All users will need to merge their MTGSalvation account with a new or existing Twitch account starting Sept 25th. You can merge your accounts by clicking here. Have questions? Learn more here.
The Magic Market Index for Jan 12, 2018
Treasure Cruisin' Tempered Steel
The Magic Market Index for Jan 5, 2018
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Quote from Rodemy »
    Hmm, it seems i've struck a chord with archmage.

    I dont like azreals role.

    Plain as that.

    Explain how what i said was horrible.

    I think it could be true. But i don't think it's condusive to town wincon.

    Esspecially his little quip about helping scum.


    Quote from Nobue_Itoh »
    I don't understand how you don't understand.

    First, you're not wolf hunting. You made a specific attack for how a wolves operate, but ignored another player doing that. It was already mentioned but there was an attack made on me for "weird" behavior.

    Didn't read it/don't recall it. Might have written it off as RVS garbage.

    Quote from Nobue Itoh »

    The other thing is just saying that your role can't work as claimed. You are basically guaranteed to gain two souls.
    1. Hammering wouldn't be a big deal you could easily sneak this.
    2. Your night ability has virtually no counter play.

    I think you're intentionally acting daft and dislike this. But add that to the fact that you are not hunting. I'm starting to fully doubt your claim.

    I'm not sure how someone "sneaks" a hammer on public vote counts. If you're arguing I could theoretically out-hammer the town, sure, there's that possibility. And I'm equally sure trying that would never result in my being punitively lynched in short order...not a real fear.

    Night ability has counter-play based upon whatever powered roles Iso saw fit to include, plus the fact that this 14-player game is not going to be 10 nights long, I'd expect. The true "counterplay" would have to come in from me racing to be the hammer vote on every single lynch, which as we covered, would have been a stup-tacularly dumb idea for me on ten thousand different levels.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Sent Iso the following:

    What happens if I hammer someone whose soul is gone, or double-target someone whose soul I've stolen once already?
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Quote from Nobue_Itoh »
    Azreal has made many good points and overall I'm okish with letting him live for the moment.
    His role as claimed is false.

    Azreal's claimed role wins as soon as day 5.

    Azreal hammering would not be suspect to players if he didn't announce it. His soul ability part also makes little to no sense. The game of this part should be obvious. Azreal has the chance to pick up extra souls BUT he has to correctly figure out who the NK target is and not target them. This makes Azreal dangerous. But I don't think we need to lynch him immediately.

    Also Azreal made a comment about something scum did but didn't pick up on a possible mafia doing it. And it has been called out in the thread already. So I'll give him a chance to rectify this.

    + A lot of Townie points to Nancy BTW.

    Can't decipher what you're trying to say here.

    Quote from Rhand »
    There’s something that bugs me with Aztael’s claim. He says he gains souls by hammering (which kills a person) and by just targeting them at Night.
    Flavor-wise that doesn’t really make sense. It would make way more sense if the one he targets at Night dies too.

    @Azrael: would we know when our soul is stolen?
    What happens if you hammer someone whose soul you stole before?

    The role is pretty close to one Iso once rolled when he was a neutral violin. I don’t think Azrael was in that game, so I think there is at least some truth to the claim. I’ll have a look if I can find that game and see how that role worked.

    Yeah, anyone who's targeted should receive a notification.

    Quote from Rhand »
    The game I was talking about is Dr Polyopticon, and I think Az’s role is loosely based on that one.
    Iso needed to target 5 players at Night there (no hammer clause) in a 12 player game.
    10 here seems fair, but it might be 7 or 8 for all we know. I don’t trust the numbers he gives us.

    Yeah...I'm not sure Iso thought out the alt-win condition part of the role very carefully. Unless there's something I'm missing, in a fourteen player game, I can only fail to collect souls from four people before it becomes completely possible. If it were less, it would be more feasible and better designed from that perspective, but also not great from a "everyone should have fun" perspective. Instead it's just this kind of weird corner case thing that ought never to happen.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Quote from shadowlancerx »
    Is there anything pointing you to a town read on him other than his post restriction?

    Nothing except I know his tendency to entertain himself as town that way, which is only a tiny point in his favor in my mind.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Iso says my soul-sucking ability occurs after roleblocks and similar abilities, and also before information abilities, but prior to the nightkill.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Quote from shadowlancerx »
    Well thanks. How do you feel about my ground rules for you?

    I'm cool with them, but it depends mainly on how everyone else feels.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Based on *
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Didn't respond because I don't have a read on you baded on what you said at this point. Post zero eacape, you're in a different read category for me now.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas

    Sorry, with those pesky specifics and actually stating your reasoning stuff. Very un-piratelike.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Eh. That last line for Kazin is just bugs me. It's an awkward line/rationale, seems manufactured. I guess you could also argue that the considering a scum alliance thing is more likely to come from scum?

    Eh. He's in shrug pile still.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas

    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Hell no.

    First, a survivor with an extra wincon that causes everyone else to lose the game is odd from the get-go.

    Exhibit A: As scum, cardinal rule of mislynches is to get the town to lynch people who are odd, instead of scummy. It's both very easy to do, and the town is usually inclined to give the scum a completely free pass for what is an actual mislynch. So, when dealing with someone who is a good potential victim for this tactic, emphasize their "weirdness", without explaining how what they're doing is a scum tell or makes any sense from a scum-motivated perspective.

    Second, assuming that "survivor + souls wincon" is true, you would have no reason to honestly tell us the number of souls you need. Maybe you just win at 6 souls, or at 8 souls. Pushing an admitted non-town closer to an alleged wincon that would case everyone else to lose is crazy.

    If Iso created a role that wins on day 3 and makes everyone lose, he's the crazy one. You could maybe make an argument for insta-losing by day 4, but that also seems very much like a sour grapes type scenario for both the town and scum. Neutrals aren't supposed to win easily or by surprise. They're supposed to be the hardest role to win with, and only in endgame. So even if you built in some margin of error for deception as a suspicious soul, the odds of it being six are pretty much nil. Yet, you fearmonger that narrative forward.

    (On the plus side, with all this nice mislynch attention, I can probably count on not being a NK target now without you guys giving me any souls at all. Yay! Mission accomplished, bulletproof unlocked.)

    You're a confident enough player that you could be gambitting with this as actual mafia; if "soul stealing" is a real mechanic, you would know that it would be revealed quickly by those who had it happen to them, and you're preparing your cover story. Alternately, it is possible you're telling the truth - but that still means you have an anti-town wincon option. Either way you're definitely not on our side unless we force you to be.

    Fearmonger again, of course I'm confident enough to do that. I'm confident enough to do any number of things. Instead of stating that, you could actually maybe pause for a moment to consider if it's A) Smart or B) Likely.

    Then concluding with a false dichotomy where even the prongs are completely false. Neutrals can behave as either townies or scum by predisposition. It's one of the things that makes them dangerous from a design standpoint - you can't balance for how the player chooses to lean, faction-wise. They could play it in a pro-town way, or an anti-town way. Makes it tough for the designer to predict. As for me, there's a long history, if you cared to look, of my playing neutral survivors on the townish end of things.

    So, stating that I'm only on the town side unless I'm forced to be is just a completely ridiculous statement in the face of human nature, reality, and my past history that was clearly not carefully thought through.

    So, we are accumulating an entire shipload worth of logic, argumentation, and hyperbole tells throughout this post. Could be just bad play, but color me suspicious once we get to this final sentence:

    My counterproposal: we never allow Az to hammer, on pain of death. If we go too long without killing scum, we lynch Az. This prevents him from being scum and getting away with a neutral claim - and if he really is neutral, it forces him to win with the town.

    First part is fine. I've got enough heat on me now that I don't even need the bulletproof particularly badly, I think. Second part - oh, I skimmed that a little fast, I think. It's not as bad as it struck me at first. You're wanting me to contribute to the lynch of the scum, so our motivations align? Well that's perfectly fine. My concern there was that you were just gunning for a free mislynch in the bag for scum when the town was already on the ropes and in a tough spot, to seal the win for the scum. Which, by the way, would be absolutely awful for the town, so you may want to be careful about that.

    Unvote. We'll chalk those up as innocent logic tells, then.

    Quote from vezokpiraka »
    Vote Azrael

    I don't believe your 10 souls claim. In a game this size it would take until night 5 to get all the souls assuming you hammered every day. You might also be getting screwed out of your win con if people with souls die before you can steal them.

    Even if all the bull***** was true, survivors are by definition anti-town.

    See above - at what day of the game is the earliest do you think Iso wanted me to stealth-win by playing to this totally unfun win condition? Day 3? Day 4? Or Day 5? If you think it's earlier than that, you have a lower opinion of Iso's design skill and a higher opinion of his bastardry than you should. Nobody likes losing to an independent neutral outside of the endgame. They're not supposed to win quickly. That's not fun for anyone (including me).

    It's not bull*****, it's self-evident from how the role would need to be designed, and as others have already called you out on, survivors are not anti-town. Why exaggerate there, Vez? Smelling blood in the water, perhaps?

    Quote from Kazin Drake »
    Az's early open claim seems to suggest a more likely smoke screen than an actual claim. If everything he says is true, which, I believe it is, he's already pointed out a path at which he wins, we all lose. The first things that says to me are: "Bury my intentions in a sea of knowledge" or "call myself out as a potential enemy for all and get lynched early." However his immediate defensive state at being pointed out as this and pushing for a rushed lynch focus shift to Kamikaze says to me that he's actually not some kind of "wants to die early" role. I mean... the extra defensiveness he put forward about claiming to be a neutral and "I could just play dumb" also drive that nail home. The other thought I had was: maybe this is a ploy to try and avoid lynching to see the first night scum chat and not get lynched before he could try to make alliances play.

    Nah, I'm kinda jumping quickly on the:

    Vote: Azrael

    bandwagon and just keep him at a nice healthy 0 stolen souls. I might just be a superstitious sort... but in my book Necromancy is never good.

    I'm calling for a "rush lynch" on Kami, when I didn't even bother to point out what was wrong with his post? You have a strange definition of what pushing for rush lynching looks like, or you're exaggerating there.

    Why do you feel this early claim is more likely to be a smoke screen? In my experience, the earlier the claim, the more truth there is to it, typically. It's the ones who sit on their claims and keep their options open and brood on what the most effective false-claim is that you need to watch out for. Here, I just vomited the truth into the thread at my first available opportunity, because I don't particularly want to play towards either of those objectives.

    Ah. Some people are reading me actually trying to give you a chance to read my mindset by explaining it as over defensiveness? Nevermind that over-defensiveness is one of the most badly mangled tells in history. Hunh. Perhaps that was what bugged people a bit in zero escape, too. Only here, there's no DBS to be my interpreter. Maybe just Tom, if he's on his game.

    I'm thinking I'm leaning on this post being another townie paranoia tell, based on primarily that last sentence. It's just such a weird line of thinking, you clearly were trying to think of more interesting possibilities beyond you just "odd" "vulnerable" "burn the mislynch with fire!" classic line of play, so points for that. Do you think that if I actually wanted to play this role conventionally, I'd have claimed it in a million years? I could have skated through Day 1 with a no claim just playing my normal townie self like a hot knife through butter.

    Problem is, at some point, town is going to wonder who the flying dutchman is, and they're going to ask me to claim. Well, I've got nothing to hide, and I don't want the town to think that I do. So my preferred solution to that is to claim instantly, rather than asking you to believe a neutral claim on day 4 or 5 or during a mass-claim, or setting myself up for a lynch by false-claiming. Those are the things that get you killed as a neutral, and before I invest effort in the game, I'd like to know if I'm going to have a shot at being allowed to play to the town win con or not right at the start rather than playing coy for four or five days, putting in a bunch of effort to find scum for you, and then being shot in the face because the town got scared of the ominous neutral player.

    Quote from Rodemy »
    Scum vines on kamakaze and shadow.

    Tom is doin a storytelling thing that could be a way of misinformation.

    I believe azreal, but i still wanna lynch him.

    vote azreal

    If you believe me, why lynch?

    Perhaps you believe that it's good town play to murder non-killing neutrals and give the scum free lynches?

    I mean, I can understand and appreciate people who think I'm lying - they're totally failing to correctly read what's right in front of their noses, but sure, neutrals lie sometimes, that's a thing you're on guard against. But uh, believe me AND want to lynch?

    Is this a "I'm scum and know he's telling the truth but don't want to to be demonstrably wrong when he flips exactly as he said he would" thing?
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    *refresh refresh refresh* Someone come entertain me. No?

    Ok sleepy time.

    (Psst, I also get souls for repeated multi-posting. Don't let the mods infract me, it'll make my win con impossible.)

    (Iso, I see what you're doing. Stop blowing my cover! Kill joy.)
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Also, Kami completely and utterly claimed scum in post 25. But I'll let you super sleuths figure out the precise reasoning on that. Can't make it too easy, now.

    vote Kami

    Also, tell your buddies not to mess with me, yo. I'll glower at you menacingly with my complete lack of abilities that impact the game.

    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Pirates Mafia - Day 1 - Scourge o' the Seas
    Also, limited past experiences says Tom is slightly more likely town, but I resent other people pulling smilie gambit variations, so I have to vote him on principle.
    Posted in: Mafia
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.