Mod note: To clear up any doubts, the intent of the day post was to show that Drealmer clearly killed Bookwyrm as the sword which he used was still held "attached through Rigor Mortis" to his outstretched hand. Enough other things are vague...that piece of information is not. Also, it is clear that Drealmer was shot by someone other than Bookwyrm.

I've lost a post I had typed out three times now during the past 1.5hrs due to power grid overload in my area (nasty heatwave) and subsequent power failure, and it's started to kill my mood to be online in general.

Giving it another try, before I get cut off the civilised world again, while noting the mod's latest clarification on Bookwyrm627 and drealmer7.


I was pointing out that if he's that sort of protective role, variant or not, he'd be dead as soon as someone took a successful shot at the player he was protecting, hence not around to argue if he took a shot or not at one of the dead on top of that.

Is it clearer now?


I don't see how you'd think that I presented anything as a fact, and return to say that I assume any of what you say in your post #714, if you actually read what I said and followed my thought process.

I clearly said that I entertained JMich's idea after stumbling upon something on MS clearly labelled as "ani-town" that reminded me of adaliabooks "Divorce Attorney". But the fact that I've never seen players used as plot devices being presented as anything but actual Town doesn't support that idea, hence, at this point and unless/untill something suggests otherwise, I don't think that it's likely that the alignment of the three that died during Twilight is misleading.

I'm pretty sure that what I said doesn't lead to where you went, and don't understand why you're insisting here.



** On a completely unrelated note, I've got a gift code for a game on FireFlower Games that I will post about in the admin thread. Take a look, perhaps someone's interested in it. **

That's a lot of killers we haven unaccounted for. It makes my supposed lynch or lose scenario even worse...
I don't like this.

Never mind. I had a brain fart and didn't realize I had already taken the drealmer killing as an ambiguous case in my worst case scenario. This is a moot point by now.

Ok, this is all speculation, but I want to see if I'm on the same page as everyone thus far. I theorize about a third of all the players got to have a killing role of sort. Yog being mafia, drealmer doing one kill, and having 3 unaccounted kills thus far supports this motion. Is it unreasonable to think that those killing roles could be of all three types of alignments, Town, Neutral, and Mafia?

Now the question is, how would those roles flip? We have concrete information about drealmer and yogy. They flipped Neutral and Mafia. Is it outside the realm of possibility that non-killing roles would flip false alignments while killing roles would flip their true ones? Just a thought. I"m not sure whether this was included in the game mechanics or not.

Do keep in mind I am not counting my role as a killing role since it's a reactionary action and Elite Bodyguard is considered a protective type, regardless of the modifier. Still, if one wants to make a case that my role disproves my theory, I will take it. It is not unlikely alignment flips have nothing to do with role. That is all just speculation on my part given my role and alignment. I don't know anyone else's, so there's that.

I have a plan, but I don't know if it will work.

@RW: How long until the day ends again?

Well, yeah, this is obvious. My point was that Hijack's original reading of how the role worked was providing him with a Town-aligned alibi, but later that point became moot because we came to the conclusion that it wouldn't have worked because of the sacrificial trait of the role.


You also said this:

Why is this giving you pause if you have never seen such a thing and continue to do so with this game?

I read that as you were accepting the idea of the reversed flips being the correct ones. Hence why I continue to ponder the situation myself. I don't think I made a mistake in putting more thought into this regardless of why I did it.


Such a thing is quite possible. Lift's opener on multiple factions killing the plot devices is turning out to be true.

This would mean that we had at least 6 killers from the start - docbear also flipped without quotation marks.

Yes, I have to agree that the number of factions this game is higher than usual. I don't think it's just three. I find it more likely that there are multiple lone individuals involved besides the classic mafia.

Ah, I had forgotten about her. Perhaps it's possible that close to half of the players got a killing role then. That's an unsettling large amount of killing powers. I am wondering as to how they were distributed in this case.

This. However, on D1 there were a couple of people I thought likely town. Bler was one of them. I was good with seeing where the yogs/Hijack claims went. Most players were somewhere in a null pile.

Today, my pile is more bottom heavy (toward scum). One player has moved notably up the pile (toward town). Which makes me wonder if town is not a relatively small faction.

Refresh - it appears others are considering this. Multiple factions.

You know, I was entertaining this idea earlier and this scares me a bit. If town is a relative minority, but still a majority of minorities, like the United States will be in 2050, it makes me wonder how the difference of win objectives and goals will interfere with the overall play and scum hunt. I reckon scum are still relatively the universal foe of everyone, but the different in interests can be characterized with Game Theory since we are talking about relatively separate entities with their own sovereignty. Depending on whether we have already reached the Pareto Line or not, we may see some trouble brewing.

More importantly, does he believe that Yogy was not in fact Mafia?

Perhaps you should change your diaper more often?


Assume for a moment that I asked you this question before the mod's clarification - if Bookwyrm627 would flip "Town" but would actually be different, could he then still be PGO?


I didn't read it this way, but interesting.



Why do you think it's an unlikely one?


Fair enough.

Hm, true. I forgot about the sample PM, and it does indeed seem to refute said theory.

Unless of course RW is messing with us, which I'm not sure he's not.

I know what both of these mean but as I said I may have misunderstood the underlining point for which I apologized.


I will follow my own request to Lift and not intervene in other people's conversations but I have a comment on this one that I'd like to share at some point if no one else does so before me. Please, remind me about it when you are satisfied with Trent's responses on the matter.

Do you think it more likely that Bookwyrm627 was scum then, and why (besides the quotation marks, that is)?


You seem to miss quite a bit, and not just these past 24-48hrs. Interestingly enough, you don't seem to be the only one.

Did I say anywhere that I expect perfect play and being infallible of people to consider them townie? The issue I have is not that your play isn't perfect, or that I don't see how a townie can be mistaken, it's that you say things, and the way that you do, that don't quite seem to be coming from a town mindset and thought process.


Weren't you the one that argued that the reason he flipped Mafia was because of the way he dressed (post #597)? And isn't that what makes you investigate and flip Mafia? Did you change your mind? Why, and what do you think now?


So, if docbear1975 was given some slack, you wouldn't have defended yourself as hard? "Oh, docbear1975 didn't defend herself when everyone wanted her to do it, and look what it got her; she got lynched. Better not do the same" is not "perfect justification". And it's not the argument I' expect, or at least I'd like to see coming from a town mindset.

You defend yourself hard because, if you're town, the only one you can be sure of being town is yourself; starting from this point, anyone trying to take you out maybe doing it as anti-town, until proven otherwise, and everyone else makes a better lynch candidate, unless evidence says otherwise. You somewhat made this argument later in your post #677, then you brought docbear1975 back into the picture again in your post #678 as justification for your defence line. Mixed signals here.


It's not relying on previous anything. It's taking into account what players are capable of doing and pulling off. You complain that people underestimate your skills, yet don't like it either when they don't.


If you were genuinely surprised, then I may be inclined to consider that you're neither as smart as you think, nor as a Professional Mafia Player as you proclaim.


Not sure if I need to spell it out, but I was being sarcastic.


You think I'm asking you, again, out of obtuseness?

On a side note, it's criticising. ;-P


That was somewhat funny. But don't change my question - I asked you specifically about you, who claims to be town, how "detecting and flipping Mafia" works as a power, not how flipping a different alignment in general may be a power; in the case of a Godfather, the answer is obvious. Do you understand how it's a power in your specific case? I assume that if you didn't underhand at first, you asked for clarification, so must have at least some idea after RWarehall's reply. Why don't you share it with us?


That's pretty much how your sounded to me, and perhaps not only to me. Now you claim you want to know if there's a pattern to figure out game mechanics, and that's another thing that raises my eyebrow - isn't it pretty much self-explanatory that certain types of roles do receive information in relation to their night-actions, even if you don't know that some others usually don't.
Unless, you were fishing after all...


I've already said that I don't think that your school related stuff was a cover, and I don't mean to fuel the situation, but in the post you quoted (which you mislinked, btw) it says that your paper was due Friday evening.


Yeah, sorry, just because you gave your piece doesn't mean that any and all questioning will cease on the spot. Do you go "ah ok, this player looks suspect to me, but they gave their piece, so I'm dropping any and all questioning and moving on"?

Scrutinising your piece, and watching the reactions of others to said piece, are very much part of active scum-hunting. Or do you think that only what you say is looked at?


The lack of interaction is something to note, regardless of if two players are like-minded or not.


He used the term "may", i.e. no definite opinion expressed. So why don't you ask him directly?