Well, bugger. I leave the thread for a day or so, and I come back to an absolute torrent of posts. Nice in one way, as the game is proving to be active, but frustrating in that I haven't yet read most of them and need to catch up. So, here are some of my observations on various posts, made as I read them. I'll be posting these sorts of posts until I catch up with the thread proper.
So I apologise if anyone does not find these interesting or feels that they are inadequate contribution, but they are all I can really come up with for now. Finally, I apologise for any errors in spelling and punctuation, misattributed quotations or posts, and the wall of text that follows.
Post #261 - JMich - While i shared some info, I mostly agree. I don't know how productive this conversation (sharing role/PM info vs. not doing so) really is, and I also think that the two sides of the argument aren't really going to budge from their respective positions. Perhaps we can leave this discussion alone for the time being. What does everyone else think?
Post #262 - agentcarr16 - I disagree with you on your second point (the one made in reference to Sage), agent. Lynching a lurker is an established tactic for a reason. I can't actually believe that I've been allowed to get away with lurking as much as I have on GOG. Furthermore, a lurker is a pretty good option for an offing, especially if we find ourselves in a situation where the day has been dragging on for an age and no consensus can be reached as to who we should off.
You make a good point about bler's,"vote for yourself again and your scum so I'll vote you," statement (be aware that I'm not implying that this line is a direct quotation, and am only using slight hyperbole for effect). A self-vote, especially in RVS (at least, I think Krypsyn's self-vote occurred in RVS), isn't really a good reason to vote for someone.
Another thing on bler. I still believe that we should ignore his, and Bookwyrm's, little 'slips' and claims, at least for the time being. They seem so transparently,"Oh, look at me," and are often (to my mind) phrased in a sort of jokey way, so they may not even be worth considering.
Post #266 - bler144 - I must once again stress that focusing on 'narrative' or flavour is really not all that helpful. It is counter-productive, in fact, to the task of scum hunting, I would say.
Post #268- agentcarr16 - I'm not really sure why Krypsyn voted for me initially, nor can I speak for him or as to why he unvoted me, but I wouldn't put it past him to have done so entirely for jokey reasons or to intentionally rile people in whatever way he could. To what end, though, is anyone's guess.
Also, a rather nice,"I'm totally townie, guys," comment to end your message, agent.
Post 271 - RWarehall - I really don't think that a day one role claim would be the town insta-win that you suggest here, RWarehall.
For instance, I think, should such a situation arise, we'd have a scum claiming important town roles such as Doctor, Cop, or Watcher/Tracker, and getting way with it pretty easily, especially if they could claim before the real Doctor, Cop, etc.
Now, you may say that this happens later in the game in anyway, and you'd be right. However, town would then (assuming enough power roles are left alive) be able to have multiple claims that could hopefully be corroborated by one another. Thinking of it now, this scenario relies rather heavily on the Watcher or Tracker still being alive by the time this happens and picking the 'correct' night targets, but I think it's a better bet than,"We'll claim now and win easily."
I do agree, however, that a lot of this talk about suspecting people for making statements like,"I'm so town," etc., is a little heavy handed. Many of these sorts of posts are meant to be humorous, and even if they are not, it's silly to suspect someone for claiming to be a townie. No, by the way, I'm not saying that anyone that claims town automatically is town, only that suspecting someone for this claim alone is perhaps a little harsh.
I don't know if Arsonist is really that much of a noteworthy inclusion. It's out of the ordinary, sure, but after all (as I understand it) Arsonist is only a variation on Serial Killer (all Arsonist kills are done through, what else, fire and the flavour usually reflects this; plus the fact that there's usually a 'Firefighter' or somesuch role that is meant to stop Arsonists specifically). Taking this into account, and supposing this may be an unbalanced game (skewing towards role madness, I would guess), I don't think that Arsonist is that much of a wild or specific role to speculate about.
Post #275 - bler144 - Honestly, while no-lynch may be a smart play in certain contexts, I push against it so hard because it is the most game killing play there is to me.
With a kill we go into the night knowing that all of our yammering hasn't been in vain, even if it has resulted in an undesirable result (such as the offing of a townie).
Without a kill, I always feel as if whatever amount of momentum town had built up is squandered, even if the result is that no townie is killed by the town. We come back, twiddle our thumbs at one another, and have to reassess everything. Maybe this isn't too bad later on, as stopping and surveying things to gain perspective on events may be helpful, but if we're doing this on day 2, we don't have anything to gain perspective on, and we're pushed right back into day 1 mode.
Fair enough on why you voted for Krypsyn and a fairly decent argument as to why he'd be a good target to off today.
I'll be posting another one (maybe two) of these tomorrow, when I'll hopefully be caught up with all the posts. If everyone hates this sort of post though, please tell me that it's overwhelming or unhelpful, and I'll try to think of a better way of sharing my thoughts and feelings about previous posts and the current run of events.
