In that case we've got to discuss what happens when you get to endgame, assuming you get that far. As it is if we get to LYLO you'd be in prime position to win through supporting a scum quickhammer.

So, explain to me why we shouldn't lynch you in the early/mid-game to prevent that scenario and so that our (more important) lynches in the mid/late-game are focused on scum?

 

I'd also like to hear your thoughts on this MB. It's not an unreasonable concern.

---------- Post automerged at 11:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:16 AM ----------

From you Titus, I find that less then believable

 

I think it would depend on the quality of play that you see from me and everyone else. I have no idea when LYLO is and therefore have no idea when to quick hammer.

The other thing Lexi was upfront about is my role is extremely bastard. My win con can change at a moment's notice. Therefore I am extremely unlikely to quick hammer.

Thirdly, if I ever figure out where LYLO is, I play these games for maximum fun. If I win that is great. Don't get me wrong I always try to win but I will always choose the action that lets others/myself have more fun. Because ultimately that is what this game is about.

---------- Post automerged at 08:11 ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 ----------

Although that last sentence looks really scummy. Why aren't all lynches focused on scum? I know there is like no information now but lynches should be focused on finding scum IMO if town.

---------- Post automerged at 08:15 ---------- Previous post was at 08:11 ----------

Don't be sorry PoD. It is your play. However you have made it in my interests to hope you die. Nothing personal just trying to win

 

Lol. That is accurate. I am less concerned with direct claims and more concerned with why they acted.

 

I think covering all your bases is a scummy mindset.

 

There seems to be some hint or something (Dr. Whoves? and ?) about scum being able to choose their team (the horror). Is that a scum slip or ?

I'm not a fan of killing the survivor first mentality. Let's kill scum first and if we can't figure out a scum kill a lurker and\or no lynch. There have been 3 games on DLP that would have benefited a no lynch. Although, this game the scumminess is already showing itself so we probably won't have to worry about no lynch.

Anyway, time for some fun questions:

1. If you could be on a scum team with any 2-3 (4-5?) players in this game..who would you choose and why?
2. What are the possible third parties in this game and if you were a third party, what would your optimal course of action be?
3. How does town effectively combat the villany of the murderous scum and the infamy of the shadowy third parties? Things like group hug are not considered a valid answer because of the shanking factor.

 

Being risk averse isn't scummy or townie. We all know PR claimers are rarely lynched Day 1

Let's look at the pros and cons of that scenario. What ws the question?

---------- Post automerged at 09:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:17 AM ----------

1. No preference strategically. On an emotional level, I would want to coach Mathblade on being scum. Strategically, scum have a few roles to fill. If they don't overlap it's good.
2. Third Parties should keep their heads down and shut up. If there is a third party, sk variant.
3. Teamwork. We identify who is with us. We lynch who may not be. We definitely don't pray no matter how close our corporate overlords make the birth of my daughter to Jesus. We take control.

Your turn to answer.

 

1. I would be on a team with Titus or anyone any size. People keep thinking I am scum due to gambler's fallacy. I need a scum game eventually.
2. Me, myself, and I are a third party. I am performing my optimum fun strategy.
3. You can manipulate me. I am extremely susceptible to manipulation. I am definitely not a standard survivor.

 

Why did you feel the need to chime in without knowing the context?

 

That last sentence makes no sense on 3....WTF? Corporate overlords and pregnancy??! Sis...do we need to talk?

 

No. Keep that in mind. Snicker....


Blab, Answer context. You were implying all risk averseness is scummy.

 

Ok, I didn't want to imply that absolute.
Merely that covering your bases in response to a question is a defensive/scummy mindset.

Do you have an opinion about this specific case now?

I have never seen anyone saying something like that. Why say that in response to a question with whom you want to be scum?

 

I meant 'cover my bases' in terms of providing a full and expressive answer, not being defensive. Why on earth would I be defensive about a question to which I answered 'no, and I didn't want to anyway'.

I answered as well I could to a question that at best was pointless and at worst was a thinly-veiled dig at me not rolling scum yet. And you haven't answered my question yet, either.

 

I think people who wanted to play scum are more likely to be scum and that players who never played scum before are on average more likely to want to play scum. It's probably not much, though.

 

So, why did you ask this specific question and what kind of answers were you looking for?

What questions did he not answer? (I didn't notice any, but I did notice that he only denied the 'skittish' part of this and ignored the part about answering questions.)

If you are town, the best way to convince people of that is to scumhunt. So, don't just call me slippery with a funny analogy because anyone can do that. Ask me questions, try to get inside my head and show why my posts come from scum. Which posts specifically did you think were slippery/scummy? Why? Etc.

Vote: Aekiel
Vote: blab

Although I just played a bastard game a few weeks ago where someone was a hidden double voter only on certain unspecified days. He forgot to test it on day three and accidentally hammered scum. XD

Why fonti?

This worries me more than you as a survivor.

It looks like trying to lynch non-mafia today.

---------- Post automerged at 11:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:57 AM ----------

Getting a snowscum vibe btw.

 

I take Snowscum vibes very seriously Rubicon, what makes you say that?

 

That's... actually pretty much what I thought. I just went on to specify that I didn't have any particular desire to, and so didn't request it.

Thanks for answering, though. I can see why you asked it.

 

I asked him because I wanted to see how he would deal with the obvious implication.
And I wanted to ask somebody what he thought about him.
I don't really have answers I am looking for beforehand. I just analyze after.

And I actually am interested in analysing "who would pick what" because it's impossible to just forget it and nobody else mentioned it. Like, I can't just forget thoughts like "Would Rubicon really pick 1. option scum right after his absolutely dreadful scum-performance in WH4? (no offence)" or "Sloth mentioned several times he really really wanted to be scum against non-newbie people, hmmm".

 

@Rubicon
I think I actually really prefer to be town, at least on DLP, because. Reasons.

@Lyrium
<3

1. I'd be on a team with people who can read me like I'm a pop-up picture book.

2. Serial Killers? Jesters? Arsonists? Wow I wish I had remembered Arsonists were a thing, I'd totally have requested that. My course of action would depend on my wincon, which is very likely to not die? Maybe Jesters are present? Although I'd be really sad if everything suddenly went "boop game over" because a Jester was killed.

3. Scumhunting, same as always. I've only read one game with a third party in it, and nobody really cared about hunting them, so. Titus won that and it was beautiful. But MB is being pretty open about it here so there's really no harm in not killing her. Since she likely doesn't know who the scum are, she can totally be an honorary townie. With a certificate and everything.

 

Funny thing about that, I've been trying and getting hammered between you and fonti for my approach to scumhunting. I call you slippery for dancing around fontisian's questions yesterday in addition to not giving your own nearly-cemented opinion that I was scum until after I'd signed off for the IRL day and couldn't try to defend myself against that false accusation.

And this post rubs me wrong for the reasons fontisian covered immediately beneath it.

For whatever that is worth, thank you, too.

1. None? The previous time I played scum(one of Riley's Dresden games) it was a bloody disaster. If it ultimately mattered, then any of the stronger players so I could be guided out of major fuckups and actually have a chance to play competitively for once.
2, 1. No idea.
2, 2. Dig a hole and wait for someone else to commit some cardinal sin worth wagoning.
3. You/fonti/Rubicon/Citrus/Aekial tell me, my guesses so far have been nothing but one mistake after another.

---------- Post automerged at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:41 ----------

Welp, I just signed my own death warrant with that failure to look at how my words read in response to Lyrium's first question, since it can't be read in any other way but to appear as though I'm saying I'm a scum player when I'm not. Dammit Riley, even in non-Dresden games you still find a way to fuck me over.