- Messages
- 11,371
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just as a point, muted players are allowed to vote "No Vote" so they can keep track of voting. Vash and I tested this out last game.
Why not just click View Results thoughJust as a point, muted players are allowed to vote "No Vote" so they can keep track of voting. Vash and I tested this out last game.
Meanie buttface. I could read faster if I wasn't getting tagged so much!![]()
this is the question I keep asking and no one ever answersWhy not just click View Results though
I don't think people realized you canthis is the question I keep asking and no one ever answers
Maybe cause you have to click it each time you visit the thread and as such it's less convenient.this is the question I keep asking and no one ever answers
cuz I'm fucking lazyWhy not just click View Results though
But he wasn't actually thread banned. Was he temporarily to see what it looked like?Vash and I tested this out last game.
YesBut he wasn't actually thread banned. Was he temporarily to see what it looked like?
YeahBut he wasn't actually thread banned. Was he temporarily to see what it looked like?
I say we thread ban the Cupid to test it out.But he wasn't actually thread banned. Was he temporarily to see what it looked like?
Unless we are dealing with a Corrupter who hit someone who was protected. Now that we have hit Day 2, Beast Hunter traps are in play too.Hmmm that'd probably be allowed so he can watch the votes. But surely if they could mute they'd have done it day one?
Ah how the creations turn on their creatorI say we thread ban the Cupid to test it out.
what say you, Zell?
If you claimed Cupid and YOU of all people are Corrupter, this would be legendary.
Not anyone.Next game I'm a townie again I'm just gonna claim a role I'm not just to see what happens. You people will believe anyone as long as they claim something
There's still time todayNext game I'm a townie again I'm just gonna claim a role I'm not just to see what happens. You people will believe anyone as long as they claim something
An interesting change in philosophy from yesterdayJust in case I don't get back here before 9 and the day closes;
I'm going to listen to the masses and put my vote on GwJumpman. I can't say I really have anything to go on explicitly, but it seems we're trusting everyone's role claims for the most part so I'm not going to deprive the town their blood.
Sorry, buddy.
I didn't realize it until I ran a game and knew everyone's roles from the start, but townies fake claim SO MUCH. So yeah feel free.Next game I'm a townie again I'm just gonna claim a role I'm not just to see what happens. You people will believe anyone as long as they claim something
There were only enough votes about thirty minutes before the end of the day, weren't there? So that's not much of a justification.In my defense, there were enough votes to vote out Jawneh and my logic on Tommy day 1 I think was still rational. Being someone to vote for a wolf doesn't mean you're not a wolf and the reverse is also true.
Speaking of - you've been unusually quiet and indecisive about suspicious people yet you're on every bandwagon.I didn't realize it until I ran a game and knew everyone's roles from the start, but townies fake claim SO MUCH. So yeah feel free.
I was watching until the night ended, so there was enough time. I didn't need to make the decision because enough votes were made.There were only enough votes about thirty minutes before the end of the day, weren't there? So that's not much of a justification.
If this is the case and everybody's lying, any of you people out there that are using not claiming a role as justification as sus as fuck then.I didn't realize it until I ran a game and knew everyone's roles from the start, but townies fake claim SO MUCH. So yeah feel free.
You and Kat nowSpeaking of - you've been unusually quiet and indecisive about suspicious people yet you're on every bandwagon.
Jumpman aside, who is suspicious to you?
I was asking Kat and seeing as you unquestionably trust some of my top suspects, it's an interesting take.You and Kat now
I have no idea what kind of 5D chess you're playing but my chess takes place in only the 1st dimension. I don't have enough familiarity with you all to be able to pick out all the common habits and inside references so I'm just going by what I've been able to pick up in just a few games of playing. I see people keep relying on role claims to determine who's trustworthy or not, now I'm being told by a game runner that people lie all the time even on the townie side.I was asking Kat and seeing as you unquestionably trust some of my top suspects, it's an interesting take.
OK in all seriousness though I'm really not gunna let this go. We can also deal with this tomorrow, but no reason not to get a head start.
Tubby is clearly muted or bluffing. We all don't want to role reveal, and we all call people sus for trying to call for a role reveal, but I'm doin it. If there is a Librarian, step forward.
Reasons for this:
If someone comes forward and admits to muting Tubby, we believe that person, but also make the person agree to not use the ability for the rest of the game, as randomly muting targets have no benefit when you're a townie. I understand the role of Librarian, but in this political climate, there's just no reason for a townie to shoot in the dark and basically guess who to mute. That seriously fucks things up. I'm willing to hear arguments on how this mechanic can benefit the town, but so far it does nothing but prevent someone potentially vital to assisting the town. In my opinion, risking randomly muting a townie is worse than successfully muting a wolf. The odds are too low, and there's little payoff because they can still participate in their nightly chat and vote.
If the Librarian that comes forward agrees and someone else is muted the following day, then either the person that came forward or the second person muted is bluffing, and we can reduce our odds of someone lying down to 2 players.
I understand I'm going unnecessarily hard in this department, but I would have been right last game, and I feel like I have a pretty reasonable proposal in this one. Totally cool if people aren't on board with this. But I think this is a lot more solid than just sussing out vibes waiting for a seer.
Or we'll have a different answer in just over two hours and Tubby will no longer be with us.OK in all seriousness though I'm really not gunna let this go. We can also deal with this tomorrow, but no reason not to get a head start.
Tubby is clearly muted or bluffing. We all don't want to role reveal, and we all call people sus for trying to call for a role reveal, but I'm doin it. If there is a Librarian, step forward.
Zell has preached from the beginning that the key to winning the game (for both sides) is role claiming. Some people will blatantly do it. Some people will drop hints. Some people will lie.I have no idea what kind of 5D chess you're playing but my chess takes place in only the 1st dimension. I don't have enough familiarity with you all to be able to pick out all the common habits and inside references so I'm just going by what I've been able to pick up in just a few games of playing. I see people keep relying on role claims to determine who's trustworthy or not, now I'm being told by a game runner that people lie all the time even on the townie side.
So now to me anyone that's using this logic of role claiming at all is now super suspect so that's why now you and Kat at least are suspicious to me
Tommy gave himself mute PTSD and nothing even happened to him
Maybe. But it's not night 1 anymore. I'm going to have to assume that at least some of the evidence presented so far is legit.An interesting change in philosophy from yesterday
If I was the Librarian I would not be able to resist muting you.
Why?i'm pretty sure i'm gonna be muted tomorrow
If I truly went with MY gut, I'd be voting for you.
because it would really annoy tommyWhy?
So I will relentlessly pursue him only to be wrong probablyWhy?