Final-Fan said:
What exactly did hat say he wouldn't clarify? I remember he said we would not be informed whether people were punished, because it would reveal false claims. But I was referring to your idea that we could repeatedly invoke the punishment. |
Oh! About my idea for Baal. Yes that is a good point that I hadn't considered.
In terms of Leatherhat, I wouldn't rule out possibility of him being mafia out at all. After all, my fist game I wound up being a mafia roleblocker, I think there is as much a chance of him being mafia as anyone else. WIll likely to see his justification for lurking, although my activity hasn't been much better lately at all.
Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.
|
theprof00 said: ... that's what I was saying, Baal. Burn looks like a non-standard kill. Poison is a non-standard kill. Hat could be substituting "burned" for "murdered" because of flavor, "poison" is pretty akin to mafia as opposed to "burned". That is one viewpoint. Then, looking at the flavor we have the poisoner claiming surprise at an explosion, mentioning a night killer, and the quote of "how could you turn on a fellow officer". So, there are at least two killing sources with separate agendas. It can't be 2 mafia kills because of the poisoner's surprise. It CAN be an SK and Vig, or it can be an SK/VG and a mafia role, or something to that extent.
Right now, I believe the mafia is the poisoner, and the 3rd party is the "burner". I don't think an SK/Vig would express surprise. In my head, it seems to be a Vig who chanced night 1, and a mafia role. Still, we're missing the standard "murder" (I think). Either there is a doc or something like that, or poison IS the mafia kill. That's how I'm leaning. I don't think it would make sense to have a kill AND poison, along with a 3rd party, given how few people are playing.
|
sorry but I somehow feel that you are trying to read to much in the flavour, while i still agree that there might be a third party, I think its much more likely that mafia has a special ability which allows them to poison someone (now ignoring completely the flavour)
Also didn't hat make a post saying that name =/= alignment? Or am I tripping balls?
Disconnect and self destruct, one bullet a time.
A Bad Clown said:
I'm not pyshic, I just get random info. This night I got who targeted me, I was hoping for info on another player. |
So you basically role-claimed now? Do you really think that this is positive for the town if you just dump your role for tonight? Actually it makes me even more suspicious of you...
back (sorry for delay ^^) and reading (100 posts.... and remembering what happened last week, yay for 4 days forgetting weekends :p).
OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO
So okay... after reading though all the posts I am much more inclined to believe the theory with the sk and mafia-poisoner, I just read profs post, and it felt like he jumped to the conclusion rather fast, but after reading the rest of the post it seems to make much more sense now...
Made a mistake in my last post in the last sentence:
..., but after reading the rest of the POSTS it seems to make much more sense now...
Linkzmax said:
Baal said "Unless I'm being fucked over, the burn kill wasn't mafia, but I can't elaborate based on rules to the game :). As for the poison, I have absolutely no clue what that is." That's essentially claiming the kill, because if he were merely the preventer of such a kill, he wouldn't be able to say the kill didn't come from mafia, and could outright say there's an arsonist actually. |
If he's actually claiming the kill and he's a vigilante, it makes me wanna vote for him for being stupid. How many times do we have to spell out that killing on Night One isn't a good idea for a vigilante?
Signature goes here!
Stefl1504 said:
|
how is that different from what I said? Bolded.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
