In post 660, Malakittens wrote:Why couldn't she be scum and both partners visited the target to throw off any watcher results?
First of all because they would be wasting a night action.
Secondly the only help that would give scum is to have one of them bus their partner and clear themselves. It's dangerous.
This is really is not a likely scenario; you're just trying to find a way to force-interpret Rach's action as scummy - but it's clear it's a towntell.
Ok, still not getting it, help me through this one.
We all know fuzzy got killed.
RachMarie knows this. The watcher knows this. Rach knows the watcher knows this.
What nobody but the watcher knows is whether or not he used his ability.
The way I see it now: RachMarie is in a position where she doesn't know what the watcher did, but fears this watcher is on the wagon because of her visit to fuzzybutternut. This is not a certainty, she could still assume the watcher did not use his ability, but by looking at her defense it's clear what her assumption is: the watcher caught her at fuzzy's.
In this case (RachMArie assumes the watcher used his ability), there is only fooling the watcher in case someone else visited fuzzybutternut, the argument which I call "the last possible straw", and which you guys call confidence. If the watcher has seen only her at fuzzy's, she had no case to begin with so it would be a lost cause anyway, so she'd have no other choice but to try this route. Given that the global watcher did not come out and expose his identity, clearly hints to this uncertainty that RachMarie could well be aware of: If the watcher had only seen RachMarie at fuzzy's, there'd be no reason at all to withhold this information: the watcher used his one-shot and has crucial information. The fact this didn't happen allows RachMArie to know that either the watcher didn't use his ability, or saw her at fuzzy's along with at least one other person. This makes "the last possible straw" still a very acceptable and riskless move.
How is RachMarie taking a gamble in any way in this scenario? How is she taking a risk? Add to that there's still the possibility the watcher didn't use his ability at all, not being able to deny/confirm anything being said here.
Yes, I'm sorry, I really don't see it.
Aside from this: what do you think about the post-supposed-hammer post by RachMarie? Do you really believe that she thought she got lynched?
I think that the watcher has absolutely no reason to use his ability. If he gets roleblocked he retains his shot.
The only way Rach would make this gambit as scum if she thought her partner roleblocked the actual watcher.
But this is another risk because she can't know if her partner's target was really the watcher.
So another big gamble.
I don't see it.
Sorry Wisdom, I’m gonna have to go with Grimmy on this…
I would think that if Rachel was the only person to visit Fuzzy, then the Watcher would have called her out on it..
There’s really no reason not to unless multiple people visited Fuzzy, or the watcher was blocked…
Rach is smart enough to know this, and could have easily gambitted…
If you are scum, saying that some else had to have visited Fuzzy as well has a much better chance of working against the watcher than lying outright…
Not even sure if this would help, or if it would make things worse, but let me ask opinions on this…
What if everybody claims who they targeted last night.
This way, if the watcher was successful last night they can see who is lying and who isn’t..
Sure scum might gambit (if it’s not Rach) and lie about who they targeted on the off chance that the watcher was blocked or didn’t shoot for some reason, but if the watcher was successful last night they can easily call them out on the lie…
And, if the end result of our claims doesn’t seem to help the Watcher, then they can still stay quiet and keep their identity hidden…
We can popcorn our visits last night, I’ll even go first…
I am fine with that it does not reveal the watcher and that is what matters.
Ye gods Grim, it is not the first time I miscounted votes. It was late I was tired I read the posts and skimmed over the VC because it is posted in red which does not show well up on Sepia and I did not feel up to focusing to read it. I am 70% blind, 80% deaf and have been without a working hearing aid for weeks, plus the fact I am sleeping odd hours while sharing a computer means I might just make a mistake or two.
Grim have you ever even read any of my scum games? I would start with the one that was the predecessor to this game where I was scum with tne and I got caught making the NK on Syr who was the global watcher.
sorry about that Wis I really thought you meant Miss D hammering me.
No matter how high the stakes, sooner or later you're just gonna have to go with your gut.
And maybe, just maybe, that'll take you right where you were supposed to be.
@RachMarie: Sorry to hear about your impediments, I didn't mean any disrespect but I assumed knowing how many votes are behind your own name is just one of those things players should always be aware of.
In post 680, sword_of_omens wrote:
I would think that if Rachel was the only person to visit Fuzzy, then the Watcher would have called her out on it..
There’s really no reason not to unless multiple people visited Fuzzy, or the watcher was blocked…
Rach is smart enough to know this, and could have easily gambitted…
If you are scum, saying that some else had to have visited Fuzzy as well has a much better chance of working against the watcher than lying outright…
This is what I've been trying to say all along by the way. Thank you for explaining it better.
In post 682, RachMarie wrote:
Grim have you ever even read any of my scum games? I would start with the one that was the predecessor to this game where I was scum with tne and I got caught making the NK on Syr who was the global watcher.
Could you link me to it please?
How could you get caught killing the global watcher though? If he's dead he's no longer there to catch you.
it was a universal watcher we did not have everyone visiting like in this one, and we had a back up notekeeping prodigy and a 1 shot doc who got himself lynched and never used his one shot, and still was fairly town sided which is why Jason made some changes
To prevent my scum bud from being linked to me in that game once I got caught and Blue Yoshi had the result of Syrs watching me nk him (Syr), I figured there was no point in pushing it any longer and maybe get tne lynched as well. Oddly enough our plan before we got caught by BY was to bus him so I would have town cred. Then BY comes in and says I am the notekeeper and I have Syrs result .....oooppsss lol
Ok, understanding this popcorn business now.
Doesn't mean all other forms of discussion should die down now, does it? In attendance of Miss Destroyer:
@Wisdom and Egg: Do you still have such a firm townread on RachMarie after sword_of_omens explanation that exceeded mine in clarity?
@RachMarie: Not a big fan of meta-arguments, but thank you for the reference.
Also, just throwing it out there, because I haven't thought it through myself yet as there are probably ways around it that I don't see, but wouldn't it also be wise to somehow coordinate our visits for the upcoming night as well, for instance all VTs visiting the same person? That would constrict the scum in their actions severely, because if they'd visit someone else they'd stand out in the Watcher's results. But it would at the same time put the person we agree on visiting in a possible position of danger, so I guess it should be one of the general scumreads.
In post 694, Grimgroove wrote:@Wisdom and Egg: Do you still have such a firm townread on RachMarie after sword_of_omens explanation that exceeded mine in clarity?
The way sword put it makes more sense, but I still don't see Rach taking this risk. Maybe I'm just underestimating her. I'll admit I don't townread her as much.
In regards to your plan, I am not sure if it's wise to do that. If we all agree to visit a certain person, scum can just kill that person and we lose our most valuable source of info - the watcher catching someone visiting the victim. At the same time, if we happen to pick a scum to visit, that makes scum unable to kill or use actions. But it's very risky. In any case, we'll reevaluate this after we're done with the current plan.
In post 694, Grimgroove wrote:@Wisdom and Egg: Do you still have such a firm townread on RachMarie after sword_of_omens explanation that exceeded mine in clarity?
The way sword put it makes more sense, but I still don't see Rach taking this risk. Maybe I'm just underestimating her.
There is the possibility of the watcher knowing it's Rach and for some reason deciding against outing it yet (however stupid that is). Rach deciding its safe to claim she visited fuzzy because nobody outed does not seem like something scum-Rach would attempt.
