Mini Normal 2111 [Game Over!]

[Garmr]

It's possible that jan is actually a scum motion detector with out the loyal bit or unloyal. If she is loyal and is scum that would mean skitter is scum as well. So when I said tell me if she got the fruit or not town jan would def buy into me using fruit on her during it. So her scum motivation for not wanting skitter cleared is so she can do this clear one today and try to get townie points from it day 3 and a possible mislynch on me day 2.

Because there's still holes in jans thought process's

-Jan thought of skitter as scummy enough to use her ability on and knew I thought the same thing so the natural conclusion would be town is more likely to target skitter with some sort of role.

1-Jan saw motion go off so me saying it was just a gambit wold seem off since things happened that night.

2-Jan was town reading me the day before so a town me using a ability on Skitter is the first logical conclusion.

3-A fruit vendor with a loyal/unloyal modifir would fit in the theme of her role making it more believable for set up spec. It would be a set up full of gimped cops

I don't think Jan is a Unskilled newbie who wouldn't think of these things therefore the conclusion is she thought she could get a mislynch on me from what would potentially go down with me and skitter.

[Garmr]

Also her claiming now could be her trying to a pseudo power role hunt and get confirmation from that power role to make herself look more town.

[Garmr]

Also look at the alignment motivation to target skitter.

Skitter looked scummy as hell and majority of her reads (me and fl her only scum reads day 1) this game were atrocious. She ruined a slot that was practically town read by all with her play. If town she's played really poorly.

So do you know what Skit would draw? Town investigative power roles to investigate her. There's a lot of scum motivation to target skitter with a motion detector but what about town. If she really is loyal and a motion detector then she would expect town to target skitter more so than scum and gamble on skitter. She would have a innocent but to go into full defence and act like anyone that used a power on her is scum. The way she acted day 2 doesn't add up to how a real townie would act.

Fuck actually think about it this way. If she really is what she claimed town her would of held off the lynch on both of us because she could use her ability to sort me. But she pushed for my lynch instead of trying to use her so called loyal modifier to sort me. Because a 1v1 trade is really bad for scum and she had a way to guarantee it as town. In fact she would want a town skitter to answer so she could get guarantee a lynch on scum gambit if there was one and confirm me as town with her ability if she wasn't

VOTE: Jan

[Garmr]

Also on that topic she didn't mind FL lynch either she should of really pushed the fact we could of sorted him tomorrow after he uses his ability if she was town because she knew fl claimed a power role.

She then could of sorted who wanted him lynched.

[tictac]

town!jan not gonna believe another loyal role exists. that's silly.
her claim makes town!her jumping to simple/complex theory on day 2 more likely, not less likely.

what would the point of pr-hunting be when we are in the middle of massclaims?

fl claiming stuff is 0 information. who would hard-oppose that lych?

[tictac]

still think u town, but u wrong here.

[Garmr]

town!jan not gonna believe another loyal role exists. that's silly.
her claim makes town!her jumping to simple/complex theory on day 2 more likely, not less likely.

what would the point of pr-hunting be when we are in the middle of massclaims?

fl claiming stuff is 0 information. who would hard-oppose that lych?

Yeah nah. Just had a game with multiple of the same modifier. Macho. Mods like to use themes here. A bunch of gimped loyal roles is possible. Also didn't we have a simple/complex flip why would 2 of those be ok but not loyal?

[tictac]

Yeah nah. Just had a game with multiple of the same modifier. Macho. Mods like to use themes here. A bunch of gimped loyal roles is possible. Also didn't we have a simple/complex flip why would 2 of those be ok but not loyal?

now that's site-meta. u right in that jan isn't new, but she's new to the site.
simple and complex are two different modifiers. loyal isn't.

[Garmr]

Yeah nah. Just had a game with multiple of the same modifier. Macho. Mods like to use themes here. A bunch of gimped loyal roles is possible. Also didn't we have a simple/complex flip why would 2 of those be ok but not loyal?

now that's site-meta. u right in that jan isn't new, but she's new to the site.
simple and complex are two different modifiers. loyal isn't.

Loyal and Unloyal. I didn't claim exactly what.

[tictac]

mm. okay.
still think 2 loyal/unloyal is way less likely than 2 complex (1 town 1 scum), but if ya wanna win a semantic-battle, ya just did

[skitter30]

I'm a mason, so, irregardless of jan's alignment, i am town

[skitter30]

1-Jan saw motion go off so me saying it was just a gambit wold seem off since things happened that night.

Ok, so this is a resonable question:

@jan did you think that garmr was the source of the motion that night?

[skitter30]

Skitter looked scummy as hell and majority of her reads (me and fl her only scum reads day 1) this game were atrocious. She ruined a slot that was practically town read by all with her play. If town she's played really poorly.

A) this is an inaccurate portrayal of my day1 reads
B) i was playing in a way that i knew would be perceived as scummy day1 so as to not eat the nk. You even made an observation about that, assessing how likely i was to be nk'd, which i found scummy

[skitter30]

her claim makes town!her jumping to simple/complex theory on day 2 more likely, not less likely.

Yes

I do not understand what garmr is pushing rn

[tictac]

I'm a mason, so, irregardless of jan's alignment, i am town

well u haven't claimed mason-partners w anyone yet, so no.
i'm just assuming that's gonna happen at some point because u committed suicide otherwise

[Garmr]

her claim makes town!her jumping to simple/complex theory on day 2 more likely, not less likely.

Yes

I do not understand what garmr is pushing rn

You don't seem to understand much then.

[skitter30]

Yes, i am aware, all in good time. We wanted to out the masonry later but some people did not particularly like that, remember? So i claimed, they'll claim soon.

Looker first tho

[Skellen]

It would actually interest me why january targeted skitter over Looker in N1.

skitter was in her null-town reads at some point in D1 and I didn't really got the impression she was scumreading skitter at the end of D1 as she was townreading skitter according to #1030. She was already scumreading Maria and pointed out that she didn't liked Looker's entrance when he asked Una/tictac for reasons on voting FL. Why investigating offside the FL wagon?

[Garmr]

Yes, i am aware, all in good time. We wanted to out the masonry later but some people did not particularly like that, remember? So i claimed, they'll claim soon.

Looker first tho

You mean Skellen anyone else and I would consider it a scum claim.

[tictac]

Yes, i am aware, all in good time. We wanted to out the masonry later but some people did not particularly like that, remember? So i claimed, they'll claim soon.

Looker first tho

i did reverse on that before ya claimed.
u can lolclaim if ya wanna tho.

[skitter30]

Yes, i am aware, all in good time. We wanted to out the masonry later but some people did not particularly like that, remember? So i claimed, they'll claim soon.

Looker first tho

You mean Skellen anyone else and I would consider it a scum claim.

I would prob lynch you over january rn

Also i'm befuddled why scum would rb january last night

[Skellen]

Then again rereading january's D2 I think most of her play looks plausible? The whole loyal/disloyal/simple/complex matter her acting looks consistent to me, imo it's the first natural reaction to assume that someone else has not the same modifier/role or at least that it is most likely not town then. Garmr's other questions are legit imo, but I don't get this angle.

I could nitpick about her mistaking loyal Fruit Vendor with friendly Fruit Vendor and thus messing up her own modifier or ruling out a PT Cop and a alignment-telling role in the same setup, but eehh, can as well be me overthinking small things. I just don't see why she would bother to tell others they are wrong on skitter (like she did with tictac) and tries to shut down Garmr and instead wait and see how Garmr/skitter plays out. I mean after her movement result as scum she would have had confirmation that skitter is a PR, especially after Garmr admitted that his fruit thing was a gambit. So why not take the chance and go for the kill on skitter?

I also rule out her being a Rolecop that targeted skitter, because I don't see why scum would not kill either her off or not hunt for her Mason buddy. ffs they killed mislynchbaity Una instead. So I agree with Garmr that if scum, then a Motion Detector for real.

[Skellen]

Also i'm befuddled why scum would rb january last night

Well, to be fair her stance on you on D2 gave away that it was probably tmi, so from a scum point of view I could see why they would try, if there is a Roleblocker.

[Skellen]

You mean Skellen anyone else and I would consider it a scum claim.

Ah yeah, you can chill. Obviously I am Mason #2.

God knows when Looker and Suji will show up again.

[AaronFrost]

.