Page 24 of 30

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:24 am UTC
by Sabrar
Gopher of Pern wrote:Sabrar, I'm not going to give you that information now.

How about if we'll do it in reverse? I'll tell you how my role-pm looks like and you say whether yours is roughly the same?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:31 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
If you want.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:42 am UTC
by Sabrar
In my pm it is explicitly mentioned that I am able to identify only 1 type of enemies to Town, not the other. Is this how yours is worded?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:42 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
Yes. I thought I had already made that clear.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:50 am UTC
by Sabrar
I was more interested about the 'enemy' part.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:53 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
I do have the word enemy in my pm.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:04 am UTC
by Sabrar
Thank you. I'll let the claims go run their course and then I'll share why I'm sure you must be lying.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:11 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
Interesting. So you think Madge is lying too?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:15 am UTC
by Sabrar
Not necessarily, you could be scum rolecop who really targeted Madge N3.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:20 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
Would have been risky, since I didn't know who Madge targeted.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:27 am UTC
by Sabrar
What do you mean by 'risky'? You claim to have targeted the same person as town!cop as you actually did as scum!rolecop. Watchers and trackers would see that you are telling the truth, the actual ability cannot be determined.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:29 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
Touche. I forgot I would know that she's a tracker.

I wouldn't have known they had targeted me though.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:34 am UTC
by Sabrar
No, but there's no need to take any chances at that point.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:51 am UTC
by Sabrar
plytho wrote:I protected SirGabriel N1,

Why? You had him as your 3rd most townie player here (after bessie and BoomFrog) and after that he only posted D1 to say he won't be around for the rest of the day. Similarly during the remainder of the day you don't mention anything that would concern you about either bessie or BoomFrog. What made you want to protect SirGabriel over them?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:57 am UTC
by Gopher of Pern
I'm very interested in why you think I am lying. I am not.

If it is because of the word enemy, you are far off.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:01 pm UTC
by plytho
Sabrar wrote:
plytho wrote:I protected SirGabriel N1,

Why? You had him as your 3rd most townie player here (after bessie and BoomFrog) and after that he only posted D1 to say he won't be around for the rest of the day. Similarly during the remainder of the day you don't mention anything that would concern you about either bessie or BoomFrog. What made you want to protect SirGabriel over them?

My reasoning was that scum wouldn't target the most townie looking players to avoid being watched or hitting a protected player. So I took my third strongest town read to protect.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:08 pm UTC
by Sabrar
plytho wrote:My reasoning was that scum wouldn't target the most townie looking players to avoid being watched or hitting a protected player. So I took my third strongest town read to protect.
Did you change this approach for N2 and N3? If yes, why?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:28 pm UTC
by plytho
Sabrar wrote:
plytho wrote:My reasoning was that scum wouldn't target the most townie looking players to avoid being watched or hitting a protected player. So I took my third strongest town read to protect.
Did you change this approach for N2 and N3? If yes, why?

I did, that's the kind of slot I expected scum to target D1. The following days I expected them to target players that were the most dangerous to them. You were my strongest town read D2 and I think you are a very dangerous player for scum to keep around. D3 SirGabriel became confirmed townie and I felt scum would want to remove him.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:09 pm UTC
by kalira
[quote="dimochka"][/quote]

You're up.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:11 pm UTC
by kalira
dimochka wrote:


Well apparently you need at least a space in there to quote.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 5:25 pm UTC
by plytho
dimochka wrote: I wanted to make sure to be able to be on in case someone votes for me. I turned on alerts so I can be sure to be on anytime there is an update. But if there is a vote on me, if someone can please quote me, do it so I can login and remove my own vote.

dimochka wrote:I don't even know which is which but it's now both subscribed and bookmarked.

I don't think this is working.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 5:35 pm UTC
by kalira
Request official votals count, please, sir mod.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 5:46 pm UTC
by dimochka
It's working but I'm in a meeting till noon PST. I have a one-shot guardian ability, which protects against supernatural kills. I used my protection on sabrar N2 as I had mentioned earlier. For a number of reasons I think LaserGuy is lying. More later.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:16 pm UTC
by LaserGuy
@dimochka: Is guardian a bodyguard-type ability?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:50 pm UTC
by dimochka
LaserGuy wrote:@dimochka: Is guardian a bodyguard-type ability?

no, it's like a doctor but only protects against supernatural.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:15 pm UTC
by mpolo
Votals:

dimochka (1): dimochka

22 hours, 45 minutes remaining.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:21 pm UTC
by LaserGuy
Sabrar wrote:Slot me in anywhere you want after plytho.


@Sabrar, I see you're online. Are you willing to claim before kalira goes so that we can keep things moving a bit faster?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:23 pm UTC
by Sabrar
Pretty sure kalira is going to claim Inventor and I'm not sure how I'll be online so here's my claim and reason why I think Gopher of Pern is lying.

I'm normal Cop, able to detect Guild only. N1 Znirk didn't submit an action. N2 I investigated SirGabriel, mainly because of this. N3 I targeted Gopher of Pern because I found some of his interactions with YOLOSWAG suspicious (also his defense of DethStalker).

Gopher of Pern claims to be a cop who is trying to find supernatural enemies of Town. If this is true then there is no way he would post this, specifically the last part:
Gopher of Pern wrote:We are also assuming that supernatural means scum. It may be possible that an indy or town may be supernatural. I doubt it (as that would essentially make one a miller), but its worth considering.

This is not coming from supernatural cop who wants to find scum (undermining his own results right from the start), this is coming from supernatural scum who wants to claim indie if he's copped. Also this was on D2 and standard play on this forum is to claim Miller at the beginning of D1 so likelihood of it is already greatly reduced and should not be a consideration.

@dimochka: I assume you can unvote now.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:25 pm UTC
by dimochka
yes

unvote

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:26 pm UTC
by Sabrar
EBWOP: saw LaserGuy's question, hit submit too soon. I insisted on Gopher of Pern clarifying whether his role-pm contains the reference that he is looking out for supernatural enemies because this part was not present in jimbob's role-pm. However he claims it is there so he should really not be considering the possibility of a supernatural indie or townie. My role-pm is explicit in the fact that I'm hunting enemies.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 7:41 pm UTC
by kalira
Sabrar wrote:Pretty sure kalira is going to claim Inventor...


Yep. Though it's not specifically called that. I'm just told it's due to my generosity. FWIW, I asked mpolo which characteristics "I" submitted, and that is not one of them, so I got it from one of y'all.

SirG, to answer your question, I sent something to bessie N1 and to you last night. I missed deadline for sending in actions N2. I presume since she was masons with you, that she discussed what she was given at some point.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:00 pm UTC
by kalira
Compilation:
LaserGuy -- claims 1-shot tracker (no restrictions). Tracked plytho N3 (visited no one).
Gopher of Pern -- claims supernatural cop. Negative results on YOLO, BoomFrog, Madge.
plytho -- claims doc for Guild kills. Protected SirG, Sabrar, SirG.
Madge -- claims tracker (except for non-supernatural kills). Targeted bessie N2 (visited no one), GoP N3 (visited Madge).
dimochka -- claims 1-shot guardian against supernatural kill. Protected Sabrar N2.
Sabrar (v2.0) -- claims cop identifying Guild members. Negative results on SirG, GoP.
kalira -- claims inventor. Sent items to bessie N1, SirG N3.
SirGabriel -- confirmed mason with bessie.

Along with the rest of the cast:
Sabrar (v1.0) - Killed N1: one-shot doctor
SDK – Killed N3: Wizard
BoomFrog — Killed N2: Tracker
bessie — Killed N2: Mason
jimbobmacdoodle — Killed N1: one-shot seer

DethStalker — Lynched D1: Guild unroleblockable
#HBC | YOLOSWAG — Lynched D2: Guild roleblocker
DGames | Bard — Lynched D3: Guild goon

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:07 pm UTC
by SirGabriel
kalira wrote:SirG, to answer your question, I sent something to bessie N1 and to you last night. I missed deadline for sending in actions N2. I presume since she was masons with you, that she discussed what she was given at some point.

I can confirm that bessie received a gift N1 and I received a gift N3. I have no way of knowing yet whether either gift works as advertised, and since no one received anything N2, neither does anyone else. But bessie believed it was probably a genuine gift rather than a fake, and I'm inclined to agree.

Also, I believe it's my turn to claim. I am a mason, nothing more. My only power now is the one-shot thing kalira gave me.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 8:37 pm UTC
by Sabrar
1. If Gopher of Pern is Goon, GF or roleblocker then Madge is lying and game is locked. If he is Rolecop then his ability is useless going forward. Therefore we should lynch LaserGuy first.
2. There is a way to test Madge's claim. Both plytho and myself have useless abilities. Madge tracks either one of us (best if decided by coin-flip) and claims D5 first thing in the morning. Scum needs to take care of both kalira and SirGabriel and they have at most rb+kill therefore scum cannot allow themselves the luxury of interfering with the plan (obviously they could take a risk and let SirGabriel or kalira getting through an action but that would be even more dangerous to them). If Madge gets it right, she's most likely Town. If she claims getting blocked and both SirGabriel's and kalira's abilities have been tempered with then we know she's lying.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 9:36 pm UTC
by Sabrar
Vote: LaserGuy

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:13 pm UTC
by LaserGuy
Unvote

Sabrar wrote:1. If Gopher of Pern is Goon, GF or roleblocker then Madge is lying and game is locked. If he is Rolecop then his ability is useless going forward. Therefore we should lynch LaserGuy first.


Why do you think scum!GoP would falseclaim a town result on someone?

Madge wrote:Just to tie this in a neat little bow, I tracked GoP visiting me.


Why did you pick the targets that you did?

Gopher of Pern wrote:But no, I got a town result. On Madge. So I wouldn't mind her claiming her result later.


Why did you target Madge?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:44 pm UTC
by Gopher of Pern
To clarify about my role pm, which is definitely going to get me killed.

My cop ability tells me if they are human or not. There is no mention of the word enemy until the end of my pm. I am patient, so if I get it wrong three times, I get to detect if there is a supernatural enemy, instead of picking a person. So tonight, I will know the identity of a supernatural scum.
That post was also put there as a bit of misdirection, so scum wouldn't think that I'm a cop.

FMPOV:

SirGabriel and Madge are town.

If Kalira is scum, Laserguy is town, and vice versa.

If Laserguy is town, plytho is scum. Vice versa.

I was initially thinking no one would false-claim unrestricted tracker, as everything else in the game is keyed to one side or the other. So it would have to be real. But I now think it might be a genuine mistake, by the reaction.

Just because it is a genuine gift, doesn't mean it was given by town.

Laserguy, why would it be a false claim if I was scum? If I was scum, I'd know if they were town or not.

I targeted Madge because I was hoping something from Bard's flip would indicate your alignment, and Madge was next on my scummy list.

Town to scum list:
Gopher
SirGabriel
Madge
plytho
Kalira
Sabrar
dimochka
Laserguy

I will vote later. If I die tonight, look hard at Sabrar.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 10:49 pm UTC
by Gopher of Pern
EBWOP:

The reason you found some of my actions suspicious regarding YOLO is I had copped him, as human. That's why I was hesitant at the beginning of the day to go after them.

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:06 pm UTC
by dimochka
Gopher of Pern wrote:Town to scum list:
Gopher
SirGabriel
Madge
plytho
Kalira
Sabrar
dimochka
Laserguy

I will vote later. If I die tonight, look hard at Sabrar.

Why look specifically at Sabrar, and why am I below Sabrar if you haven't mentioned me a single time?

Re: Shakespeare Mafia III - Act IV looks grim

Posted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 11:14 pm UTC
by Madge
Sabrar wrote:2. There is a way to test Madge's claim. Both plytho and myself have useless abilities. Madge tracks either one of us (best if decided by coin-flip) and claims D5 first thing in the morning. Scum needs to take care of both kalira and SirGabriel and they have at most rb+kill therefore scum cannot allow themselves the luxury of interfering with the plan (obviously they could take a risk and let SirGabriel or kalira getting through an action but that would be even more dangerous to them). If Madge gets it right, she's most likely Town. If she claims getting blocked and both SirGabriel's and kalira's abilities have been tempered with then we know she's lying.


I'm on board with this plan except for one inconvenient fact: while your power and plytho's powers are useless, my tracker power is not. I can use it to see scum killing town. I feel like my current results are not useful, they only serve to stop me getting lynched, whereas tomorrow I have a chance to see someone hitting a townie.

Now, from your point of view, scum!Madge also has a chance to frame someone for hitting a townie, which is not ideal. Not sure how best to reconcile these. FMPOV though it seems silly to track someone with a "good" claim. I'm not sure who I'll target tonight (and,well, I can't say who I ultimately plan to pick, because scum needs to be on their toes), but targeting you or Plytho in order to "prove" I'm town seems far-fetched.

Why I targeted SDK, Bessie: Targeted SDK because he terrifies me and I wanted to get information about him. When I didn't get a result I worried he might be untargetable so I targeted Bessie because I figured it would give me information about SDK by proxy, and I was kind of scared they were scum doing a gambit. High risk high reward. Last night I targeted GoP because I found him scummy.

I was initially thinking no one would false-claim unrestricted tracker, as everything else in the game is keyed to one side or the other. So it would have to be real. But I now think it might be a genuine mistake, by the reaction.


I'm not sure what GoP is saying the above in response to, it's a kind of disjointed post. I thought the unrestricted tracker claim was weird because I was a restricted tracker, and surely we had two restricted trackers rather than a restricted and unrestricted? Anyway... when was this tracker claim made? I get the feeling it was one of the very first, so what did GoP have it to compare to? (Wait, it might have been made on D2 in which case he would have had town flips as well as his own role. NVM.)

I still don't trust GoP but I don't know what scum could target me without killing or blocking me. The rolecop thing makes sense but I haven't seen scum with a rolecop in donkey's. Which I guess means it's due?