suspicion of Stocaryn in the Night thread). Not an enviable record.

Once more unto the breach ...

[Owlbear]

Yeah,

vote Filibuster

[Bahamut]

[Mordenkainen]

I can almost always get behind having more time to think.

[Friendly_Illithid]

[Roving Mauler]

[Mordenkainen]

There isn't that much activity to review in the voting arena.

As Owlbear noted, only five players have an outstanding vote; Bahamut, Friendly Illithid, Onna Role, Owlbear and vichyssoise please. Alan Tudyk has voted, but rescinded their vote almost immediately.

The only noteworthy voter is Owlbear. They have placed a total of five votes, four of which have been for nonparticipation this Day. His first vote, for Alan Tudyk in post 33, appears to be because Alan didn't follow why Owlbear thought we'd be worse of if we'd no lynched.

The problem with voting for nonparticipants is that lynching someone who hasn't posted extracts a bare minimum of information; the dead player has no history of interactions with other players to mine for information. Players with RL problems probably won't see the vote(s) until too late to do any good, while those who are trying to organise their thoughts won't want to be hurried.

Of course, some people just need a nudge to make them realise they are slacking.

One thing Owlbears multi-vote post did do for me was help crystallise my thinking on multiple votes and when (and when not) to use them.

If a player sprays a large quantity of votes around, how do we know which one they mean? The multiple votes could indicate someone with no idea, or a Hero flinging mud for little apparent reason, planning to claim some credit (or better, have other players, preferably Monsters, give credit) for spotting a Monster and voting for them when one of his subjects is found to suffer from Heroism.

The utility I can see for multiple votes is twofold. First, to be able to vote for two players you believe are both Heroes, a situation in which I found myself in my second ever game. Second, to be able to maintain a strongly believed but unpopular vote while still placing a vote to choose between leading vote candidates, which might help shine a spotlight on your main suspicion later.

I thought of voting Owlbear for this. It's not enough on its own to sustain a case at this point, so I'll hold off for now to see what else may come to view.

[Alan_Tudyk]

I presently am leaning towards a later vote for Owlbear.

[Alan_Tudyk]

Owlbear and Jeopardy Contestant have 2 votes each. And they are in first place. WHAT?
Yeah, Filibuster was the right choice.

[PurpleWorm]

Originally Posted by Alan_Tudyk

I presently am leaning towards a later vote for Owlbear.

What does this mean? Why later?

[Erinyes]

Originally Posted by Erinyes

There's something I really want to know before I vote. I suspect I know the true answer, but I wouldn't be able to disprove a dishonest answer. Therefore, I'm hoping the true answer gets volunteered over the next 12-ish hours.

About four hours ago, I realized that even if the "true answer" were true, it wouldn't be scummy. This is my first chance to type with a keyboard since then.

I haven't been getting enough sleep this week and I need to be at work 4 hours earlier than usual tomorrow. As of now, filibuster looks like it will pass, but just in case, I'll


solely to avoid a possible infraction point. I'm truly sorry, everyone.

[Owlbear]

17 people are playing. 6 have placed votes. I'm in the lead (it's a modest one) just for trying to get some momentum going (aka Lynch the Loud).

I'm all for the filibuster, and here's hoping this game picks up soon. But, lo, the weekend.

[Gelatinous Cube]