I said "you seem to be pretty convinced" based on your [emphasis added] "wholeheartedly doubt".

It's not that something is unclear, but it seems to me that it's based on your disagreement on the choice he made, than anything else.



How about other roles?


I must be the only one also seeing something else then. Or if anyone else sees it, they're keeping it to themselves.


Is this in order of "most to least"?


I don't understand what you mean by "playability purposes", could you elaborate?

Is this in order of preference, even with JMich removed from the list?


On a related note - for someone who's "100% in favor of the mass role claim", you sure are very reluctant to say anything about your own role. Am I to assume that you want to full- claim last? Or does "mass role claim" not mean "full-claim"?



May I ask why he was top of your scum-list?



From mchhack's claim: Why do you think that "restricted" equals to a complete inability to use one's role?



Is this still coming?


I didn't expect mchack to full claim, I thought he did a good job on D1, and hoped he'd stay hidden for longer to use his ability as much as possible.

Sorry, for that asswipe of a boss you had. I also really hate having to write job applications alot! I know it doesn't help you right now, but I feel for you. :( I wish you all the luck in the coming days...

Urgh, I'm not going to parse this, but I'll try to answer everything.

1) How about other roles? What do you mean? I am saying I do not believe flub is a simple Town Cop. He's something else.

2) Nah, I just didn't get the question. Could just be me not understanding. If you clarify, I might be able to answer.

3) No, just two names in the same pile there. Put JMich on this list. No order.

4) You and adalia add too much to the conversation for me to want to snuff you out this soon. :) You are both reading fairly neutral to me, so all else equal, I'd rather lynch less active players than more active players.

5) Ah, flub and Kryp are at the top, but it wasn't meant to be a strict rank-ordering, no.

6) Too true, too true. What I would like to see is a claim of all basic roles. I don't think we need to put the exact nature and detail of any potential restrictions on the table all at once. The real benefit to the claim right now is not to sort out who has what kind of restriction, but rather to see who claims a role that simply is not so. For example, there will be no role claim of "roleblocker", because whomever would claim such a role would have to explain why he or she blocked me. That player will have to fabricate a claim from scratch.

This was what I was looking for. Thank you.

@hypet - post 961, yes when I'm home after work and no longer posting with my phone

Told ya Krypsyn don't know (bleep).

I'm OK just doing this now, flub or no flub.

Heh. Perhaps, perhaps not. I have an incomplete picture, very likely, but I think yours is lacking in some other areas as well.

That certainly could be.

Let's kill ya and find out. WHOOP WHOOP WHAZOOOOO!!!

Yes I thought you were. It's still the truth of what I think., because they won't even know I've tried it on them in the first place. either that or they don't want to be known as unrestricted roles to scum.
But now that cristigale and adalia put doubt into the validity of my "confirming" scheme, I wouldn't recommend anyone that has been unrestricted by me, to claim so anyway. At least until rwarehall answered my question, as to if someone I use my dayaction on that doesn't have a restricted role does get a pm that something has happened. Since I don't know if he'll answer it, and somehow doubt he will, I guess that scheme of confirming town players is down the drain anyway :/
Well since noone claimed to have been unrestricted yet, there was no harm done...

:P

Okay.. now I am really gone, was only checking on my way out the door. :)

So do you have any thoughts/opinions regarding yogsloth's posts #928 & 931??

I don't. At least not anymore. Yog said even without the role-block he couldn't perform anyway so the most obvious assumption was that the role don't work or at least don't produce the expected results before unlocked. Then in #946 while I was thinking aloud about why Trent's is different I actually figured that the restriction may not be inability but a shortcoming (my original post was a bit different than the end result).


Interesting.

EBWOP

That should be #948. The link is correct, though.

[emphasis added]

Do you seriously have to ask? He clearly said "Each Day". But putting that aside, if you believe his and [url=https://www.gog.com/forum/general/forum_mafia_30_murder_they_wrote/post644]claim, then you shouldn't need to ask if it's a day power, not even in a rhetorical manner.

Is it your turn for the question I asked CSPVG?


I had asked you if you thought that any role in play was unique for each fraction, and since you didn't answer it, I asked again. And have still not received a reply.

Regarding flubbucket and "He's something else" - is that town something else or mafia/ third-party something else?


I seem to have better reading and interpreting skills than you, and certainly lack your tunnel-vision. This is a prompt to go back and read/ check the thread again.


You keep bringing this up, but I have yet to see some evidence from you that it was indeed the case.



[emphasis added]

Here's what's puzzling me. yogsloth claimed in his post #931 that he didn't have a night-action: Given that a Cop investigates at night, I take that to mean that he was unable to use his role on N1. IIRC, you were among those that had him town on D1, and you say that you used your ability on D1. Is it reasonable to assume that you didn't use your power on him on D1? If yes, why didn't you?


Can you be sure that anyone with a negative ability modifier you use your power on is instantly informed that it has been removed? If they're not told by the mod, then they won't know until they attempt to use their power. Do you know if they're told as soon as you use your power?



Thanks for this, reminded me to ask a couple of things I had noticed earlier.

What about post #931? Am I to assume that you consider it a slip?

Here's the thing with yogsloth. He's (over)confident as he thinks he's got things figured out, this game more so as his risky play seems to have paid off. He also has a tendency to not read carefully and use the evidence to fit his reads, and overlook things due to being tunnel-visioned once the thinks he's got something right.

On the other hand, these exact elements served him well when he was scum.

The inconsistencies I see raise enough of an eyebrow to put a question-mark next to his name, but not enough to put him down as scum.

This game, I'm leaning towards you're both reading too much (or too little) in some of each other's posts, and draw inaccurate conclusions from that. I may be wrong, but I hope that I'm not.