A search for ‘bastard’ doesn’t show anything particularly noteworthy from Lift.

Well, I didn't accuse trent of bastard modding. I only said that a false role would be bastard modding. But I don't think that it's the case here. I was told that I was limited, but not in what way. The 'Complex' thing is just my guess, but if it is true, then yes, I do have a negative utility role. But that's not bastard. ... Actually it is even considered 'Normal' on Mafiascum. So not as convoluted as you would like it to be.

What were you aiming with that comment by the way? Are you accusing me of pulling a 'Town Arsonist' stunt? But why would I do that? You know my stance on lying and I would try to lie as little as possible as scum as well. After all, I would try to be as towny as possible as scum. So why would I speculate about my role if I hadn't failed the last two Nights? As scum, I could just have claimed a one-shot role. Or a regular role-blocker. Or even claim Vanilla and not mention the role-blocker at all.

Maybe the 'complex' is wrong and there is something else going on. Maybe I was a hidden one-shot, although considering that dedo was told his limitation ('one shot') making a second, identical limitation hidden wouldn't make sense. Maybe I was supposed to be a kind of Vanilla-Cop, once I figured my mechanism out. Because that's a side effect, it my 'complex' theory is true.

Another question:
you consider it possible that RW copped you and killed ZFR in the same Night. Would you consider a scum role that can perform two actions at Night bastard modding? Or not? And did we ever have an example of such a scum-role here?

I assume he was replying to. I was the first one to bring that up since all of this does look pretty bastardy to me, if it's true. You said at one point you considered the possibility yourself. Agent did as well and he based his suspicion on something way less weird than what you seem to have. Anyway, my point was that it would have been a nice sort of preemptive confirmation if there was a hint of #metoo when Agent brought it up.

No. I pieced together what's wrong with my role bit by bit and the last puzzle piece was that Pooka claimed Vanilla too and that was the day after agent speculated about bastardy.

I had considered another possibility: I might be shy. I.e. not visit someone if someone else is already there. But that doesn't fit N2. No one visited Joe that Night, right?

Knowing RW had observed someone, you might have needed a reason why you visited Pooka, and also a reason why your visit achieved nothing. A complex need calls for a complex solution.

But why would you try to night-kill pooka? If you did try to kill pooka, why would Carr try to protect pooka? So what would you be doing to Pooka that would achieve something but leave no trace? The idea is baffling.


Lift - if you were in a situation where you had visited someone and it was incriminating and you were worried you may have been observed, in a situation such as I describe above, what lie would you come up with?

RW, Pooka, Dedo, Lift - is there any role Lift might have that would make the situation described above at all plausible?

Not really? I did it once with Rodzaju in Game 8 (which was an unbalanced mess) where the mafia fortune-teller could divine and kill in the same night. I don't know if it's been done by anyone else since, but at least we know someone's been mad enough to try it.
It might be unorthodox, but I wouldn't consider it bastardy - I tend to think of bastardy as deliberately misleading. If Trent had included a rule at the beginning "A role with multiple abilities can only use one per night" or "All roles in this game are as they appear on mafiascum" then broke those rules, that would obviously be bastardy.


Negative utility roles are considered normal, or complex roleblockers that can't target any of the scum are considered normal? The situation Dedo mentioned as bastardy is if we're in a game where all the scum are vanilla roles and so , theoretically, can't be block by you.

Is a negative utility role like a miller? If trent gave a role "town miller" and told the role that they'd investigate as scum, that would be giving all the information that the player needed to play that role effectively.

If Trent gave a role "town limited roleblocker" and made the limitation such that the role couldn't actually block any of the scum roles, it would be misleading the player into thinking that they should be trying to use their role to target scum, where the best thing they could do with their ability is not use it - well that would be kinda bastardy wouldn't it?

Balance is an question too, if a mod put a miller or a non-scum-targeting roleblocker in a game, you'd expect it to balance out something that gives the town an advantage.

Anyway, it looks like the role as you've described it can still block RW, so it's likely that it isn't only-capable-of-harm. You might have got it wrong anyway. Who knows?

Hm. Why would Trent not detail your limitation?

Oh.

RedFire was limited too, wasn't he? Maybe the limitation was the same? Maybe RedFire couldn't kill vanilla roles? Or certain targets are immune to his kill (which might lead to a tie where a unkillable town player faces off against Death, neither able to lynch the other...)
Fun to think about but who knows?

---

What's the plan, gang?

I spent the whole day installing a new Windows and getting it up to speed. Will make a quick post before heading to sleep.

After you put it together in your next post, it would make sense that dedo can't be scum with RW, thus clearing him and not making him a main suspect anymore. And yes, I meant that this exposure is fabricated. I just have a hard time taking things at face value.

But speaking of what power roles did N2, you do bring up an interesting thing but I don't see anyone following up on it. You do say that from these claims:
- dedo successfully jailed RW
- Lift roleblocked Joe but failed
- agent's protection did not work or else he would have died
- Pooka and Joe are vanilla
- RW couldn't do anything
- no nightkills happened N2.

And yes, it would have been very stupid to miss out on the nightkill and the opportunity to bring the game to MyLo. Which means that...RW is looking a heck lot scummier now, mechanically speaking. Only dedo's jailing role has worked by RW's own admission. This was the night with no kills happening. The only way my theory would fall apart is if the scum intentionally refused to do a nightkill (unlikely) or Town has lied about its protective roles (also unlikely).

I kept saying he was my Towniest read so far and I admired how he played coolly, but now my mind is set. He's unlikely to be Town. @everyone what do you think? Should we off him?

OK...another quick post because I really like my "RW was the N2 Killer" theory.

When I think about it, RW's claim becomes even more convenient. He was... "hoping" to catch scum with his claim (or at least I remember him saying something of the sort at the beginning of this Day). Then the claims started happening.

- Earlier on, Joe claimed vanilla.
- Pooka claimed vanilla.
- Lift claimed he failed to block Pooka last Night.

From his perspective, there was one person left, dedo, and what's more convenient than claiming he watched dedo? He knows nobody has visited dedo, so he gave himself a good alibi. "I knew someone was going to visit dedo to off him but darn, Agent's dead instead!"

And even the "watching" claim meant he didn't have to come up with an explanation of what dedo did last Night. I've still no idea what's his motivations for claiming this as scum, other than to follow up on his "I may or may not have more" claim from Day 3. But RW's claim was the last and at the time nobody had an idea that dedo had more to say, and he even intentionally held back his claim until (to him) we were done. But it is something to think about.

I didn't have a lot of time to go through the last couple of posts in detail and think about them properly, mostly a quick skim (I'll revisit tonight) but a question for Pooka:

You make it sound impossible for either Joe or you to have tried to do the kill on N2 (in which case the target was RW) because both of you are Vanillas. I don't see what that does have to do with the price of eggs.

Huh. Well, I made it on the assumption that jailing == blocking but forgot that also jailing == protecting. In which case, I'll retract what was said earlier and revise it: either Joe or RW are unlikely to be Town. Actually the more I think about it, the more it completely falls apart as a theory. I want to flip a table now.

However I've been thinking about Lift being part of the scumteam. RW's result on Joe was a Night 1 thing, and Lift's blocking of Joe was a Night 2 thing. What is the possibility a scumteam with Lift had passed the vanilla Joe result in the Mafia chat so to have Lift with a decent alibi?

Easy. Tracker. I could have stuck to my actual targets and would have claimed a classical Town-role with a convenient explanation why I didn't read anything. Both Joe and Pooka were already revealed as Vanilla (and Pooka even as blocked). So no one would have been surprised at a claimed read, that they didn't go anywhere.

Both negative utility roles and the Complex modifier are considered Normal. Not the specific setup we may have here. But keep in mind that the 'scum are only Vanilla' theory is just that: a theory. Unless, of course, you want to confirm that that is the case because you know? ;-)

You know, now that you mention it, you are right. RFG's limitation was never revealed either. Perhaps there was a limitation in play to balance the second killing role. I had my earlier theory about his limitation based in flavour (only able to kill if the scum kill doesn't go through). But it may have been anything else.

... so you must be scum! Only scum would voluntarily do something that dastardly! ;-)

What. ??? Now you are really stretching. So your new 'theory' is, that I am a scum-roleblocker, who intentionally wasted his N2 block on a Vanilla-Townie, after his scumbuddy-rolecop RW had told him that Joe is Vanilla, instead of trying to block a Town-PR? And for what, so that I might be able to claim a strange role-modifier on Day 4? That doesn't make the least bit of sense.

... and I don't think that such a 'theory' comes from a Town-mindset. This looks more like scum trying to throw shade wherever remotely possible. I also notice a pattern: whenever someone comes under scrutiny by others, you are there to throw some shade their way. Dedo revealing his lie and coming justifiably under scrutiny? ... Suddenly he's your top scum-pick, even though that doesn't make sense. Joe and RW had their share of shade/suspicion from you when others questioned them as well. One of them will have been distancing, I think. The other just convenience. Now that dedo and Joe justifiably debate the validity of my strange role, you come up with a quite far-fetched 'theory' to add your two cents to the suspicion.

And I still haven't forgotten how you jumped on the 'only one scum' theory right after dedo proved that you can't be a lone scum. Sure, you claim that you had that theory before and just didn't say anything about it. But I don't think I believe you.

@all: I come back to my earlier realization: if we assume that there are two scum, Pooka is at the intersection of all likely scum-teams. At least for me. Only if there is just one scum, Pooka is cleared.

Well, you could have done something else on that day. You don't have to have actually blocked Joe. It's a game of Mafia and none are complete without lies.

Well, if I'm a lone scum, this wouldn't come from a scum-mindset, because as you do say so yourself:
If I am scumteam with someone, then sure. But I'm neither scumteam nor lone wolf.

So you say I throw shade when others come under scrutiny. Can you explain how this fits with the RW theory I had right before this? If I were as you say, throwing shade just when others are questioned, I would have jumped on you instead of RW. My idea about you only came after dedo pointed out where my RW theory falls apart, then thinking of the claimed night actions.

The claimed night actions do feel convenient. Nothing stands out among them. Of course I'd inspect them and come up with theories on what the heck. That my last theory came on you was only a byproduct of the night actions, not because of the questioning about the Complex/Limited modifier. You don't see me mention that in my post.

Or, I am desperate Town trying to get anything out of what I'm doing. Have you thought of that?

I don't know how to make you believe it. You know, I never even thought of myself when bringing up the lone wolf theory, the thought that it "would clear" me never even crossed my mind. You say I'm the intersection of all likely scum-teams, so which Pooka-X scumteam is the most likely for you? We could start there.

Sure. Desperate Town is a possibility. I am aware of that. But it's also a convenient excuse for scum - and the problem is, someone (or two someones) have to be scum.

The scumteams are easy: we have excluded dedo. I know I'm not scum. So if we have a Team, it can only be RW+Joe, RW+Pooka and Joe+Pooka. Of those, I feel it is the latter one. RW+Joe is possible too. In that case their animosity was nothing but a skillfully played distancing with a willingness to bus. But just by gut-feeling I rate the Joe+Pooka theory highest. Pooka+RW is possible, but doesn't feel right either for the reasons I discussed at the start of this Day.

As much as it is convenient for scum, it is the conundrum we are dealing with. The scum have done a swell job hiding themselves, and we are now at potentially LyLo.

So you think Pooka+RW is possible "but doesn't feel right," but you also think that "RW+Joe" is possible but this time say it's a skillfully played distancing, basically you're giving me the vibe that it sounds more possible than Pooka+RW. The way I am reading it, you're saying that Joe+Pooka > RW+Joe > RW+Pooka

Wouldn't it be more beneficial, in your eyes, to suspect Joe is a better intersection than I am?

This last bit reminded me of a quote of Gandalf the Grey:

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”

I don't like the tone and the lack of even a smidgen of second guessing yourself. "Should we off him?" sounds a bit too trigger happy considering the shadow of LyLo.

This I agree with but that how mafia works. Scum aren't just going to claim something that would incriminate them, they will always tailor it based on their personal knowledge and what is publicly available (I heard that's one of the reasons some schools of thought consider alternative paths like lying as Town).


Desperate Town indeed.

Hey, why am I Joe now?

This is precisely why I asked if we should lynch him. If he's the wrong choice after all, all it would have taken is my singular vote for a scumteam to swoop in and seal the deal. And even with a lone wolf, maybe I am wrong (hint: I was) and need feedback to tell me that this idea I had just come up with and like is a bad one. So I am asking if we should proceed with doing it or not to avoid losing a Townie either way.

Who do you think are the most viable for the lynch, in the lone wolf and scumteam scenarios?