There's been a dozen times when I feel like voting you, but decide against it because "that's just too dumb, can't be scum", and if I start a train on you, chances are it won't stop.
You just used doubting your assigned role and the likelihood of being a lunatic as an excuse to target Banana.
BGs get no feedback unless they save their target, and that's assuming you aren't a lunatic. Why would you try to make it sound like a drug dealer is the most likely case?
And then there's this:
Sounds like genuine scum self-awareness.
-vote Varcron
Sen is so wishy washy with that vote today
Originally Posted by BananaCucho
Piss off:
To recap:
He said that he visited you because he thought he was a lunatic vigilante. just some minutes later, he claims to assume that his rolecard was correct. Furthermore, he doesn't even know what the feedback of his supposed rolecard is.
Spoiler : Okay :
First you claimed to take the dumbest night action because of the assumption that you could be a lunatic vigilante and didn't want to risk it.
Right after it, you said that you assumed that you are the role that you were given (you claimed having a bg card).
So what is it? Do you trust your rolecard, and thus should have targetted a proper town player to protect them, and decided not to?
Or do you think you're a lunatic vig as you first claimed? And if so, why would you claim to expect bodyguard feedback that you would only get if someone shot Banana?
First you say that you doubt your card, then you say you assume it's correct, and say that there must be a drug dealer stealing your information.
None of it makes sense, no matter where you look it from.
I trusted my rolecard however suspected otherwise, so a 50/50 if you could call it that. It kind of makes sense as I would rather if it were the 50 I didn't want I would have shot Banana (an easy mislynch and y'alls scumread) but if it were the 50 I did want it would have just been protection
No, I don't.
Besides the train hopping and other questionable action from yesterday, none of your claims make any sense: first outing yourself as a bg on d1, then protecting the scummiest player around, and finally saying that there must be a drug dealer because you didn't get feedback as a bodyguard.
And here we go again; I explained multiple times that everyone should assume being town-aligned regardless of their rolecard. "I have the tinniest chance of being this specific role" will never be a valid excuse for anything. Not after how many times I mentioned this, including the times when I did it as a direct quote to you.
@deathworlds
Just to clarify:Rage in Grief: Upon the death of a Occult Leader, Cult Leader, Jester King, Serial Killer, Witch, Mass Murderer, Ritual Killer, or Drug Dealer. A random Lunatic that is a Sinister receives information that somewhat confirms their alignment.
You use "Upon the death" which I take to mean "immediately following." One could argue that receiving that information and the end of the night would still be "upon"
If I replaced "Upon the death" with "Immediately following" would that be correct?
Well, I'll be back once y'all start typing again.
Welcome goofy pringles
Hello guys! So, first of all: this is the craziest day 1 I've ever seen, minus perhaps one game on Mafiascum where 13 players posted 2x more than 50 players (in another game) in the same time lapse...
Second thing: I was visited last night. I recieved no feedback from it. As for the rest of my feedback, I'll wait on the host's reply to my question before talking about it, but there's something else
Third thing: Everyone should reveal if their cell was visited last night (or not visited). That will greatly help everyone figure things out.
Have you recieved anything interesting recently @Light_Yagami ?
Oh wait, I am utterly stupid lol, I just realized something. Don't ask me what it is, I will reveal it if I deem it is pro-town to do so.
By the way, I really think Light is town, as painful as it is to say...
beep beep choo choo-vote VarcronI didn't like him yesterday, both because of gut and because his "oppressive veterans" thing works well as a way to not contribute... It looks like there was the beginning of a train against him, so I'm adding pressure here. I didn't read everything yet, though, so my mind may change.
I really like Cucho. It's a mix of the following: I like the fact he's pulling gambits and that it actually helps town, and I like that he's putting himself in a bad light under the public eye by doing so. I also think (although that's a personal interpretation that could be totally wrong) that he prefers scum to town, and that when he's town, he tries to make things interesting with the gambits. Of course, this doesn't exclude the possibility of him doing scum gambits, but the one he pulled this game was pro-town IMO, and it worked.
Sen is a slot I honestly believe I'm not competent enough to read. He has been sticking to absolutely logical posts, most of them making sense, but he hasn't really been scummy. Perhaps a slight town read because he looked town-tunneled on Cucho earlier, but that could be mimicked by scum!Sen, especially with the amount of experience and skills he seems to have.
Cucho I can agree with, however I don't really think that we should rule him out as scum yet simply due to the extensive amount of wolfing from yesterday (from a prot role I don't personally believe that that was a smart play on his part)
I'm going to highlight a little spot here I want to touch on
I think that Sen could potentially be using those logical plays as scum with a greater likelihood than town. HOWEVER, I also think that there could always be a chance he is town, therefore I will not apply pressure on the slot at this point until we see moreOriginally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall
He has also been very wishy woshy with his vote already today.
Mhmm, fair, especially since we had Banana the Red Knight yesterday, and that... there's no damn reason to scumread Banana outside of "unorthodoxy", which is, according to Varcron's principle, not something that should be scumreadable.
HMMMMMMM? I'm pretty sure you did say it, and I even noted that you had pushed Banana in contradiction with what you claim to be your principles. I'll look at your ISO and try to find a post proving you wrong