tsaephai2005-10-23 13:12:11
QUOTE(shadow @ Oct 23 2005, 09:10 AM)
Well the problem is though.. we might as well hit one of us, so that might not gain us anything either..  Time might be in our favour.. or not, that's the question.
210895
hmm...
yes, but when noone's doing anything(i think this last page has had little information in it) time isn't helping us because of the deadline there.
so it's much more helpful if we do get one of them, but if it's one of us then it's still a little helpful, though not nearly as much.
Unknown2005-10-23 13:24:04
The deadline is due to lack of discussion and is retractable.
Unknown2005-10-23 13:39:49
Well my vote stays at no lynch for now, I won't lynch someone just because I threw a dice and their number came up.
Cwin2005-10-23 13:40:45
There's not much information realy because there's a nolynch bandwagon. I bet if everyone who believes that we can wait another day before lynching voted No lynch then we'd hit 7 in a heartbeat. As such, for them, this day is over. Thus why only a few people are talking, accusing, and so forth, and why even the votes on people aren't causing a bandwagon like they normaly do.
I don't believe we can wait, which is why I voted. It's not from the gut and Quid explained the reason for the silence, but still, it's the best guess I have.
I don't believe we can wait, which is why I voted. It's not from the gut and Quid explained the reason for the silence, but still, it's the best guess I have.
Unknown2005-10-23 13:42:36
Yeah move those that haven't voted yet to no lynch and declare the day over.. nothing gained, nothing lost.
Unknown2005-10-23 13:42:47
QUOTE(Cwin @ Oct 21 2005, 12:19 PM)
Ahh, another day 1. I'm agreeing with Quidgy actualy, though I dislike the vote flingings: we do need to get people talking, and it's the votes that do that. On the other hand, I REALY got worried last game when a good 4 citizens had to rolecall, including the protector (which ended up having to protect themselves the whole game to survive). This game, I'm hoping they keep a low profile.
No gut instict, though, except that this game is hiding something VERY freightening: We don't even know WHO we're up against.
No gut instict, though, except that this game is hiding something VERY freightening: We don't even know WHO we're up against.
209309
QUOTE(Cwin @ Oct 21 2005, 12:23 PM)
After reading that post, I need to take my own advice.
FOS Shorlen I see you reading this: speak up.
FOS Shorlen I see you reading this: speak up.
209312
QUOTE(Cwin @ Oct 21 2005, 11:18 PM)
I still don't like the scryer to show up, but Revan makes sense. I KNEW Nars was Tainted because "I" was the scryer. Now that I think about it, if I had spoken out then the protectors (which we had a full one and a scry/protector) would've kept me alive. It would've made things ALOT easier.
Whoever is the scryer, don't call today, but call soon. That's my gut calling.
Also another thing my gut is telling me: Something is very wrong here.
unFoS: Shorlen vote: nolynch
Whoever is the scryer, don't call today, but call soon. That's my gut calling.
Also another thing my gut is telling me: Something is very wrong here.
unFoS: Shorlen vote: nolynch
209549
QUOTE(Cwin @ Oct 23 2005, 12:01 AM)
Last game everyone looked suspicious. Now everyone seems sensible.Â
It's true though: no lynching hurts in the long run. As such, I'll throw a vote: Laneth since Quid is the most suspicious at the moment. Throw a vote everywhere, then nothing. It's not solid evidence, but it's the best we got so far.
It's true though: no lynching hurts in the long run. As such, I'll throw a vote: Laneth since Quid is the most suspicious at the moment. Throw a vote everywhere, then nothing. It's not solid evidence, but it's the best we got so far.
210376
Alright, I've gone back and had a look and, while I think everyone is doing a good job of keeping their profile fairly low, Cwin jumps out at me (a little more than Tsaephai, who I FoS for the confusing and non-sensical ramblings).
Cwin starts off agreeing that we need to lynch someone to get things moving, but tells me off for throwing votes around. Next post, Cwin points a finger at Shorlen him/herself.
A little while later with not much prompting it, Cwin starts going on about scriers and Revan, and then proceeds to pull a vote for me out of the woodwork. Now, granted, I have thrown votes around like the Queen giving away Knighthoods, but Cwin talks with me and then against me in one breath and does the same thing as me in another? It is too all over the place for my liking; at least my pointing had no reasoning at all behind it, until now .
Unknown2005-10-23 13:43:41
Ah of course, I forgot to Vote Cwin.
Unknown2005-10-23 13:49:52
Vote Count
Cwin: 1 Laneth
Laneth : 2 Shorlen, Cwin
Revan: 1 Iridiel
Tsaephai: 2 Kiarlea, Xenthos
Iridiel: 1 Revan
Kiarlea: 1 Tsaephai
No lynch: 3 Shadow, Vix, Tsuki
Not voting: Sylphas
With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch
Cwin: 1 Laneth
Laneth : 2 Shorlen, Cwin
Revan: 1 Iridiel
Tsaephai: 2 Kiarlea, Xenthos
Iridiel: 1 Revan
Kiarlea: 1 Tsaephai
No lynch: 3 Shadow, Vix, Tsuki
Not voting: Sylphas
With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch
Cwin2005-10-23 14:32:55
I never said I had very good reasoning. I prefer using logic or intuition and I don't have much of either at the moment.
I stand by my vote though unless someone looks more suspicious.
I stand by my vote though unless someone looks more suspicious.
Unknown2005-10-23 17:28:56
Each side waiting for the other to do something.. doesn't get us anywhere. Make up your minds people and let's get this day finally over with!
FoS: Tsaephai by the way.. looking back at past posts..
FoS: Tsaephai by the way.. looking back at past posts..
Sylphas2005-10-23 18:48:07
I haven't a clue at the moment, no one really jumps out at me yet as suspicious, and throwing my vote anywhere isn't really going to change anything. Normally, I'd be against it, but since we didn't lose anyone, we're not really losing as much from it as normal. Vote: No lynch
Kiarlea2005-10-23 22:00:36
If this were a real Mafiascum game, you'd ALL look suspicious for voting no lynch. Know why?
Cause even if we lynch an innocent, that's one less to worry about. That's one more who -is- an innocent. Isn't there some role that lets the scum recruit? That's one less person that could be recruited.
I'm not flaming anyone or being pushy. I'm saying this deadline is too far away and this is boring
Cause even if we lynch an innocent, that's one less to worry about. That's one more who -is- an innocent. Isn't there some role that lets the scum recruit? That's one less person that could be recruited.
I'm not flaming anyone or being pushy. I'm saying this deadline is too far away and this is boring
Kiarlea2005-10-23 22:01:25
That said, if two more people will vote no lynch, I will too just to get things moving again. *yawns*
Unknown2005-10-23 22:16:05
QUOTE(Kiarlea @ Oct 23 2005, 11:00 PM)
Cause even if we lynch an innocent, that's one less to worry about. That's one more who -is- an innocent. Isn't there some role that lets the scum recruit? That's one less person that could be recruited.
211036
There is? That's news to me..
Xenthos2005-10-23 22:18:45
There was in one previous game... Munsia the traitor, who if scried by the Soulless would have given the Soulless the option to convert her. But that was just one game, two games back I think- who knows if it made a reappareance here?
Unknown2005-10-23 23:10:00
We aren't told what roles are or are not included, and that is part of the fun of it. Adds more depth and possibility.
I also agree with Kiarlea in that voting no lynch is a suss action to me. The scum can afford to not kill anyone during the day, the rest of us can't.
I also agree with Kiarlea in that voting no lynch is a suss action to me. The scum can afford to not kill anyone during the day, the rest of us can't.
Unknown2005-10-24 00:22:44
I'm tempted to end the day right now.
Kiarlea2005-10-24 00:25:06
I'm going to make one last comment on the no lynching.
We can afford to lose an innocent. We can't afford to leave scum running around.
It sounds callous, but once more: a chocolate townie who's dead (that is, a good guy with no role) is better than an unknown SK/roled scum.
We can afford to lose an innocent. We can't afford to leave scum running around.
It sounds callous, but once more: a chocolate townie who's dead (that is, a good guy with no role) is better than an unknown SK/roled scum.
Unknown2005-10-24 00:28:26
QUOTE(Kiarlea @ Oct 24 2005, 10:25 AM)
I'm going to make one last comment on the no lynching.
We can afford to lose an innocent. We can't afford to leave scum running around.
It sounds callous, but once more: a chocolate townie who's dead (that is, a good guy with no role) is better than an unknown SK/roled scum.
We can afford to lose an innocent. We can't afford to leave scum running around.
It sounds callous, but once more: a chocolate townie who's dead (that is, a good guy with no role) is better than an unknown SK/roled scum.
211172
Exactly. C'mon people, start a bandwagon! Cwin or Tsaephai are my recommendations, I'll jump on the lynch for either.
Kiarlea2005-10-24 01:03:11
Tsae! He's already got two votes. Let's bandwagon away.
At least if we lynch him, we don't have to read his confusing posts anymore
At least if we lynch him, we don't have to read his confusing posts anymore