DP5: The Three Musketeers mafia (DAY 1)

Bobacino · Post Post #75 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:32 am

Dragon Slayer, I just asked you to clarify why you would reveal your role in all it's glory to us all (knowing full well it would destroy it's purpose by doing so) and your response was this

I figured if I gave my complete role at once, you wouldn't get on my back on it later.

What? What the hell? You gave out all the information regarding your role, making it completely useless for the town, even though you're a very experienced player, just because you had a hunch that it might stop us from chasing you up? At first I didn't really think that was such a bad thing to do, but now that I think about it, you voluntarily ruined your pro-town purpose on a gut feeling.

The question that I keep trying to get the answers to is why didn't you just wait for questions? The answer I keep getting is "I figured if I gave.. blah blah blah". A new player could make that mistake, but you? I don't think so. And explaining it all away with a "I'm not playing so well" is not sitting well with me at all anymore.

Lastly I quote this:

Could you mean that you don't understand? Becasue I'm getting sick of saying it.

Yes, I understand now. You are acting more aloof than you ought to be about this whole affair (your arrogant stance can be exemplified with one-liner sighs and no logical arguments):

*double sigh (or should it be triple, now?)*

Vote meme

I"m hte Duke, period.

*(are we on quadruple, I believe?) sigh*

This is unsettling. If I was in your position and I was actually a pro-town role I would be ranting at everyone to lay off the abuse. You, however, are simply *sighing* and ignoring the logic that some of us are throwing at you. I tried to defend you earlier on and your reply to it was that I couldn't understand the reasoning behind your decision. What reasoning or logic is there to understand? Most of us have been disuaded from voting by the reliance on two things that are not provable:

1) Your role claim is true
2) You are not playing very well

I no longer believe either claim. As MeMe has iterated, you are the most suspicious out of everyone here and I'm going to

unvote: Warrior

and

vote: Dragon Slayer

. Also, Im going to

FOS: Jeep

for attacking, without very much logic, the only person who is pressing the attack on the most suspicious person here.

Bobacino · Post Post #76 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:35 am

Also...

Also, no offense meant to DS, but I don't think he knows enough about the Three/Four Musketeers to remember that the Duke of Buckingham was in love with the Queen of France (I could be wrong, but he's never said anything to me about the books, and I know him well).

But could the Cardinals not be given information about such a role?

Quailman · Post Post #77 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 8:53 am

FOS: Bobacinoa because he stopped posting using flowery prose.

Bobacino · Post Post #78 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 9:56 am

(Thanks Quailman, I forgot we were doing the Muskateers thing!

...)

Truly, now that I have given evidence of my claim, I must illustrate to thee not the logic of the Dragon Slayers guilt, for at best it can only be claimed presumption, but the tides of my heart also. Mine own gut doth call to me to query his innocence for he doth exhibit the aloofness of nobility, as though his claims were firmly supported by the scaffolds of fact. However, it is not fact that supports him, but vague and foggy arrogance. I vote him, if not for solid logic, then for the wrenching suspicion in mine heart that labels him a man of ignoble deed.

Dragon Slayer · Post Post #79 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:43 pm

Yes, I understand now. You are acting more aloof than you ought to be about this whole affair (your arrogant stance can be exemplified with one-liner sighs and no logical arguments):

I have the right to be angry. I calmly explained all the answers to your (and everyone else's questions), now multiple times and I'm sick of it. Pretty ticked, too. And people are still carring on about it.

BTW, whoever said that I didn't know much about the Three Musketeers was right.

FOS Bobacino

Bobacino · Post Post #80 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:55 pm

I said you were aloof, not angry. Your posts didn't reveal your anger, they just revealed a sort of arrogance.

Leonidas · Post Post #81 (ISO) » Sat Mar 15, 2003 3:41 pm

Bobacino, the Duke of Buckingham is most likely present in this game.

Dragon Phoenix · Post Post #82 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:25 am

Deadline for this day will be Tuesday 2PM GL time

If the situation warrants it I will extend the deadline.

MeMe · Post Post #83 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:49 am

Remember, everyone, we agreed to be

active

in this game...

~stares meaningfully at SaberKitty who promised to post later "this afternoon" on March 10~

Also, can we get a vote count?

cuban smoker · Post Post #84 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 6:08 am

Maybe the queen, or whoever it was Dragon Slayer was claiming to chase, should come out. Then, Dragon Slayer can find the queen, and then the can start hiding. If they guess right, and the mafia keep targetting them, we will be wasting mafia kills. If the queen doesn't come out, we can lynch Dragon Slayer.

And it is very risky to claim a role that depends on the existence of another role, unless you know that other role exists. I do not suspect DS yet.

MeMe · Post Post #85 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 6:36 am

Well, what are the possible outcomes of this plan?

1) DS is a lone scum (e.g. Serial Killer) and no one backs up his claim, so we lynch him. Hurrah!
2) DS is the Duke, the queen comes forward and they attempt to dodge night kills. Hurrah? Boo? Depends on how long they're successful at dodging.
4) DS is the Duke, but the queen remains incognito to save herself, so we lynch DS. Boo!
3) DS is in the Cardinals gang and another member of the gang comes forward and claims to be the queen -- we give them both a free pass. Boo!

Anything I missed?

Dragon Slayer · Post Post #86 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 6:51 am

If number 3 was true than once one of us

was

killed, than you'd have the other one oinned. Too risky. I'd appreciate the queen coming out.

MeMe · Post Post #87 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 7:12 am

Just realized I reversed the numbers 3 & 4 in my list. I'm assuming you refer to the third in the list, DS, not the one numbered (4). Any confusion is my fault. Sorry.

cuban smoker · Post Post #88 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 8:04 am

Yes, the queen should come out if we intend to go forward with that plan. Note, the only results of the queen staying hidden are boo.

Queen, show yourself such that the duke and the queen may act as martyrs for the good of the town. Heck, the doctors can even protect the duke and the queen on random nights.

Dragon Phoenix · Post Post #89 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 9:03 am

Vote count (10 to lynch, 5 at deadline)

DrSl 4 (MeMe, Boba, Cors, Polo)
Doom 2 (Quai, CuSm)
Boba 2 (Leon, NiSt)
Meme 2 (Jeep, Dral)
Quai 1 (SabK)
Dour 1 (CapB)
CapB (Dour)
Gasp 1 (Quer)

CoolBot · Post Post #90 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 12:15 pm

It seems to me the queen might have some more power as the queen was a more important figure in the book. Maybe something to do with Madame Bonacieux or D'Artagnan? If this is true, I don't think it's such a good idea for the queen to come out.

Then, when a cardinal spy found out who the queen was and they attacked her, she would not be there.

This comment by Bobacino has been bothering me; I don't remember any other mention of any cardinal spy. With nothing much else to go on,

vote: Bobacino

Night Stalker · Post Post #91 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 1:28 pm

Let's not forget:

Bobacino wrote:I shall be be so brave as to allude that there are three of the Cardinal's troupe at large. Furthermore, this lunatic murderer may have had an accomplice, such is the way of madmen.

How does he know all this?

CaptainBlicero · Post Post #92 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 2:39 pm

unvote whoever

vote: Bobacino

... maybe you're just going completely overboard with speculation, but this business about a "cardinal spy" seems like a slip-up. Also, I think you and MeMe can stop attacking DS. The queen's role may prevent her from revealing, or she could have other reasons for not revealing. If DS is lying about his role claim, the real Duke would have denounced him by now.

Also, once a role claim is forced on Day One, it's not a very good strategy to instantly lynch the player who role-claimed. Killing the only player we know anything solid about is not the best of ideas.

MeMe · Post Post #93 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:22 pm

Defending my right to stick with my vote isn't "attacking," CB. Be careful with your blanket statements, please. And there is the possibility that the "real Duke" hasn't denounced DS because they're a non-poster. And, I also wouldn't say that we know anything "solid" about a player, ever, just because they've claimed a role. Until the card is flipped, it is all just words.
*******************************
Sudden tonal shift (I allowed to do that anytime I want...I call!):

Since Bobacino's the only other player who's spoken up in defense of my posts, I

really

hate to agree that he looks suspicious. But...well...he's said a few suspicious things (as pointed out by Night Stalker and others). Since CB has declared lynching role-claimers a dumb thing to do

and I was unaware of this policy...I'll go with the #2 most suspicious.

unvote: Dragon Slayer
vote: Bobacino

Dourgrim · Post Post #94 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 5:44 pm

Good points made all around...

unvote: Captain Blicero, vote: Bobacino

How

do

you know there are three baddies, hmmm?

Bobacino · Post Post #95 (ISO) » Sun Mar 16, 2003 9:48 pm

Right, the attack on me has come from two suspicions, has it not?

1) A reference to a cardinal spy
2) An allusion as to how many anti-town roles there might be

and a third that I've added is..

3) Me talking too much

1) If you look at what I posted, you may notice that the whole thing was an hypothesis. Here, take a look:

However, although this looks like I'm heavily defending DS, which I suppose I am, I have thought of a possible use... If DS hadn't revealed his role to us, it is likely that the Cardinals wouldn't know of it. If that was the case and DS found the Queen, he could hide her away at his place. Then, when a cardinal spy found out who the queen was and they attacked her, she would not be there. The cardinals would have lost their prey and Her Graciousness would have been saved.

What I was referring to was a mafia investigator (some games call them devils, some call them mafia cops etc.) and I paraphrased it to fit in with the Muskateers theme. Please, take a look at the number of posts that I've made and in how many I've tried to keep to the theme of Muskateers. It's not a rarity. I think it's more fun to fit into DP's theme. Honestly, I called the mafia investigator a cardinal spy because I was fitting the theme.

2) Some people seem to think I know how many bad guys there are:(Dourgrim)

How do you know there are three baddies, hmmm?

(Night Stalker)

How does he know all this?

If you'd like to read my post....

It is fair news indeed that one of the Cardinal's entourage has fallen during the night. Would that it were the hand of Paris that lead to her execution than the lunacy of some hidden stalker in the night.

I shall be be so brave as to allude that there are three of the Cardinal's troupe at large. Furthermore, this lunatic murderer may have had an accomplice, such is the way of madmen. I fear, however, that I can not truthfully say who among us are treachers to the monarchy.

Again, this is me trying to get into the falvour of the game. There were three things that I was trying to acheive. The first was to get a mood going. The second was to start the ball rolling with some hypotheses. The third was to explain my hypotheses. If you translate my post into modern day english, you would get something like this...

NOT A REAL QUOTE
Yay town! One mafia down. Because she died last night, that means there's a serial killer. That's a bit of a sh**er. I'm going to guess how many scum there are: Let's say three and a serial killer or maybe two. I've read about games that have teamed SKs. It could be nothing like that and to be honest, it's all guesswork.

Please, don't confuse '

allusions

' with '

knowledge

'. I was guessing, blindly, to try to get the game going and to make the game fun.

3) Yes, I talk too much. I'm an easy target. Isn't that why you're all voting for me?

Lastly, don't reveal yourself, Queen. Surely the mafia (Cardinals men) want to kill her.. In fact, isn't that who the Muskateers are trying to protect? (That's a genuine question, not a hypothetical question.. I.E. I require an answer because I don't remember the plot to whole thing.. except from what I remember from "Dog-tagnion")

cuban smoker · Post Post #96 (ISO) » Mon Mar 17, 2003 3:36 am

Hmm... I guess we can give DS and the queen the benefit of the doubt for now. After all, why risk having them both killed, and thwarting their love?

On a completely unrelated note, I just watched Natural Born Killers, a very good, if not slightly twisted movie.

Who am I voting for? DoomCow eh? He hasn't posted for a while. I'll keep my vote there.

Even if Bobacino confessed to being the Cardinal, I still wouldn't vote for him because his flavourful posts make this game more interesting. I'd honestly wait a few days... I think creative posting should grant you a special immunity for a little while.

Quailman · Post Post #97 (ISO) » Mon Mar 17, 2003 6:16 am

The momentum seems to be shifting towards Bobacino. I will not vote for him yet, for 'twas I who asked him to post more of his 'flowery prose'. In keeping with my dislike of non-participants, I will leave my vote on DoomCow.

Dourgrim · Post Post #98 (ISO) » Mon Mar 17, 2003 7:24 am

Creative posting is great, agreed... I wish I was better at it.

And I'm certainly not someone that votes for people who talk too much. However, I do vote for people who let "flowery prose" and creativity get in the way of logic and clear speech and thereby confuse fiction with fact. To wit:

Bobacino wrote:I shall be be so brave as to allude that there are three of the Cardinal's troupe at large. Furthermore, this lunatic murderer may have had an accomplice, such is the way of madmen.

Alluding to something is

not

equivalent to guessing about something. The use of the word "allude" directly implies knowledge of a situation but an unwillingness to come directly forward with information about it... hence my suspicions and subsequent vote.

Oh, and by the way...

Bobacino wrote:3) Yes, I talk too much. I'm an easy target. Isn't that why you're all voting for me?

Absolutely not

. As a matter of fact, I wish more people posted as often as you do... it makes the game a lot more fun for everyone, IMO.

jeep · Post Post #99 (ISO) » Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:11 am

unvote: meme ; vote: bobacino

I'm just bandwagoning, I think we need to get to night for more informaiton. The daytime discussion seems to have come to a screeching halt.

-JEEP