I think Frogster's play was very townish D2, and towards the start of D4. I also, however, think that Frogster's play was scummy D3, and want to go over why.
The discussion D3 became mostly dominated by discussion of Gamma's question #1593. I didn't initially see the question as scummy – I thought Gamma was playing in a scumsided way, but intentionally thought it was by mistake rather than intentional – and tried to dissuade Gamma from asking the question (first by ignoring it, then refusing to answer in #1622 after Gamma presses me in #1618, )
#1608 – Frogster is apparently sure that scum left Italiano alive due to a rolecop report on Tayl0r. That's a bizarre conclusion to draw given that Tayl0r had already softclaimed a power role (specifically, one that was somehow connected to a Friendly Neighbour Neighbour and knew that its action had failed, which narrows things down to about three possibilities among Normal roles). Normally, when a player comes to an excessively complex conclusion when the evidence supports a much simpler conclusion, that player has hidden information and/or is lying, so that leans towards Frogster as scum. I'm not convinced that this is a scumtell for Frogster specifically, though, given that he seems to have something of a complexity addiction.
(As a side note, flipped town Italiano makes a case for Frogster as scum in #1614.)
#1633 – I was wondering at this time if there was some connection between Frogster and Gamma, i.e. that the question that Gamma was asking had somehow caused Frogster to suspect me (this wasn't all that surprising, because seemingly anything I did caused Frogster to suspect me). So I decided to check whether Frogster had a strong town read on Gamma (and thus was willing to sheep a townread who was attacking a scumread). Frogster stated a null-leaning-town read on Gamma (whilst impugning my motivations behind asking the question), so if he's following Gamma, it isn't because of a townread. (This is what I meant by "I was just trying to rule out a possibility, but haven't been able to conclude anything from this. It might make more sense later in the game." in #1635.)
#1640/#1641 – Frogster explicitly calls me out for stalling in response to Gamma's question. I am stalling, and have explained why. Frogster assumes that Gamma will reveal something that will reveal me as scum. So he's attempting to follow Gamma in putting pressure on me. It wouldn't surprise me if Gamma had asked Frogster for help pushing me in the scum PT.
#1646, #1647, #1648 – I assume that Gamma received Walter's Friendly Neighbour PM N1 (I'm wrong in this assumption, incidentally), because I still have a townread on Gamma and it's the only way I can rationalize his behaviour. I try to dissuade Gamma from asking the question, giving enough detail as to why I think answering would be harmful for town. Gamma pushes me very hard for failing to answer in #1648, despite this (we subsequently learn that this is because Gamma is scum rolefishing). In between, #1647, Frogster posts "Hmm..". Why? This feels oft to me, it's like he's trying to shade me despite not having enough information. At this point, I decide that I can no longer rationalize Gamma's behaviour and he might well be scum.
#1664 – Frogster indirectly defends Gamma. He would later list the possibilities in question in #1871. One of the listed possibilities is "motion tracker" which isn't a real role; Motion Detector would be unlikely to make Gamma think "maybe Walter is a Friendly Neighbour targeting CFJ", and Tracker is the actual explanation. The other listed possibility is "watcher", and Watcher would gain the same information as Tracker. The thing is, it takes quite a leap to go from "Gamma has tracked Walter to me" to "Gamma wants to know if I received a Friendly Neighbour PM from Walter". I didn't make this connection at all until Gamma stated it (and once I did, realised that it implied Gamma was scum, as a townie wouldn't use that reasoning). So how did
Frogster
, who is less familiar with Normal mechanics than I am, make that connection? It would be a much easier connection to make if you were already aware (e.g. via scum PT) of what Gamma's motivations for his actions were.#1710 – Gamma pretty much screws up unrecoverably. At this point, there's almost no doubt in my mind (other than the usual paranoia of "maybe everything I'm thinking is wrong") that Gamma is scum; the only real question is whether I can get enough votes on him without outing the fact that I'm a power role.
Frogster doesn't post for a while after this, but is apparently V/LA so that's null. When he does, though:
In post 1756, Frogsterking wrote:I think we all need to drink some tea and calm down.
In post 1760, Frogsterking wrote:Yes I would 100% recommend not hammering Gamma.
In post 1761, Frogsterking wrote:Hammer outside of Gamma today, and figure out a way to confirm/deny his role.
That looks aIn post 1768, Frogsterking wrote:He's a tracker so confirm him somehow.
lot
like a Mafioso panicking because his buddy has been caught. It doesn't look like someone with a null or nulltown read on Gamma.#1770/#1771 – Cognitive dissonance, "[Gamma] should draw either the night kill or the role block", "If he's scum then he will have to continue to make up reports tomorrow which might make it more obvious to lynch him. If he's town then his report will be useful.". Why didn't Frogster just reason "now that Gamma is outed, he will likely be killed, and/or blocked for the rest of the game"?
#1773 – Indirect defence of Gamma, wanting to find a compromise elimination who isn't a power role claim (this is when lots of people are scumreading Gamma).
At this point, Titus replaced in, and hammered Gamma before Frogster next posted. But Frogster was looking awfully connected to Gamma at that point – I had suspected a connection much earlier, before much of the evidence had built up – and so it immediately lead me to suspect Frogster somewhat.
Frogster's play was rather more townish at other points in the game, though, so my read on Frogster is more "conflicted" than "scum". I'd be interested, therefore, if anyone a) thinks Frogster's D3 play is sufficiently scummy to outweigh any other reads on him, and /or b) Frogster's D3 play is easily explainable, and thus I should follow my townread on him from other parts of the game.
