Mini Game 26 - Night Three!

[Dourgrim]

/confirm

[Dourgrim]

*bump*

[Dourgrim]

My handy-dandy d10 tells me to...

vote: Mickey

And, don't worry about it, Polotet... I'm just impatient, I suspect, due to my newbieness. Glad to get the ball rolling, though.

[Dourgrim]

Everyone vote for the evil Dourgrim, eater of snot and doer of bad things.

Hmph... normally this would merit an OMGUS vote for being unnecessarily insulting and just generally weird, but there are more important things to be done with one's vote than just fire it at weirdos... Cuban's got the right idea, I think.

unvote: Mickey
vote: DarkBlade

[Dourgrim]

(By the by, excuse the length of this post... I'm responding piece by piece and quoting all the while so no one accuses me of altering fact.)

Sure sounds like three killers to me. Yeah, I know, let's lynch someone for ACTUALLY READING THE MODERATOR'S POSTS.

FOS: cuban smoker,

second to leap on the bandwagon, praising d8p, and offering 'wisdom' which really doesn't say much.

Vote: Dourgrim,

third on the bandwagon, for two reasons:

OK, I've stopped laughing long enough to respond. You may have read the mod's post well, but you sure didn't read the rest of them: d8P never voted for DarkBlade, which means CS made the first vote and I the second. d8P voted for ME because...

Now, down to business. (1st game and 1st) Random vote: Dourgrim for posting ahead of me while I was still saying eeny meeny...

Did you notice the word "random" thrown in there?

And now for Chiromancer's "reasons":

1. "Everyone vote for the evil Dourgrim, eater of snot and doer of bad things." This after d8p "caught" DarkBlade. Sounds fairly interesting to me.

The National Enquirer is often "interesting", and usually contains quite a few snippets with as much sense as random insults like this one... however, I wouldn't advise using it to guide your voting habits in real life.

2. Dourgrim's little bandwagon jump didn't exactly shout "Look, Townie!"

Since when is the second vote for someone a bandwagon? CS made a good point, and I backed it up... although I do see your point about three killing parties (crossbow and hacking, etc). For now, my vote will stay where it is... I'll have to give this some thought.

[Dourgrim]

AAAGH!
Dourgrim: Sorry. Didn't mean to cause offence. Newbie nerves, or attempt at humour, that's all. I would have been the first to post except you beat me to it, so I had to re-write mine, hence the name calling.

No offense taken... which is why I referred to them as "random insults" rather than "despicable slander".

[Dourgrim]

It seems

highly

unlikely to me that we'd have 3 different killers in a mini-game... unless, of course, we're aiming for the fastest town loss in history. 2 killers is enough for us to deal with, thankyouverymuch. The theory of an unreliable armed townie sounds right... or perhaps a doc protected someone from an armed townie, or something like that. Basically, it's all guesswork at the moment, but I'd have a hard time believing that we've got 3 kills/night against us.

Which leads me to our first-day vote decisions... the only way we get any kind of information on day 1 is by lynching someone, which is usually random unless someone says something suspicious. Darkblade immediately jumped to a conclusion that would generally be unthinkable in a minigame, unless one had information to verify that conclusion. However, even if he is the one with the gun, I think we've clearly established by now that he's probably not a baddie (see above paragraph). Therefore, perhaps we should lynch someone besides him to slightly increase our chances of lynching a non-innocent.

unvote: Darkblade

.

So who do we lynch? Well, we've got a couple of folks that aren't saying much in this game at the moment... most notably Baby Face Nelson, jeep, and Doomcow, none of whom have posted since this game began. Doomcow is currently attempting to destroy his liver via the Carnaval festival, if memory serves, so we can't fault him for that... so I say let's get the silent ones moving and see what happens. Flipping a coin, I come up with

vote: jeep

.

[Dourgrim]

OK, so you think the Mafia missed last night, and you therefore think that I'm Mafia because I didn't think

(explanation of my possible change of heart below)

there are three killers? *shrug* I don't see the connection. My doubts on there being three killers are purely based on game balance: a mini-game with three separate killing parties seems a bit unbalanced to me, although I'm fairly new to the game and I could be wrong.

Furthermore, you're 100% right about me placing the gun with a townie being a stupid theory... assuming that our beloved mod is writing things thematically the same as most other Mafia games I've read so far, the Mafia kill will most likely be via a gun, the SK kill will be the most gruesome (in this case, the dismemberment), and a Townie kill will be something with little or no finesse (like clubbing). Crap logic on my part last post, I guess... However, I was not intentionally trying to distance myself from the gunshot... oddly enough, I never even stopped to consider who did what (i.e. which killer used which weapon). I guess I should've taken that into consideration before I posted. Anyway, what I'm really trying to say is: good thinking, Mickey, but don't jump to conclusions based on my feeble attempt at analysis.

So, let's consider: if you're right and the Mafia kill was stopped but two other kills went through, then we're screwed, because that means we've got a Vigilante who has begun the game by killing people randomly, a SK who doesn't really care who he kills, and the Mafia. Unless we have some really lucky docs out there, we're hosed, plain and simple. If, however, we only have two killing roles, then we get no farther than we already are.

I'm fresh out of ideas at the moment, so I'll keep my vote where it is for the moment until we can spark some more discussion.

[Dourgrim]

You're not the only one, CS... quite frankly, I'm not sure what to think at this point. I certainly agree with the majority of your hypothesis, and the entire situation makes me more than a bit suspicious, but I'm not completely convinced of Darkblade's guild as a result. I guess I'll have to settle for a

FoS: Darkblade

. For right now, I'd rather use my vote to wake up the unusually-silent jeep... time to talk, jeep, and soon...

On another note (pardon the possible nitpicking):

That third shot couldn't be from a vig. The vig won't kill the first day as chances are he'll hit a townie.

This is incorrect. The third shot

could

be from a Vigilante, but it certainly

shouldn't

be. Any armed Townie that starts shooting randomly on Day 1 deserves to be lynched, but it does happen occasionally... semantics, I know, but the possibility must be seriously considered if you're going to logically stand by the 3-killer theory.

[Dourgrim]

This has gotta be the most interesting Day 1 I can recall...

I'm on my way out the door to go to work at the moment, so I don't have much time to explain things, but I'll

unvote: jeep

since he's finally posted... and, at the risk of seeming to be a shameless bandwagonner, I'll un-

FoS: Darkblade

and

FoS: CS

because I too think perhaps his logic is flawed... not to mention the fact that he went from arguing in favor of his chosen target to arguing in defense of his theory somewhere along the way, which to me smells like perhaps the possibility of a cover-up.

I'll read more and post more cogently later tonight, and I'll decide on whether that FoS should become a vote.[/b]

[Dourgrim]

Again I say... bleh. I've been changing my mind more often in this game than even I can believe... right now I'm not sure who to believe or what to think. At first, CS made a certain amount of sense to me and I followed him... then I had some doubts about Darkblade's guilt and decided to go after the silent people... now the silent people are talking...

Is it time to shamelessly bandwagon on the word of a claimed cop on Day 1? A bit dangerous, because we have no history of investigations to compare this one to (i.e. he could be random/insane/etc), but not really any more dangerous than the usually-random Day 1 lynch... but CS admits to attempting to manipulate the town, which perhaps casts a bit of doubt on his cop claim... but only a bit, because you're supposed to try and talk people into following your investigations without having to claim your role; that's what the game is all about, isn't it? See my confusion?

I'll leave my FoS where it is, simply because this whole "manipulating the Town" thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. However, I would very much like to make an

official request for a vote count from the mod

soon. I'm sure you'll understand, d8P, if I tend to mistrust vote counts from players... nothing personal, of course.

I guess a shameless bandwagon it is, then... *sigh*

vote: Darkblade

... but if he comes up innocent, we should probably go after CS on principle.

[Dourgrim]

Dourgrim, just for you:

<snip the vote count>
CS: If you knew Darkblade was guilty why didn't you "random" vote for him/her from the start?

I hate to drag this out everybody but I smell a Lepton's gambit. At the risk of being associated with Dark, I urge everyone to wait until we've heard more.

OK, here's the deal: you are quite clearly defending Darkblade

waaaay

above and beyond the call of duty here, IMHO. If Darkblade ends up being innocent, then I'll happily salute you for being correct... but, then again, I suspect it won't be necessary for me to pat you on the back, because we may very well be busy stringing up CS for being a self-admitted manipulator and lynching a Townie. If, however, Darkblade comes up scum, you're in deep ka-ka, buddy. A big ol'

FoS: d8P

for not only dragging out the day, but also for staunchly defending someone a claimed cop has declared scum. The lynch will tell the tale...

Hey, folks, look at it this way: tomorrow should be easy... if we ever manage to finish this day, that is.

[Dourgrim]

Hmph. My last two posts were supposed to appear one after another except I went back to the beginning to check and double check my vote count. When I finally posted the tally CS had already responded to the first attack on his role claim.

Heh... just like when you were trying to out-post me earlier... you have absolutely zero luck with your post timing, bud.

Incidentally, I was attacking CS's claim, not defending Darkblade. My vote would have lynched, and will, but I didn't want to be hasty because I still had suspicions. Foolish to believe any insights into human behaviour and interaction could be gained through confrontation and discussion. ~scratches chin, having momentarily lost the point of the game~

OK, I'll buy that... but remember, it's still Day One. It seems like we've debated and haggled more in this one day than most games do in later days. Going into Day One, we all pretty much knew that we'd be voting semi-randomly anyway, so going on the investigation of a claimed cop is much better than a truly random bandwagon.

And, also incidentally, although I'm sure CS is less than pleased about it, you certainly did a good job provoking someone into giving us information to work from on Day One, not an easy thing to do most games (from what I've read, anyway). There's your insights... if you glean anything from them, let us know.

OK, one last thing. We want to hear from Darkblade before we lynch him, is this correct? If so, someone better unvote him. Personally, I'd rather just get the day over with... callous of me, I know, but this first day has kinda dragged...

[Dourgrim]

Normal policy is that once majority is reached, that person is lynched next time the mod checks. Since it wasn't stated as different, I assume this will be the case.

Y'know, I'm pretty sure I already knew that... apparently I had a misfiring neuron or something.

[Dourgrim]

zzz

zzz

zzz

<<hopes he doesn't wake up with a headache because he slept for so long>>

zzz

zzz

zzz

[Dourgrim]

Good morning, all!

OK, so we've lost a Role Thief and successfully lynched a SK... CS was right about Darkblade, so perhaps it's time to deal with those that opposed him.

vote: d8P

for arguing against the Darkblade lynch originally, and then doing a complete turnaround by casting the final lynch vote without giving him a chance to defend himself.

Also, we have a few players that haven't posted in quite a while... speak up, folks! We need all the people playing we can get if we're going to keep this game rolling.

[Dourgrim]

Wow... does your role have a title? I'm really loathe to vote CS after he handed us a SK last night... but, y'know, my role is a bit odd too, so weird roles like Jeep's are believable to me. Ack, indecision... I'll

unvote: d8P

and mull this over before re-voting.

[Dourgrim]

....8O Yeah, good morning to all

except Dourgrim

, and possibly CS.

Well, I will wish you a good morning anyway... such bitterness! *sigh*

I know you've unvoted, but this:

vote: d8P for arguing against the Darkblade lynch originally, and then doing a complete turnaround by casting the final lynch vote without giving him a chance to defend himself.

has to be the ultimate in CrapLogic. Darkblade was an SK. Only he could have known.

I wasn't saying that you had any special knowledge about his role... I had no problem with the fact that you were against the lynch (or questioning CS's roleclaim, whatever) at first. What I

did

have a problem with was you turning around and ending the day without giving Darkblade a chance to defend himself. Granted, it didn't end up mattering too much in the end, but that's a very bad habit to get into.

when you FOS'd me for "dragging out the day" I thought it meant I was being a stubborn newbie who didn't get it. Bah@listening to the more experienced.

For the record, I am of the firm belief that everyone has the right to their opinions, newbie or no... some opinions are just wrong, that's all.

And I am

not

ungood, dangit...

[Dourgrim]

Quite frankly, I don't blame you for coming out, jeep... I'd be sorely tempted to do the same if I were you. I want to hear the "intellectually stimulating" response from CS before I dismiss him as potential scum... after all, we went on CS's Day One cop-claim yesterday, so going on jeep's Day Two stalker-guy (or whatever he is) claim is hardly more dangerous.

[Dourgrim]

Excuse the extremely long post, folks... lots to say.

8O 8O 8O

Well, let's see... if we combine this:

Mafia 101:
The reason a cop should not reveal innocents is because they are likely to be killed by the mafia.

... with this:

<snip>...I think I am of more assistance to the town by sharing my results.

Dourgrim stayed home he was on his computer all night.

... I get the bullseye painted on

me

, thankyouverymuch. [sarcasm] Thanks a

ton

for outting me, Mickey, I really appreciate that. [/sarcasm] Well, since the scum know I'm innocent and therefore have a reason to kill me now, might as well out myself all the way:

I am a digital cop. Each night I can investigate someone "online" and discover facts about their past (i.e. clues regarding their roles). Sometimes the clues seem vague and difficult to interpret, sometimes they are quite easy to figure out. On Night 1, I investigated DoomCow (whoop-de-doo)... and I will

not

reveal who I investigated last night, simply because I'm almost 100% sure that person is innocent.

Because my role gives me specific information about players' roles, I would like to ask for doc protection tonight (assuming we even have docs, of course)... or at least flip a coin to see whether you protect me or not.

Now, the worst thing about this is: no matter how angry I am at Mickey for outting me for no good reason like that, I can't vote for her (? on gender) because I know her investigations must be correct... she got mine right-on. That means her claim about CS is also probably correct... which means I have to

vote: cuban smoker

.

Bleh... this whole situation leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

[Dourgrim]

My investigation of DoomCow showed that he had moved around quite a lot during his lifetime, had moved to our not-so-quiet little town very recently, and had made an expensive purchase online from a website that was no longer up. After his death scene, the nature of the purchase became clear, but until he died I had no idea what to make of it... honestly, I had almost decided he was scum from that investigation (a gun as the expensive purchase, perhaps)? As you can see, my investigations do not reveal innocence or guilt, only clues.

And, by the way, Mickey... if you "found it strange" that jeep would ask for the results of your other investigation, then

why in the blue hell did you give it?!

[/i]

[Dourgrim]

CS is 100% right... there's really nothing he can do to talk his way out of it at this point, unless we have players that aren't reading the thread, etc.

So CS, you

do

realize that the only honorable thing to do at this point is vote for yourself, right?