WW 19 Game Thread - Mobster Mayhem - GAME OVER

[Serdoa]

Your multiple ways to verify are based on the hope that the village has those tools.

Do you really think the wolves have the Fool card, the Item Seer and the Lockpick? I think it's quite unlikely.

I think a little of Ockam's Tommygun might be in order Rowain, because your formulations seem like they are much more complicated than would be plausible, particularly as the first thing to assume.

I also heavily disagree with the idea that it is "worth eating a mislynch to get rid of the fool card".

What? Selrahc, what do you expect the wolves have? Why is the lockpick, fool card and item seer unlikely, what is the reasoning for that assessment?

[Ryan]

Tas is lying. I've played with him everyday for 3 months or more . I know his American ways. I'm Egyptian with magical powers as well .

[Rowain]

Assuming you are village:

If I get to hold on to the Fool card I can just publicize that fact, and we'll have a reliable Ouija board. If the scum have the lockpick and choose to steal my card
1) The cloak could catch them in the act
2) They'd have to leave me with the lockpicks
3) They can't use the lockpicks to steal any other item which might be even more useful to scum

about 1)
Which means the cloak has to watch you. Maybe even have the jailer jail you so that there is no theft possible=> hurray all the village watchers are bound to sit on novice. Great move and really helpfull for the village.

about 2). They can kill you afterward (lockpicking happens before the kill) => no more lockpicks

about 3) thats the only hinderance but to get better tools they have first to find them. Your card is powerfull enough why do they need to find a superioir item. Besides since your claim they have 1 less target to search for items so your game was not so great for the village afterall.

So yeah, I think me claiming having the Fool card is pretty obviously a good play (especially since I'm typically seer target numero uno), and I think you're scrambling to justify your vote.

see above.

Brick, will the items in a person's possession be revealed upon the person's death?

Let's assume it will. In that case doing this as a scum gambit would be suicide. It makes no sense.

Why? Lets assume you are scum and scum B has really the card. What are the difficulties ? The seer now won't scan you giving you a free pass. And cum B has powerfull protection against the board. If he gets scanned he might even reseve the board afterwards (The seer has to pass it and who else then a scanned villager is the best recipient?) The only danger is the item-seer who will most likely check you out. But the item finding tool is a good scum-item so who knows who has that power.

Leaves the pickpocket: Now I have my doubts that a village poickpocket will try to stzeal from you. Because if you are a villager he suddenly ends up with the card and will find it damned hard to convince the town that it was a villager taking the card and not a snitch.
In short we will most likely lynch him => we end up lynching the card anyway so I really see no reason to not lynch you and end the whole theatre now. Leaving our PR's the freedom to protect whom they want, getting rid of the card and stopping all the meta around it.

Summary you might be wolf doing a risky play for an easy victory if it succeeds (and in the moment it looks like it will) or a villager whose 'great play' will overshadow us the following days if we don't get rid of him now.

[Serdoa]

If I get to hold on to the Fool card I can just publicize that fact, and we'll have a reliable Ouija board. If the scum have the lockpick and choose to steal my card
1) The cloak could catch them in the act
2) They'd have to leave me with the lockpicks
3) They can't use the lockpicks to steal any other item which might be even more useful to scum

So yeah, I think me claiming having the Fool card is pretty obviously a good play (especially since I'm typically seer target numero uno), and I think you're scrambling to justify your vote.

Brick, will the items in a person's possession be revealed upon the person's death?

Let's assume it will. In that case doing this as a scum gambit would be suicide. It makes no sense.

Not true novice. I have explained that in my last post and if you have that card you certainly have thought about the possibilities. So I find it hard to believe that you didn't realize yourself. Also your above conclusion AGAIN assumes you are a villager. And if not? We don't know that, so the argument doesn't help at all - it just proves that it would be good play if you are village. Fine, we know that. Doesn't mean you are village though. It would be good play as scum as well.

Also, your last sentence is bullshit. If the card is revealed when killed, why would it be suicide as a scum-gambit? You are already killed, so when people find out you don't have the card doesn't make any difference any more for the scum.

novice

Your arguing gets worse - thats actually why I didn't like others defending you, it made it too easy for you.

[zakalwe]

Zakalwe for mayor!

Novice would be a pretty decent alternative, too. It seems overpowered to let the wolves rats start with the fool tarot card, especially considering how it could be passed among them.

I'm surprised zak. Have you actually considered what Rowain posted? Because I don't think the logical conclusion from all that is tht novice is a decent alternative for mayor. I don't think he is a snitch for certain - but his play is certainly not enough to make me want him to be mayor. Why is it for you? Also, is there a reason why you have not even commented on the whole novice-fool-tarot-card topic? I would have expected something along those lines when you actually put him up as mayor-alternative. I mean that clearly states that you believe him, but I think especially the discussion about what implactions the role could have and how it could be used in connection with other roles should be a puzzle that interests you.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, Serdoa. Have I actually considered what he posted? He had only posted one thing at that point, namely "Novice" in red. I said in that very post that the wolves probably won't start with the fool tarot card. Claiming to have the card when in fact you don't also seems crazy. Others have elaborated more on why this would be a very risky scum gambit, but for me those observations were enough. I feel more confident now that Novice is town, since there hasn't been a counter-claim (unless that's what Rowain has up his sleeve).

You conclude with listing Novice as a suspect "As his play is awfully dangerous for the village if he is wolf and I don't see how it benefits the village right now."

So how should he have played this, if he's innocent, to benefit the village? Claiming miller immediately is textbook play.

[novice]

Tas is lying. I've played with him everyday for 3 months or more . I know his American ways. I'm Egyptian with magical powers as well .

Lying about what? You being innocent?

@Serdoa:
I didn't think claiming the Fool card would establish me as innocent, although in my opinion it's protown play regardless of my alignment, so I think it should give me a village lean. The primary reason I claimed the Fool card was that I tend to get scanned, and it would be better to claim the card before that happened than after the fact. If I were scum I would rather have sat back and waited to be scanned as innocent. If a scum buddy had the card he could pass it to me.

I don't see any reason not to pass the fool card to someone else tonight, so if somebody does, speak up.

Crossposting with the stuff after Ryan's post.

[uberfish]

1) Novice claiming certainly isn't suspicious, if I had that card I would have also claimed it immediately. It's just correct play if he is village to avoid the seer potentially scanning him and exposing himself

2) It doesn't clear novice since it's possible scum hold the card and decided in the pregame discussion to use it to act village, rather than as an anti-seer defence.

3) If novice is village and scum have the thief, the scum can try to steal the fool card but there are obvious risks in doing so if you read the list of powers.

4) Selrahc is actually being useful this game for a change and I agree with pretty much everything he's posted on this subject. Really dislike how Rowain is trying to argue for a policy lynch on novice so my vote stays on him.

5) Personally I'm far more worried about the vigilante somehow finding its way into scum hands. Even though I'm normally an advocate of vigilantes shooting suspicious people, in this game whoever is the vigilante should NOT shoot because passing the gun on afterwards is too risky.

[Ryan]

That he's a rat .

[novice]

@Serdoa and Rowain: I did think about the implications after receiving my role PM, but not to the extent that you guys are outlining here. Like Zakalwe says, claiming Miller immediately as villager is textbook play, so I thought about reasons not to do that, and didn't find any. I didn't really consider all the ins and outs of how this would work as a scum gambit, that's the prosecution's responsibility, if you will.

Rowain, you certainly can't have thought through all this in the minute between my claim and your vote, so why exactly did you vote for me?

I can address the reasons my play makes little sense as a scum gambit, I don't think I'll bother just now though. Serdoa, go play pbem47 instead.

[Lewwyn]

1) Novice claiming certainly isn't suspicious, if I had that card I would have also claimed it immediately. It's just correct play if he is village to avoid the seer potentially scanning him and exposing himself

2) It doesn't clear novice since it's possible scum hold the card and decided in the pregame discussion to use it to act village, rather than as an anti-seer defence.

3) If novice is village and scum have the thief, the scum can try to steal the fool card but there are obvious risks in doing so if you read the list of powers.

4) Selrahc is actually being useful this game for a change and I agree with pretty much everything he's posted on this subject. Really dislike how Rowain is trying to argue for a policy lynch on novice so my vote stays on him.

5) Personally I'm far more worried about the vigilante somehow finding its way into scum hands. Even though I'm normally an advocate of vigilantes shooting suspicious people, in this game whoever is the vigilante should NOT shoot because passing the gun on afterwards is too risky.

I agree with 1, 2, 3 and especially 5. On 4, I don't think Rowain should be policy lynched for advocating a novice lynch since he does have logical reasons. I agree its an overreaction, but we are talking about Rowain.