code:

---

PLAYER             R01  TB1  R02  GRP  STA
=================  ===  ===  ===  ===  ===
BernieB            AGM  AGM  ---   1    A
Bugger             TMB  AGM  PD    1    A
GottaLoveElves     AGM  AGM  JAZ   1    A
hilikuS            AGM  AGM  GLE   1    A
Liq                JAZ  AGM  BB    1    A
XplicitR           LIQ  AGM  ---   1    A
Battle_of_Twits    BB   BB   TMB   2    A
JackSpade          BOT  BOT  LIQ   3    A
MasterWolf         BOT  BOT  BOT   3    A
ryan2754           BOT  BOT  BOT   3    A
TheMidnightBomber  ---  BOT  ---   3    A
Jazaray            JSP  TMB  LIQ   4    A
PlasteredDragon    TMB  TMB  RYN   4    A
ThoughtsofLepers   TMB  TMB  RYN   4    A
fwybwed            BB   BB         C    E
AlmasterGM         BB   BOT        C    L
Montague                           C    E

---

Looks like 3 undeclareds... provided there is no vote switching, BernieB, XPR, and TMB will decide this round. Obviously I hope they vote ryan, but there's really no telling. XPR has voted Liq & AGM, he might vote Liq this round. TMB has only voted BOT, so he might do the same this round. BernieB voted AGM twice--no telling where he'll go, but I'll be interested to see. If he votes ryan it might be another tiebreaker. Crrrazy.

If they block vote, nobody is safe. Should be interesting. Hopefully we will get results tonight.

EDIT: fixed headers.

At this point I have no choice but to make these remarks:

I strongly suggest you do not vote for me.

I strongly suggest you DO vote for ryan.

I strongly suggest a certain winged fellow should smell the coffee.

You may take these strong suggestions however you wish. They are suggestions only of course, but very strong ones. As much as I want out of this game, you should probably keep me in for another round.

{SUMMARY: PD makes strong suggestions}

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Ah, and with Liq's second vote switch of the game, now it is a four way tie, putting me in danger of being lynched.

At this point I have no choice but to make these remarks:

I strongly suggest you do not vote for me.

I strongly suggest you DO vote for ryan.

I strongly suggest a certain winged fellow should smell the coffee.

You may take these strong suggestions however you wish. They are suggestions only of course, but very strong ones. As much as I want out of this game, you should probably keep me in for another round.

{SUMMARY: PD makes strong suggestions}

---

As to those who complain of my silence, I am here, and I'm the type who only posts when I have something concrete. I will be more talkative later.

{SUMMARY: votes due in one hour!}

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
@ryan - would you mind editing your post to include SUSPECT tags?

---

{SUSPECT: BoT (silence, bandwagon, IIoA); PD (weak-logic, suspicious of me because I'm good mafia argument); BernieB (silence and disappearance after suspicion); TMB (silence and disappearance after suspicion); ToL (bandwagon this round, hypocritical vote last round); Jackspade (silence and disappearance after suspicion)}

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:

Anyway, my vote is staying on you--I think I twigged on something there and your response seems coolly calculated which doesn't at all feel like the ryan I've played with before--not to say you aren't capable of a calm rational response, but this is way different than, for example, WW6. You almost seem like a completely different person from WW6 ryan.

---

Behavior I have noticed in my re-read of own behavior in this game:
1.) Talking more, but occurs mainly at nights, when I get off work. No longer in college, so nights aren't consumed by homework [I graduated and am going to Medical School], so I usually post at night, and have more time to dedicate. Thus more posting and a more consistent posting schedule.
2.) Suspicious of non-talkers.
3.) Vote analysis.
4.) Found suspicious for typo, and defended myself. My defense here is harder, mainly because more people find it suspicious and it was pointed out more directly (by you again). Again, I feel I had an adequate (calm and rational as well) response.
When I need to break down logically bad arguments, I do. I find it to be the most fun part of the game - defending yourself and breaking down arguments. It's what makes mafia/werewolf fun.
The biggest difference in my posting pattern I see is my posting type. In the earlier games, I may quote one or two things in a post, and say much less.
Since WW6, I have played in two Mafia games and multiple mafiascum games. Because of my recent stint at mafiascum.net, and because their games are lengthier (since time isn't usually a deadline, a majority for a lynch is), I have gotten into the habit of using multiple quote tags in posts, and addressing points/posts/quotes I find interesting SINCE my previous post (For example, if I post middle of page 1, and we are on page 3, my next post will contain quotes of things I feel I need to address from my post on the middle of page 1 to the current discussion). I can link you to my mafiascum games if you like, to show you that this is the truth (Mafia III at the end has be seemingly leading in that direction). Thus, I believe your sample size and time since you last played with me to make your argument of "completely different person" to be incorrect.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:

It doesn't seem like you are going to be lynched, and since I feel I am on to something, I figure I won't make it through the night, which at this point would suit me fine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Irrational arguments cause me distress, and I get consumed trying to combat them when more often than not the person I am explaining to continues to operate at right-angles to reason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JackSpade:
Why would you intentionally try and make it tougher for another [b]villager to try and figure things out?
[/b]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JackSpade:
As for my own thoughts, BernieB sticks out in my mind because fwyb was quick to try and rally people against Bernie, voting for him during the vote and re-vote. And then he gets taken out by the wolves. While this could be a bluff by the wolves, by setting someone up to look like a wolf, I think they decided to take care of fwyb early on hoping it wouldn't arouse too many suspicions. I think they feared he would continue on his quest to get Bernie lynched and that led to his death.

---

So BoT drops in, votes a silent (which he is well) and says he can't sift through all of the thread. So much for joining a game and actually putting in the effort.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Ah, and with Liq's second vote switch of the game, now it is a four way tie, putting me in danger of being lynched.

At this point I have no choice but to make these remarks:

I strongly suggest you do not vote for me.

I strongly suggest you DO vote for ryan.

I strongly suggest a certain winged fellow should smell the coffee.

You may take these strong suggestions however you wish. They are suggestions only of course, but very strong ones. As much as I want out of this game, you should probably keep me in for another round.

{SUMMARY: PD makes strong suggestions}

---

Oh and, just in case you missed it above ryan's long post:

But as previously noted, these were just "strong suggestions"--and the phrase "I strongly suggest" doesn't carry any particular connotations that I can think of just now.

{SUMMARY: finer points of angelic power explained}

@PD and MM: Are we using the one save rule? I thought that you (MM) said we were going with the regular rules this game, and would talk about a change for next game.

{Voting: ryan (PD's "strong" suggestion )}
{Summary: vote switch, asking for rules clarification}

Thanks,
Jazaray

__________________
A Plastered Dragon Original Limerick:
There was a nice lassie named Jaz
Many wished to have what she has,
A delicate face,
A soft warm embrace,
And a whole lot of bedroom pizzazz.

WeedIan: Jazaray is like MOTL's Mom.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jazaray:
"Strong" enough for me, switching to ryan.

@PD and MM: Are we using the one save rule? I thought that you (MM) said we were going with the regular rules this game, and would talk about a change for next game.

{Voting: ryan (PD's "strong" suggestion )}
{Summary: vote switch, asking for rules clarification}

Thanks,
Jazaray

---

IIRC, we're operating under the same ol' same ol' for now. :/
Also, if the angel does anything stupid this game I will hunt them down and hurt them. Personally.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myself from X(squared):
I think that maybe a person can not be saved twice in a row should be the rule.

If someone pseudo-reveals himself and the angel does not pick up on it, it won't help when the wolves kill him.
If he does pick up on it, it creates a cat and mouse between the wolves and the angel.

Will he save him this round? or will he make us wait to kill him next round...

Right now the rule is as is, and maybe we will change it to the every other round save if it becomes a problem.

~MM

---

I am beginning to grow tired of running this game

~MM

__________________
[Help me PIMP my Slide!] [Join Us,or DIE!][Refs][Me] [Werewolf 9!][My Brute!]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Game rules:
The angel can save a player as many times as s/he wishes, but can never save her/himself.

---

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

I was going to say this after the lynch, but I'll say it now.

ASSUMING ryan is a wolf, I think XpR is also a furry. XpR is the one who caught GLE's typo post in WW9. After the game, he then pointed out to PD that he caught it, and that no one paid much attention to him. He's been completely silent (I think, correct me if I'm wrong) on ryan's typo this game. It has been talked about rather frequently, there's no way he could have missed it. I call that OOC. It seems to me, if he were a cit this game, he would have been all over that mistake. And if no one believed him, he'd just point out WW9. (Like I did, after his typo post). To reiterate, if ryan is a wolf, I strongly
{Suspect: XplicitR (behavior doesn't jive w/ WW9)}
and
{Trust: TMB}
{Trust: PD}

Also why do you trust the 2 other players? It has only been 1 round so far, so you could not have checked them both if you are the seer.

~MM

17

__________________
[Help me PIMP my Slide!] [Join Us,or DIE!][Refs][Me] [Werewolf 9!][My Brute!]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Well, if I was hypothetically someone special, I would not hypothetically let it go past one save even under the old rules, because I hypothetically have no hypothetical interest in hypothetically killing the game.

---

The line between strong suggestion and claiming as seer has been eliminated.

Sure, your solution works now MM, but it still gives PD an extra investigation, and only is temporary.

The reasons I see this as a problem in the current game state is as follows: PD is using a loophole in the system - using strong language about his possible investigation, they think his reason for doing so is because is the cop, based on precedence of history of the games on here. 1.) If PD is actually the seer, he is practically giving his investigation results while still not formally claiming, thus giving himself ultimate protection under the angel since he never "formally claimed," but led the angel to protect him because he pretty much says he is the seer. Thus, the game practically becomes a 2 cop game, as the angel must be killed before anyone can touch the cop, and thus, an unbalanced game with the seer just feeding information to the town since he never formally claimed. 2.) If he is a wolf or a cit, he is playing off of people's belief systems that he is technically claiming. Obviously I am going to come out as wolf (given my response to his earlier post), but he could still be a wolf, or a cit who thinks he is 100% right, thus misleading and using the rules as they weren't intended. Either way, it needs to be fixed, because if he is doing option 1.), he is giving the cits 2 cops, but if it is 2.) the rules need to be changed so everyone can claim anything, so such a statement doesn't carry so much weight. Especially if PD is a wolf: he can act as though he scryed his fellow wolf, and when they lynch his buddy and he is right, they will take his word as golden. Then someone will come out and say "I strongly suggest you lynch PD," which will drastically change the dynamics of the game. I am not saying this would be a bad thing, but given the current format of the rules, it seems this was not what was intended. Thus, my reasoning on why the rules need to be changed.
Also, when the rule was formulated back in mafia, it worked: people abided by it, and the cop/seer put their investigation results subtely in their defenses and attacks, and when they came out they did this:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pyro in Mafia 36:
All right guys, I think the time is ripe. The Mafia will be going after the people who voted for PGB, and that means either I, junichi, or k illig. Rather than squander what I know, I'll come forward as the cop.
yakusoku is Mafia. Bernie is not. My other check was PGB, which is why I led the charge on him.

That being said, I don't think all citizens should immediately vote for yaku. This is an opportunity to try a split vote and find a bit more information, especially since Bernie will be free to organize the voting piles as he sees fit for 1 more round. I'm sure there's a logical way to do it such that we can narrow the search down further, but it's late enough and I'm sleep deprived enough to not be able to figure it out.

Good luck, cits.

/waits patiently to be beheaded

---

Either way, one of a few things I feel need to happen for next game:
Any person can claim any role (like mafiascum) is in the game, and then individuals have to beleive who they want to beleive, or take out the angel like mafia before, or change the rule like MM has it (don't like this particular one because it gives the seer an extra investigation).

Note to self (for future games): If I am close to being lynched, and I am any role, make a post saying "I strongly suggest you lynch ____" so as not to get killed if I am almost positive that person is a wolf.

Oh and by the way:
I strongly suggest you lynch PD, and angel, save me

If I had actually kept up with the past few games, I would have realized this trend of shaving the fine line between claiming and practically posting investigation results, I would have tried to say something along the lines of "PD is not technically claiming, he is clearly lying just to get me lynched, and to save himself. Don't listen to him, listen to me. I strongly suggest you lynch him, and angel save me." But I had to go to a softball game and as I was writing my long post responding to PD's WW6 accusation, I saw what he wrote in big bold letters and got ****ed, because he is clearly trying to bend the rules (No offense, PD, you know I love you). The sad thing is, I wish I had thought about doing a "practically almost a claim."

I know this could have waited, but again, given the way this game is going, I figured I would post this now, as I feel it needs to be addressed. MM, if you want to bar me from the next game because of it, that's fine, I just felt that given the current game state and loophole in the rules that has caused the line between actually claiming and revealing scry targets to be eliminated (which seems against the spirit of the game given the current rules - see 2 cop scenario) it needs to be addressed immediately.

/end tirade, because yeah I am bitter because I thought I was gonna get myself out of my screw up with Fwy and TMB, and because I felt I destroyed people's suspicions about me (save the typo thing, which was an honest mistake).

quote:

---

Originally posted by ryan2754:
...I saw what he wrote in big bold letters and got ****ed, because he is clearly trying to bend the rules (No offense, PD, you know I love you). The sad thing is, I wish I had thought about doing a "practically almost a claim."...

---

As long as the seer is permitted to drop hints about his role and an angel has unlimited saves, the situation you are describing will continue to happen--although I am not saying it is happening right now. The line between hint and admission is fuzzy and highly subjective. As is the line between suggestions and lies.

Consider, WRT to the seer role, I either have it or I don't have it. If I have it, I technically haven't revealed anything, if I don't have it, I technically haven't falsely claimed to have it... all I've done is make strong suggestions.

So is the game broken? No of course not, because from this point forward more people will start to make "strong suggestions" no matter what their role is and the MOTL house rules will move closer to the real-world rules in every respect. In the future an Angel will have a moment's pause to consider if he or she *believes* the hinting player. Players may start using "strong suggestions" to bait the wolves. I think this could lead to interesting games.

BTW, the other MOTL-only mechanic, the secret ballot by PM, also has drastic effects on the game... in mafia votes are supposed to be public, where you vote is where you vote--the GM tallies votes directly from the thread, not from private messages. A lynch occurs the MOMENT there is a majority (>50% of the surviving public). PM votes creates players who never have to post, people who declare a vote or a vote switch and then forget to "send it in", and a layer of subterfuge where we declare one way and vote the other (this last bit, I admit leads to interesting games).

Either way it doesn't really matter to me because this is my last game. But I encourage you guys to go over the game mechanics after this game. You *cannot* stop hinting, you can only force the hinter to be more and more subtle, and that way lies madness--people are going to continue to find ways to hint.

If I *were* the seer, I would have had a conversation with MM where I would have encouraged him to make a ruling, and by which I would abide in the interest of not ruining his game. No doubt he would eventually do so and the results of his meditations would be shortly announced. All a GM would have to do is say "in my opinion so-and-so has revealed and there can be no save" and the issue would be resolved--although it could potentially in the future lead to arguments about what does and what does not constitute a reveal, since it is entirely subjective when you are talking about hints.

Therefore if hinting is allowed, and the angel has unlimited saves, you have 2 cops, as ryan notes--unless the angel is asleep at the keyboard, which happened in WW6 when the seer (GLE) dropped strong hints and last game when the seer (Thanos) dropped strong hints.

If the angel is permitted one save per player, a "near-reveal" guarantees a save (=extra round for the cits), and guarantees an extra name for the seer. That's a pretty big bonus to the cits. It's up to you guys (and MM) to decide if it is *too* much of a bonus.

If you think it is too much, what are some possible solutions?

(1) Angel is revealed to the wolves if he actually makes a save, but not to the cits. "Your kill is thwarted by Thanos, who drives you away from Ecto's house." Under such a mechanic the angel may choose not to save a strongly hinting seer--the information has already been imparted, and to save him costs the cits both of their special players. This makes the angel (like the seer) a one-shot deal, only one save per game at best.

(2) Get rid of the angel. We haven't had a save in like forever anyway.

Anyway, all interesting discussions. But AFAIC, all purely hypothetical. All I've done is made strong suggestions--I could be a wolf, I could be a seer or angel, or I could just be a cit who is REALLY CONVINCED he's found a wolf. It's up to everyone else to decide what it means.

I realize you're all omg I can't believe everyone doesn't agree with me all the time... but come on dude. Stop being a small child about it.

EDIT: I guess Ryan is the way to go.

__________________
Originally posted by GLE:
And man... what happens when we get past 300 GDs? Will we need a second MOTL?

And then past 300 MOTLs... we'll need a new internet!

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
Just because you're butthurt PD doesn't mean you gotta try and kill the game. Some of us are still trying to play it. Can you please actually PLAY the game?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
I realize you're all omg I can't believe everyone doesn't agree with me all the time... but come on dude. Stop being a small child about it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
Just because you're butthurt PD doesn't mean you gotta try and kill the game. Some of us are still trying to play it. Can you please actually PLAY the game?

I realize you're all omg I can't believe everyone doesn't agree with me all the time... but come on dude. Stop being a small child about it.

EDIT: I guess Ryan is the way to go.

---

I'm extremely disappointed in you HilikuS, that was TOTALLY uncalled for. Perhaps it's time to shut down WW and Mafia. I'll have to converse with Jeff about it.

Thanks,
Jazaray

__________________
A Plastered Dragon Original Limerick:
There was a nice lassie named Jaz
Many wished to have what she has,
A delicate face,
A soft warm embrace,
And a whole lot of bedroom pizzazz.

WeedIan: Jazaray is like MOTL's Mom.