Chinatown: Mafia Scum Thread

[seph]

I have 16 minutes to write this, writing this cacky intro is taking up time so I better get on with it

 

Firstly, apologies folks, sincerly it's tosh play to blame outside stuff for not playing so I'll not make excuses there

 

Secondly, an appraisal of my posts at the start of the day phase

 

Just to highlight to some who have wondered:

 

Ron actually had a perfect chance to 'confirm' his vig claims with a slight bit of bread crumbing of his kill. I would have done this.

 

Alas he didn't it seems, so he still is not 100% confirmed in my eyes, especially as Kenny looked a good shout for scum too, someone else could have engineered that kill, and we shouldn't get away from that fact. Highlighting it, I do not feel is an act of scum, it is an act of making sure we remember that at this juncture Ron is still not 100% confirmed.

 

With this in mind:

 

Teedy Kay - A game this early won't have much from Brownie. This is the argument in favour of a serial killer or day mafia kill. As a result, post 191 is utter bollocks. Post 342 - totally redundant logic. Stating the absolutely bleeding obvious. Pushing massively on Ron. If Ron is a vig, this needs to be worked out. Scum 100% want rid of him. Also pushing on the breadcrumbing, which is a bit shitty. Bad logic re: Ron not targeting him overnigh

 

Post 191

How so is it 'bollocks', something triggered Brownie's death, shouldn't we go back and review that? No one did, until I went back and reviewed every post. Surely that is the Town's bread and butter, a Town member was struck down, we have to actually investigate that death

 

Post 342

Redundant logic? Eh?

IF 2 folks go V/LA, and there is enough Scum members, if that power was the scums they could manufacture it that if one of their cast was about to be lynched, that by resetting the power a no lynch would take place due to the knowledge Town wouldn't actually be there to vote.

 

This would only be redundant logic if we KNOW that that power was a Town power, so to claim it is can mean 2 things in my opinion.

 

One question before I HAVE to go,

 

Seph, can you explain why your presence in this game has been fleeting compared to your first two? Serious question buddy.

 

I hope to review more later on, seeing as it's weekend time, but here's one thing I will say

 

Chris Stone, Ron, Bristep and unfitfinlay are Town in my eyes, not confirmed, but their style of play is that of someone scum hunting, I'm more than happy with all of them.

 

Outside stuff, as you say. Work's particularly grating at the moment, and I'm on the fourth Aztecs programme of five this season - the last one is in August. Not that I'm going to wait that long to properly play, mind you.

 

I won't get the chance to summarise how I feel in full until lunch, but I'll say I haven't got any solid suspects yet I'm uneasy about Ron and Dazz at the moment - I don't believe both are on the same side yet there's nothing I can see that overtly makes either of them stand out as scum; out of the two I think a Dazz lynch would make slightly more sense. Ron, however, is still pushing for a lynch as he's a little more worried about another vote reset this late in the day.

[seph]

EBWOP: that is, if it wasn't a one off and if it's an at-will ability.

[Chris B]

Post 191

How so is it 'bollocks', something triggered Brownie's death, shouldn't we go back and review that? No one did, until I went back and reviewed every post. Surely that is the Town's bread and butter, a Town member was struck down, we have to actually investigate that death

 

Because it was early day one. Nobody has definite insights early day one unless there's a huge slip. Your suggestion is that he must have been onto something, when it's far, FAR more likely that he was killed because he was town and for no other reason. Enough of us have been scum to know that you don't kill someone when it's obvious that it's you that's done it.

 

Not only is this obvious, but the attempt to focus on 'but why Brownie' while stroking your beard thoughtfully is blatantly trying to distract discussion.

 

It's scummy and it's bollocks.

 

Post 342

Redundant logic? Eh?

IF 2 folks go V/LA, and there is enough Scum members, if that power was the scums they could manufacture it that if one of their cast was about to be lynched, that by resetting the power a no lynch would take place due to the knowledge Town wouldn't actually be there to vote.

 

This would only be redundant logic if we KNOW that that power was a Town power, so to claim it is can mean 2 things in my opinion.

 

You're not making much sense here. I honestly don't know what you mean. It was redundant because it was obvious. 'Do you agree here? I think you should!'. It was obvious.

[unfitfinlay]

Deadline is getting close and, while I still suspect Snake, I'm not prepared to lynch the guy without him having had a proper chance to defend himself. Learned that lesson from the Pick Your Own Power Game.

 

UNVOTE

 

As Bristep pointed out, Dazz said he'd been happy to respond to any questions "in a few minutes" and, nearly a full day later, he still hasn't. Aside from that, the way he was subtly trying to put suspicion on Ron and Bristep in his last post, and then voted for Teedy, without making a single point that any of the three could respond to (How could Ron argue against "There's something about you that makes me think you're scum", for example?) just seems scummy to me.

 

VOTE DAZZ

[Chris B]

Deadline is getting close and, while I still suspect Snake, I'm not prepared to lynch the guy without him having had a proper chance to defend himself. Learned that lesson from the Pick Your Own Power Game.

 

UNVOTE

 

As Bristep pointed out, Dazz said he'd been happy to respond to any questions "in a few minutes" and, nearly a full day later, he still hasn't. Aside from that, the way he was subtly trying to put suspicion on Ron and Bristep in his last post, and then voted for Teedy, without making a single point that any of the three could respond to (How could Ron argue against "There's something about you that makes me think you're scum", for example?) just seems scummy to me.

 

VOTE DAZZ

 

I need to look at Dazz in more detail, but with reference to the post where he quoted me and voted, I did take it that he was leaving Teedy to respond to my points, rather than leaving him in a position where he can't respond to anything.

 

I'm not absolving him, but that seems an important difference.

[unfitfinlay]

Deadline is getting close and, while I still suspect Snake, I'm not prepared to lynch the guy without him having had a proper chance to defend himself. Learned that lesson from the Pick Your Own Power Game.

 

UNVOTE

 

As Bristep pointed out, Dazz said he'd been happy to respond to any questions "in a few minutes" and, nearly a full day later, he still hasn't. Aside from that, the way he was subtly trying to put suspicion on Ron and Bristep in his last post, and then voted for Teedy, without making a single point that any of the three could respond to (How could Ron argue against "There's something about you that makes me think you're scum", for example?) just seems scummy to me.

 

VOTE DAZZ

 

I need to look at Dazz in more detail, but with reference to the post where he quoted me and voted, I did take it that he was leaving Teedy to respond to my points, rather than leaving him in a position where he can't respond to anything.

 

I'm not absolving him, but that seems an important difference.

 

Well, yeah, my point is that his whole post seemed designed to be instantly forgettable. He didn't even quote you or point out exactly what part of your case on Teedy that he agreed with, his justification for the vote was basically just "What Chris B said". Teedy can't really respond to that (only to you) and, if you're town a response is what you should be looking for, because that's the best way to judge whether someone is scum or not.

 

Being beige is Anti Town at the best of times but from a Vanillia, a CLAIMED Vanillia no less, it's even more suspect.

 

Actually looking back, this caught my attention as well:

 

1) It's obvious now that there are two different Scum factions, or so I believe. The Triads (Evil people), and some other Scum faction. What the implications of this are, I don't know. Is it the day-kill that one Scum has, and a night kill that the other has? Or can they both whack at any time, leaving us in limbo?

 

It's a small thing but Dazz, why are the Triads "evil people" and the other scum faction aren't?

[Carbomb]

This is partly out of pique, but I'm wondering why this game is progressing so slowly and drawing so little discussion when you've got just less than 9 hours 'til Night Phase.

[Dazz]

Hi All,

 

Sorry, first chance I've had to look at the thread.

 

1. Unitfitfinlay - Triads are evil people in real life. This was what I was basing things on. As they aren't friendly people. There was no loaded statement in that, other than the fact that Triads are notoriously bad people in real life. Nothing sinister in this here, in terms of the game, and not real life, all Scum are evil/bad etc... Perhaps I should have been a bit clearer in my statement. I was just pointing out that the triads, as a faction in the real world and anywhere aren't renouned for their tolerance and friendliness. Also, I would have responded to things quicker than I intended, but, due to sickness at work my timetable has been shoved all over the place, and I got dragged out unexpectedly, when I did intend doing a full Q&A to reiterate my town-ness. Also, RE: The Vote to me. So be it. Its wasted though. Why lynch me when ultimately it's not going to get you anywhere, other than eliminating a vanilla townie and letting the scum continue to be alive.

 

2. Chris B - Thats what I was hoping for from you. I was agreeing in theory with your view on Teedy and was awaiting some sort of reply or retort from him. I will bear in mind that pointing out I agree with you comes accross as scummy for the future. I didn't intend it to, and thanks for seeing what I was intending to do.

 

3. Chris Stone - I liked your analysis of me, and thank you for devoting so much time and attention to me. I have made a few silly mistakes which could make me appear scummy. It's just sillyness. I didn't really want to appear to be holding onto the "I'm new to this game" thing, and thats why I tried to distance myself from it, but foolishly, I did mention it again. I suppose it's just cause I'm stupid and not properly considering what I'm saying. What I WOULD say is, for one last time, I'm still getting used to the mechanics of the game of Mafia as a whole, and given that the last game I was in was not exactly a conventional rule set, and this one, the early kills have thrown me a little, I just get a little confused, and have therefore made some silly mistakes in how I am articulating myself in the game.

 

4. Dan Williams - I came to the conclusion that there are two scum groups, based on what I thought the format of the game is. Last time we had many scum groups, and, this time, I kinda thought the same, without thinking that there could be just one. The other side of this, is that The Triads are a group in China which keep themselves to themselves, and my theory is that, the fact that they are labled as triads and not something else, that there is some sort of other group which is dangerous to be around. There could be Triads, and some other evil faction. The Triads, in my eyes were not the original objective of this game. Lets not forget, that Carbomb said there would be some twists and turns as we went along, and I think that it's no coincidence that a Triad member was killed, in order to show us that there is more to this game than meets the eye. Not ideal for me, as it's another variant of the conventional game for me to get to grips with, but you know what I mean. It was a theory, and Idea, nothing more.

 

5. Ron Simmons - My action voting for Teedy Kay was lazy. I liked the theories surrounding Teedy and I probably should have elaborated more. Thats all. If I had elaborated more, I probably would have made more sense and not came accross as a quick deflecting person. I will be more diligent in future, and ensure I give full reasons, rather than just agreeing.

 

I think I've covered all the concerns I've missed in the downtime. If I havn't please tell me. I'm working again tonight (just in for a few hours, before I'm back out again). So, will try and do some more answers before the close of the day-phase, assuming I get a few minutes to myself!

 

Apologies once again for lazy play and not being here, seems that work is getting to a lot of people this time around. Anyways, as I said, Concerns please direct them towards me.

[Chris B]

There aren't enough people voting right now. Get to it.

[Teedy Kay]

Post 191

How so is it 'bollocks', something triggered Brownie's death, shouldn't we go back and review that? No one did, until I went back and reviewed every post. Surely that is the Town's bread and butter, a Town member was struck down, we have to actually investigate that death

 

Because it was early day one. Nobody has definite insights early day one unless there's a huge slip. Your suggestion is that he must have been onto something, when it's far, FAR more likely that he was killed because he was town and for no other reason. Enough of us have been scum to know that you don't kill someone when it's obvious that it's you that's done it.

 

Not only is this obvious, but the attempt to focus on 'but why Brownie' while stroking your beard thoughtfully is blatantly trying to distract discussion.

 

It's scummy and it's bollocks.

 

Fair one, I did just feel that it needed to be looked at. Ignoring it when a clue may have been there would have been criminally bad play. Should be noted that Bristep AND Chris Stone did also agree with me about 'randomness' too.

 

Looking back at the situation as I have now had to do, it's quite telling that Ron was one of the one's being questioned by Brownie, knowing what we know now, it does look more along the lines of manufacturing a lynch in Ron's direction, which I did in fact mention as a possibility for the actual kill taking place.

 

Post 342

Redundant logic? Eh?

IF 2 folks go V/LA, and there is enough Scum members, if that power was the scums they could manufacture it that if one of their cast was about to be lynched, that by resetting the power a no lynch would take place due to the knowledge Town wouldn't actually be there to vote.

 

This would only be redundant logic if we KNOW that that power was a Town power, so to claim it is can mean 2 things in my opinion.

 

You're not making much sense here. I honestly don't know what you mean. It was redundant because it was obvious. 'Do you agree here? I think you should!'. It was obvious.

 

So obvious it had to be explained to Ron, which is what that post details.

 

'Surely you agree there?

 

I feel you definitely should!'

 

That comment was an angle at Ron possibly being scum, who was under heavy questioning at the time.

[Dazz]

Also, forgot to add, I'm going to consider my own stuff again, and become a bit more observant in the game.

 

Therefore.

 

UNVOTE : Teedy Kay

[unfitfinlay]

Hi All,

 

Sorry, first chance I've had to look at the thread.

 

1. Unitfitfinlay - Triads are evil people in real life. This was what I was basing things on. As they aren't friendly people. There was no loaded statement in that, other than the fact that Triads are notoriously bad people in real life. Nothing sinister in this here, in terms of the game, and not real life, all Scum are evil/bad etc... Perhaps I should have been a bit clearer in my statement. I was just pointing out that the triads, as a faction in the real world and anywhere aren't renouned for their tolerance and friendliness. Also, I would have responded to things quicker than I intended, but, due to sickness at work my timetable has been shoved all over the place, and I got dragged out unexpectedly, when I did intend doing a full Q&A to reiterate my town-ness. Also, RE: The Vote to me. So be it. Its wasted though. Why lynch me when ultimately it's not going to get you anywhere, other than eliminating a vanilla townie and letting the scum continue to be alive.

 

It's not wasted at all. We're heading towards another no lynch and, just because there wasn't a scum kill last night, doesn't mean that we are going to be so lucky tonight. I'd rather mislynch someone I think is scum than no lynch, possibly lose a power role over night, and spend the next day phase still being suspicious of the same person. ESPECIALLY if that person is a claimed Vanilla, since even if they are town, they have no special value and scum aren't going to target them for a nightkill.

 

Also, Dazz, could respond to the points I made in this post? (Excluding the one's you've already addressed, of course).

 

I've missed a lot, so let me summarise where I am.

 

1) It's obvious now that there are two different Scum factions, or so I believe. The Triads (Evil people), and some other Scum faction. What the implications of this are, I don't know. Is it the day-kill that one Scum has, and a night kill that the other has? Or can they both whack at any time, leaving us in limbo?

 

Why is "obvious" that there's two different groups Dazz?

 

2) Ron Simmons, I am still slightly suspcious of you. There's something about you that just doesn't say town to me. I've not been about, and nor have you really, but, it seems that the suspicions towards you just won't shake. And surely that's not a good thing at all? I do however agree with you pushing for a vote, but, rather than rushing a vote, we should really consider it, because, even if the vote does get blitzed (Which could have been a one time deal only), we've gotta be sure we're lynching the right people.

 

I don't like this at all. If you think there's two different scum groups then it's completely natural to think that Ron, who claims he killed Kenny, is scum. So why pussy foot around it with the "There's something about you that just doesn't say town to me". Feels like you're subtely trying to push suspicion on Ron without actually committing to it.

 

3) RE: Bristep. I'm not sure I believe his bulletproof claim, likewise, I don't think he's scum. I'm confused by Bristep at this time, and before the end of the day phase I'll have a good little peruse into his interactions in this game to get an idea of what exactly I think of him.

 

Same thing here. You say you don't believe his claim but don't think he's scum. If you think he's lying then why don't you suspect him? Town have no reason to lie after all.

[Chris_Stone]

Night actions:

 

Bristep should NOT be protected in any way - goes without saying.

Ron - You should shoot Bristep tonight, even if we can't confirm he was shot at, it will at least give YOU confirmation on whether he is telling the truth or not - whether we believe you on that point or not is another thing all together. However, i will consider 2 kills in the night with none on Bristep to be evidence of your guilt. Most especially if we see 2 townies dead. IF however you for some reason have such a read on scum that you feel 100% I understand if you want to shoot them, but i'll be expecting a case as strong or better than a lynch case on the target and for you to claim the kill in your first post after the night phase, without being prompted.

 

This of course gives scum a chance to roleblock however with a scum doctor, i think a scum roleblocker is slightly less likely, especially if they do have the power to manipulate votes.

 

If we have a tracker - you might want to track ron to verify his claimed kill, if you did this the previous night phase and got a result you might want to reassess whether or not you take that action or whether you trust ron at this point especially with the fact Ron may well be a scum target tonight.

 

 

If anyone has issues with what i propose please do mention them. These are just my suggestions - With none of them am i saying you MUST do this and tbh i don't expect some of them to be carried out as i've mentioned, still though, I think testing Bristeps claim to be the most logical use of rons ability tonight.

 

2 roles have been hinted at or claimed by bristep, the first making him a target, the second explains why - if he's lying on the bullet proof to get through the nights as a different role, it's a stupid play which i wouldn't expect from him and as such i'd consider him to be scum or a VI.

 

 

Vote: Dazz

[Chris B]

I'm off out for the night, and I'm not buggering up a lynch, especially when Dazz unvoted like that. At least put a vote ON someone if you're going to do that just before deadline.

 

Vote: Dazz

 

Or, indeed Unvote, Vote: Dazz

[Snake Plissken]

Guys I'm sorry I've been away for so long, but I. Almost back. I've had a quick look and I'll answer UnfitFinlay in the next day phase, but I'm not at all happy with Dazz one bit so I'll put him at L-1

 

Vote Dazz

 

Someone want to hammer?