My Little Pony: Friendship is Mafia

[Nikose Tyris]

My logic is that a GO would have modkilled people who have broken the rules, and it's entirely possible somebody from outside looked in and went "Oh hey guys you should be doing that here" as an afterthought. You posted a text log, which is easily alterable anyway.

Essentially I'm admitting my logic is weak here but basically if Geminex = Scum then there is a high chance that Sifright = actually scum and not the role he claimed.

Mind you we could also do the same to Smarty and have the same results, I'm picking you because your avatar creeps me out, which is pretty much the worst logic possible.

But really if you drop&Scum, then I'd feel fairly confident that Sifright/Smarty are scum. Similarly, if Smarty drops&Scum, I'd feel confident that you and Sifright, and Sifright Drops&Scum, You and Smarty.

In contrast if you drop and are town, then I'd believe Sifright's roleclaim and I'd be inclined to believe Smarty is on town side.

/Nikosehasbadlogicbutitstilltechnicallyqualifiesasl ogic

[Nikose Tyris]

[Also forum is absolutely chugging today, and it seems to be only NPF for me. :/]

[rpgdemon]

Originally Posted by Geminex

I kinda agree with Smarty. Lurkers or inactives are bad for the town, good for scum. It also makes sense for scum to be inactive a lot, at least to begin with. Question is, who to vote for.

Snake had suspicions about bob the merc, right?

Also, yay, not dead.

My point is though, they're not actively bad. Having a townie gone is bad for the town, be it by inactivity, or by being killed off. But being inactive only means the town gets one fewer vote during the lynch, not that the town is being actively hurt. Killing the person off doesn't change the fact that the town is getting one fewer vote.

Granted, if we hold to only voting an inactive person if we have nothing else to go on, the scum could easily hide in inactivity and we keep killing ourselves, because they know we won't hit an inactive player.

But the way I see it, an inactive townie isn't hurting the town in any way that killing them will solve, and in fact they might have a reason to stay inactive. The scum gain nothing from killing off someone who doesn't appear to be a threat, so a town player with a power role might pretend to be inactive, just so that they can keep doing their thing.

By the same logic though, the town doesn't gain much by killing off a player who appears to be inactive, aside from hedging bets and not killing an active town player off, so the scum could hide behind that.

I feel like Vizzinni, in Princess Bride.

In any case, has Fawful done anything on the board, since the game started? If not, I don't think that being inactive can be any part of a strategy for him. As soon as he logs in and knows his role, it could be part of a strategy. But if there's no way for him to know his role yet, I think he's probably just busy.

So if we're voting inactives, I'd look at whoever has had activity within the past few days, but hasn't posted here yet, and hit them up. Though, I dunno, since it could be a town doctor or something, trying not to draw attention to themselves. Is that even a thing that people would do? This is the second game I've played.

[Geminex]

My logic is that a GO would have modkilled people who have broken the rules, and it's entirely possible somebody from outside looked in and went "Oh hey guys you should be doing that here" as an afterthought. You posted a text log, which is easily alterable anyway.

Yeah, but the fact that we posted anything at all kinda implies that we weren't scum.

If we were scum, that conversation would be totally cool by Fen. We would know that fenris wouldn't kill us for talking. The only thing we'd have to fear would be someone noticing our conversation, and getting suspicious. But we were the ones who drew attention to it. And you can say that it'd look even more suspicious if we didn't draw attention to it and someone else noticed, but if we thought someone was gonna spot us, why would we have talked in the chat at all?

Your logic is just... weird. You already have a pretty good sign that I, at the very least, am a Townie because I posted the freaking conversation. Smarty barely participated. As for Sif? Maybe. But I doubt it.

Anyway, even if me or Sif DO turn out to be scum, that doesn't mean that the other two are. A scum might have forgotten the rules as much as a townie, and Fenris would still have showed them mercy because they hadn't done any harm and tried to keep it a secret.

What I'm saying is, it doesn't make any sense of all three of us to be scum, and while some of us might be scum, even if you discover this, you can't draw any conclusions about the other two.

[Geminex]

I'm picking you because your avatar creeps me out, which is pretty much the worst logic possible.

Actually, this is probably the most logical argument in your whole post.
>: ]

Edit:
Also, does mafia always go this way?

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I didn't talk about the game in chat, don't throw me in your boat mafiasuperscum.

[Nikose Tyris]

You're running around the point, Gem.

> You spoke about the game in public.
> You were not GM killed.

I'm ignoring Fenris' claim of "GM mercy" on the grounds that it might very well NOT be GM mercy, and simply him covering for your group getting caught publically discussing the game.

Everything beyond that is entirely circumstance. Nothing says you didn't edit the posts. Nothing says you weren't caught by someone not playing and called out on it. Nothing says you aren't trying to cover your ass right now- "Oh hey I posted the log I'm a townie lol" is a pretty weak cover.

GO kills people who talk out of game. People who don't get killed - scum. There's no getting around that, unless it's a terrible GM.

GM saying it's cool says that yes, it IS totally cool with the GM and he's just making a cover-your-ass post for exposing 2 (maybe 3) mafiates/scum in one day.

[rpgdemon]

Nik, a terrible GM actually enforces rules to the letter of the law with no leeway, to the detriment of the game.

A good GM will keep the game running well, even if the rules have to be bent.

[Geminex]

I get your point. Fenris didn't kill us, we must have been allowed to talk outside of chat.

But there's other reasons for Fenris to not kill us, the most obvious being that, hey, we didn't hurt anyone, and we immediately confessed, so Fen is being lenient. I mean, I don't think he wants to kill an extra 3 players in the first night. And while I'm a noob, I really can't see your argument that "Whoever talks, dies, DEFINITELY" as watertight, because it's not like the first time this has happened. The same thing happened in the homestuck mafia game, and nobody died that. I think you're just expecting GMs to be a lot stricter than they actually are, and you're using that expectation to justify our lynching.

Add to that the fact that it would make absolutely no sense for a group of scum to reveal that they'd been talking in chat, and your argument is really not looking very watertight.

Edit: RPG summed up my second paragraph very nicely.

[Sifright]

HOS: Nikose

Basically when you guys lynch Gem and he's townie lets turn around and lynch the hell out of nikose, basically you are blowing this out of proportion. The information was posted up by Gem there was no getting 'caught' as your trying to frame it. He intentionally posted the entire log chat to the thread. If anything killing me makes more sense because as i recall I said something about not posting on here. Basically you are grasping at straws.

Also you guys mis characterized my role. I'm not a one shot PO I have literally no active or passive powers I simply start out knowing one person who began play as a townie i've no idea what will happen to them later and no i'm not saying who it is for now.

To reiterate we were not caught discussing the game gem came forth and put the log down because he forgot about the rule at the time.