A Darker Shade of Black Mafia [6/14] Endgame:Rebuilding

[jonty125]

I don't get why Doom's plan requires the whole bote thing. Nothing says we can't just vote the people the normal way to apply the color pressure. Also, nothing in the original scene says the penalty is automatically death. It could be lost powers or lost votes or something. It's just implied that the consequences will be bad. How exactly are you coming up with death as the punishment Doom?

Are you willing to test it?

He asked a legitimate question. So answer it.

Sure, I'd be willing to test it. But that means that if I test it and don't die, you must have come up with some information about the rule that only the maker of the rule would know. And I would guess that the rule maker is anti town. I'd be perfectly willing to trade my life for an anti-town role. That's a good trade for me.

If people are in favor of this, I'd happily trigger the "bad consequences" whatever they may be.

I aren't. I think Doom just made an incorrect assumption (which still may be correct), breaking any other rule results in death, so why wouldn't this one - is the train of logic.

[kgb007]

there's only one way find out what happens if someone breaks the rule...let's stop all this speculation, it could be death, it could be lose of powers, etc.

i don't understand how we get any useful information on who the rule maker is if we break the rule, i read saf's post and found it to be comforting on the one hand that he'd supposedly volunteer since trading his life for mafia is good for us but i can't help but also think it could all be posturing..

can somebody explain what other information we might gain if we break the rule other than to find out the consequences? i'm all for breaking the rule if someone can explain the other benefits but if finding out the consequence is the only guaranteed take away, i'm not sure gambling with my townie life is worth it..we're already down 2 townies, after all doesn't this rule expire at the end of the day?

[safariguy5]

there's only one way find out what happens if someone breaks the rule...let's stop all this speculation, it could be death, it could be lose of powers, etc.

i don't understand how we get any useful information on who the rule maker is if we break the rule, i read saf's post and found it to be comforting on the one hand that he'd supposedly volunteer since trading his life for mafia is good for us but i can't help but also think it could all be posturing..

can somebody explain what other information we might gain if we break the rule other than to find out the consequences? i'm all for breaking the rule if someone can explain the other benefits but if finding out the consequence is the only guaranteed take away, i'm not sure gambling with my townie life is worth it..we're already down 2 townies, after all doesn't this rule expire at the end of the day?

Well really, I suppose the idea being that Doom has asserted all along that the penalty for breaking the rule is death. That's basically why he pushed the bote plan. What I'm saying is that it was never made explicit that the penalty is death. It's all just ambiguously "bad" things will happen. But somehow, Doom is sure that it's death.

So I'm volunteering to break the rule and see if I die. If I don't die, I'm going to vote Doom because his plan and interpretation of the rule all day has been rule break=death. Which means LAL and makes that as good a lynch reason as we've had all day.

[DoomYoshi]

So wait, I'm screwed either way?

If the penalty is death then I "knew" this all along and I am clearly the SK.
If the penalty isn't death then I am a liar.

wut



Is it death? I said is it death?

It is death.

[strike wolf]

Sigh my last comment didn't even generate discussion.

It's like certain self-inflicted acts that shall remain nameless Doom. You're damned if you do because that's lust. You're damned if you don't because that's sloth.

As far as testing the rule, I disagree that it should be Saf who tests it. If we test the rule, it should be used as originally suggested on someone who is chosen as a likely lynch candidate and only if they've already came out with an insufficient role claim.

[rishaed]

Vote Count:
aage (1) - DoomYoshi
DoomYoshi (3) - Jonty125, kgb007, Iron Butterfly

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch. Deadline is 2.9.13.

[anamainiacks]

So if the SK plays anything like I play SK (which is a big if and very much META based) he might have aimed for someone he found scummy.

That doesn't make sense... why would the SK target someone who was such a big lynch candidate? Why 'waste' a kill on someone when he's close to being taken down by the town? Unless you're saying you'd just want to eliminate as quickly as possible all your threats that can kill you at night?

Well really, I suppose the idea being that Doom has asserted all along that the penalty for breaking the rule is death. That's basically why he pushed the bote plan. What I'm saying is that it was never made explicit that the penalty is death. It's all just ambiguously "bad" things will happen. But somehow, Doom is sure that it's death.

So I'm volunteering to break the rule and see if I die. If I don't die, I'm going to vote Doom because his plan and interpretation of the rule all day has been rule break=death. Which means LAL and makes that as good a lynch reason as we've had all day.

This kinda sounds like a passive aggressive way to make sure we lynch Doom... And it raises my eyebrows as to whether that might actually be your agenda. Like Doom pointed out, this means that regardless of what happens to the colour namer, Doom must be lynched.

The way I see it, if the rulebreaker dies, then Doom is SK because he was way too sure about the effects of the rule. If the rulebreaker doesn't die, then Doom was just extremely foolish in assuming it resulted in death; no implications on alignment, and still could be any of the 3 (town, mafia, SK).

Like edoc and SW both mentioned, Doom's plan wasn't actually bad.

[jonty125]

Like edoc and SW both mentioned, Doom's plan wasn't actually bad.

I agree his plan, wasn't bad but his strawmanning on aage was.

If we test the rule, it should be used as originally suggested on someone who is chosen as a likely lynch candidate and only if they've already came out with an insufficient role claim.

I agree.

[strike wolf]

So if the SK plays anything like I play SK (which is a big if and very much META based) he might have aimed for someone he found scummy.

That doesn't make sense... why would the SK target someone who was such a big lynch candidate? Why 'waste' a kill on someone when he's close to being taken down by the town? Unless you're saying you'd just want to eliminate as quickly as possible all your threats that can kill you at night?

Well it's partially confidence. On night 1, I personally do not tend to worry about town locking in on me as possible scum. That comes more night 2 and especially later nights. I am more concerned with the possibility of mafia trying to target me at that point, so I take my shots at someone suspicious. You do bring up a good point. WIFOM argument might suggest that a newer SK might not be as confident about avoiding the early lynch and aim instead for someone who is not at the top of the town's radar.

[aage]

Well really, I suppose the idea being that Doom has asserted all along that the penalty for breaking the rule is death. That's basically why he pushed the bote plan. What I'm saying is that it was never made explicit that the penalty is death. It's all just ambiguously "bad" things will happen. But somehow, Doom is sure that it's death.

So I'm volunteering to break the rule and see if I die. If I don't die, I'm going to vote Doom because his plan and interpretation of the rule all day has been rule break=death. Which means LAL and makes that as good a lynch reason as we've had all day.

This kinda sounds like a passive aggressive way to make sure we lynch Doom... And it raises my eyebrows as to whether that might actually be your agenda. Like Doom pointed out, this means that regardless of what happens to the colour namer, Doom must be lynched.

The way I see it, if the rulebreaker dies, then Doom is SK because he was way too sure about the effects of the rule. If the rulebreaker doesn't die, then Doom was just extremely foolish in assuming it resulted in death; no implications on alignment, and still could be any of the 3 (town, mafia, SK).

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

On the SK night kill discussion, whenever I'm SK I usually let the mafia work for me the first few nights as the mafia let me work for them. Your day behavior shouldn't matter because you're lying anyway but if you kill the opposing anti-town faction too soon you'll end up in early game while too low on firepower to win. Town numbers will simply snatch victory from you. Killing DJ even though he was a likely lynch target can mean practically anything (I've known people to throw the player names into random.org) but the most likely conclusion is someone flying under radar.

[aage]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

[gregwolf121]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

as to the first part, i think its a bit more complicated than that, as we have mafia too, so the mafia could kill saf which would make us suspicious of Doom whether or not he is the SK, i would think that most of the more experienced players would realize this and kill someone else.

[aage]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

as to the first part, i think its a bit more complicated than that, as we have mafia too, so the mafia could kill saf which would make us suspicious of Doom whether or not he is the SK, i would think that most of the more experienced players would realize this and kill someone else.

I thought the mafia didn't make the rule, why should they be able to enforce it?

[TheForgivenOne]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

as to the first part, i think its a bit more complicated than that, as we have mafia too, so the mafia could kill saf which would make us suspicious of Doom whether or not he is the SK, i would think that most of the more experienced players would realize this and kill someone else.

I thought the mafia didn't make the rule, why should they be able to enforce it?

I believe he is referring to a night kill done by the maf.

[anamainiacks]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

as to the first part, i think its a bit more complicated than that, as we have mafia too, so the mafia could kill saf which would make us suspicious of Doom whether or not he is the SK, i would think that most of the more experienced players would realize this and kill someone else.

I thought the mafia didn't make the rule, why should they be able to enforce it?

I believe he is referring to a night kill done by the maf.

Hmmm... so if I understand correctly, aage was suggesting that the SK could decide on his punishment for the breach of the rule as and when it happened, based on who broke it?

[safariguy5]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

I don't think it would be proper to assume that the rule maker automatically has control. It's possible the rule breaking leads to an automatic trigger. Weren't there a few games with PR's where anyone who forgot the PR was automatically killed regardless of whether or not the rule maker wanted to kill them?

My issue isn't so much that Doom's plan was bad, but more that he seemed sure of the punishment for rule breaking. Perhaps it was a bit of a logical leap to assume that speculation on the actual punishment denoted prior knowledge of punishment, but the line of questioning that Doom posted a couple pages back I felt warranted a response from me.

[DoomYoshi]

good catch with the rule aage. It adds further evidence (already including the mod-confirmation of my plan) that the penalty is indeed death. If saf wants to trade lives, that's fine, I'm not a particularly important role.

I am going away for this long weekend, as I imagine many of us are. Enjoy yourselves.

[jonty125]

good catch with the rule aage. It adds further evidence (already including the mod-confirmation of my plan) that the penalty is indeed death. If saf wants to trade lives, that's fine, I'm not a particularly important role.

I am going away for this long weekend, as I imagine many of us are. Enjoy yourselves.

I aren't, what is this long weekend you speak of?

[kgb007]

labor day weekend, Monday is a holiday in the states

[rishaed]

good catch with the rule aage. It adds further evidence (already including the mod-confirmation of my plan) that the penalty is indeed death. If saf wants to trade lives, that's fine, I'm not a particularly important role.

I am going away for this long weekend, as I imagine many of us are. Enjoy yourselves.

I will remind everyone that the person with the most votes will be lynched and the deadline is the 2nd (Monday) I will postpone the deadline though so everyone can enjoy their weekends. Deadline moved to 4-5th ish. I'll decide when I see the amount of activity on Tuesday.

[safariguy5]

good catch with the rule aage. It adds further evidence (already including the mod-confirmation of my plan) that the penalty is indeed death. If saf wants to trade lives, that's fine, I'm not a particularly important role.

I am going away for this long weekend, as I imagine many of us are. Enjoy yourselves.

Did you deliberately skim his post? He said that the rule was taken from another game. rishaed's rule number 7 is "have fun".

unvote vote Doom

[aage]

good catch with the rule aage. It adds further evidence (already including the mod-confirmation of my plan) that the penalty is indeed death.

Not really... Only adds evidence that if you are right, your plan is bad. Plus it's not from this game. You try too hard.

[gregwolf121]

Meh, the certainty about death on break is such a rookie mistake I doubt Doom would actually make it. In the end, it's of course a big steaming pile of wifom but the whole thing is. If eg. the rulemaker has a choice, Doom will only live if he is the SK so I'm not so sure if conditionally lynching him is the right move.

That was poorly phrased and incomplete. I meant: if anyone other than Doom is the SK, he will kill Saf in order to make us lynch Doom. If Doom is the SK, he won't kill saf. I'm not sure if that's how player made rules work but I got this from the "play the mod" game:

7. It is up to you to enforce your own rules, if you want to "modkill" someone for breaking them, you must PM me a link to the exact post they made where they violated your rules, if you are correct I will post a "modkill".

as to the first part, i think its a bit more complicated than that, as we have mafia too, so the mafia could kill saf which would make us suspicious of Doom whether or not he is the SK, i would think that most of the more experienced players would realize this and kill someone else.

I thought the mafia didn't make the rule, why should they be able to enforce it?

I believe he is referring to a night kill done by the maf.

yes that was what i meant

[StubbsKVM]

Doom, you should probably claim if you want to stay alive.

[strike wolf]

I suppose it is. I guess we spent all our time pursuing Doom, I'm not sure we actually made real strides towards scum.