D
Daz
Guest
You're still allowed to nominate someone yourself, and attempt to convince people to vote for that person instead of yourself.Man. Guess that means I'm out, then?
You're still allowed to nominate someone yourself, and attempt to convince people to vote for that person instead of yourself.Man. Guess that means I'm out, then?
If I am going to be honest, my main suspect is now @Kiilgore. Anyone who tries to lynch the mayor is trouble.
I have tp go with @Dipper and @Kilgore. You have been the ones to initate the lynches earlier this game. ( And @Kilgore seems to have a thing against anyone who lurks.)
as far as possibilities go,
A is correct
B is partially correct. the escort roleblocks, the doctor doesn't roleblock.
C is also a correct possibility
D is incorrect. Both CAN'T be roleblocked. only one roleblocking role is in the game.
however, the Doctor CAN protect the attack target, thus effectively making it a no-kill. (but that isn't a roleblock so to say. since the attack is still technically being done.)
So our only real lead is towards the inactives currently?
Basic principle is still correct even if the technicalities aren't.
And yep, that's our only lead.
I mean- I guess we can nominate one of the Afks.
First Lynch: was following our only lead, and your idea no less.Yeah.... Might as well follow our lead that we have...
nominate: @thatguyinthestore
So tigertruth it seems to be then? I mean... it is a nominate system, meaning for the lynch to actually happen, we need to wait until the nomination time ends... Unless if well, daz says 'okay. that's enough people nominating the same person' and ends the day phase early, but I doubt that he'd do that....
... I am debating if we should even nominate anyone.
Was it because he revealed?but my views have changed
You may not have known he was mayor, but you did have suspicions on him. @Kiilgore
Well then how do we proceed? To be honest I feel like all we can do is put our best guesses out there for discussion and hope to prove them or eliminate them. I don't have a better idea, so if someone else does, the floor is theirs. XDWhile I do have my own suspicions, they're unfounded for now. No evidence.
Honestly, all we can do is round up everyone involved and put our heads together. There really isn't a lot to go on, with our mafia either being good at hiding, or distant from the goings-on in this thread.Well then how do we proceed? To be honest I feel like all we can do is put our best guesses out there for discussion and hope to prove them or eliminate them. I don't have a better idea, so if someone else does, the floor is theirs. XD
I mean- I guess we can nominate one of the Afks.
Yeah.... Might as well follow our lead that we have...
nominate: @thatguyinthestore
Well, here goes. I nominate @tigertruth . I haven't seen them post recently.
Yeah, agreed; I vote to lynch @tigertruth
I'm a bit hesistant about random lynches, but given they haven't been contributing anyhow, I also vote for @tigertruth .
... I am debating if we should even nominate anyone.
)So tigertruth it seems to be then? I mean... it is a nominate system, meaning for the lynch to actually happen, we need to wait until the nomination time ends... Unless if well, daz says 'okay. that's enough people nominating the same person' and ends the day phase early, but I doubt that he'd do that....
It would point towards the tradegy the most. Which would be one mafia if we are correct.... But otherwise the stay out of the Lynch thing doesn't work out...For all we know, our mafia could have been silent on the matter of lynching entirely to avoid drawing attention.
Well, who is it? It could lead to discussion on them which could prove (or clear) your suspicions.While I do have my own suspicions, they're unfounded for now. No evidence.
That's an incredibly thoughtful answer, and I'm inclined to agree.@Dipper
Fairly certain there're two mafia. Although with you ruled out, that's a 2 in 5 chance for a correct vote. From my perspective, a 1 in 2 chance. I'm inclined to think doc is no longer around, although if they are, here's hoping they know to heal you.
I understand rooting out those advocating most strongly. Although as it stands, judging by Kiilgore's reactions (especially after Hawk directed suspicion towards them), well... I'm acting on gut feel, and I don't necessarily trust my gut feel as it's no more correct than a typical assumption, but from the beginning Kiilgore's been helpful and... solicitous, I suppose. Could be one of those more uncommon cases where mafia present themselves in seeming like one of the townies from how active and concerned they are, but I see it as Kiilgore has simply been contributing as best as they can, without any indication of treachery (unless someone would like to demonstrate otherwise).
Starlighter's been a tad less 'active' in that sense, mainly focused about highlighting suspicions which is all fair and good, and a common enough approach. It's not the hardest thing to do in order to pretend your innocence, but...
The one who seems most suspicious to me as it stands is Hawk, undoubtedly. Aggressive at points, quick to lynch just as Kiilgore was, but in attempting to direct the blame to Kiilgore when there were several of us who just as strongly held suspicions regarding Dipper... that earned my attention. It went from 'not sure who to vote' (typical mafia trying to avert attention from themselves by pretending their lack of desire to mislynch) to 'you tried to kill the mayor, you're my main suspicion' (not the strongest argument in order to prove someone's guilt; even if Kiilgore initiated that vote, that comment reeks of desperation to buy time by averting the attention from yourself ESPECIALLY when you, another suspicious target, also assisted in attempts at that lynch, along with several others who could be just as guilty from a logical perspective. From my understanding, as someone who was so 'certain' that Dipper was mafia only to be proven otherwise, naturally you would not want to make such a sure statement following what was close to being a huge error that you had contributed to... and yet Hawk was quickest to act otherwise).
I think it's important to also consider relationships between players in general. Mafia tend to either associate with one another, defending each other's views, defending one another from suspicion and following in on their mislynches, or disassociate completely (followed by betrayal or a general lack of care if suspicions are directed at one mafia, so that they other may divert suspicion from themselves in future and win the game for the both of them). Given the friction between Killgore and Hawk, I am hugely inclined to think one of them is innocent, or they are both innocent and misguided in their opinions of one another. I can't perceive mafia actually disagreeing like that, not in the least (unless scripted - why direct suspicions at each other however?-, and I think I am right in saying that mafia know each other and do associate privately, in order to determine their victim). So on this basis, given I am more wary of Hawk's erratic behaviour in general, he is without doubt my greatest suspicion as of current and I'll likely be changing my vote to him.