301 replies to this topic

[Darkdragon]

Day Two: Flagpole Sitta

Since some people have asked, I will go ahead and clarify a couple points about the rules.

Rule 13 said:

These rules will not change through the game. Do not pester the host about changing any rules.

This rule is completely valid and in force. I will not be changing any rules for any reason. Everything has been laid out since the Confirmation & Discussion thread went up and if you had a question or issue with any rule, you should have addressed it with me before Day One started. There was plenty of time for any perceived problems to be brought to my attention at that time.

It appears that some folks are concerned about two of the rules in particular, so I will clarify them for you all right now. Just to make sure you completely understand. I don't want anyone to be confused by any of the rules, and if you have questions feel free to ask (but not in the Day 2 thread ). I will also be adding this section to the bottom of the first post in C&D for your reference.

Rule 3 said:

A game day will last until majority vote is reached up to a maximum of 72 hours. You may not vote in the first 24 hours. After the day has concluded, a night phase will commence, which will last a maximum of 48 hours. Night actions must be sent to the host in the first 24 hours of the night phase.

Some people seem to be confused as to why Day One was closed "early". It's pretty clear right here in the rule that once the majority is reached the day is over. Obviously, if majority vote happens while I am not around I won't be able to tally and lock the thread. I will not be locking the thread retroactively and deleting posts, so expect things to happen just as they did yesterday: If there is a majority vote when I am available to tally the votes, the day is over and the thread will be locked.

Rule 12 said:

You must vote in every Day Thread. Failure to do so will result in a 2-vote penalty at the start of the next day.

Another rule people seem to be struggling to understand for some reason. The penalty for not voting is incurred against players who fail to vote on a day where a conviction isn't reached. I know this is obvious to most of you, but there have been a few questions, so I thought I'd clear that up.
I thought it would be obvious, but just to make sure this is also clear: keep in mind that if you unvote, it is the same as not voting at all.

I hope any misunderstandings have been cleared up now, this isn't rocket science

Have fun everyone!


The Rules

• Each player will be given a character to play, who will be aligned with either the Town or the Scum. To win the game, the Town must kill off all the Scum, while the Scum must outnumber the Town. Any Third-Party (neutral) characters have their own win conditions as outlined in their roles.
  
• Each day you will be able to vote to lynch a player. Voting should be done in the following format; Vote: Character (Player). Similarly, unvoting is to be done in the format; Unvote: Character (Player). No other format will be accepted. A majority vote is required to lynch a player.
  
• A game day will last until majority vote is reached up to a maximum of 72 hours. You may not vote in the first 24 hours. After the day has concluded, a night phase will commence, which will last a maximum of 48 hours. Night actions must be sent to the host in the first 24 hours of the night phase.
  
• The alignment of lynched players, as well as those that died during the night, will be revealed at the beginning of the next day.
  
• You may not quote or pretend to quote anything sent to or from you in PM with the game host. This includes all the details of your character and role, as well as any night action results. Role claims and reporting of night action results are acceptable, but in your own words only. Do not attempt to use the structure of your role PM to your advantage.
  
• You may not quote PMs from other players. Quoting PMs from other players will result in a same-day 3-vote penalty against you for each incident.
  
• Do not play the game outside the day-thread and PMs. Similarly, do not post out of character inside the thread; you must always play the role given to you. Game tactics and roles may only be discussed in the game thread or via PM with other players. Private discussion is done at your own risk and should be treated as part of the game.
  
• Writeboards will not be used in this game. All communication is to be done in the game day threads and via PM.
  
• If you are dead, your game is over. You may not comment on the game to any living or dead players in any form. This includes posting, private messaging, direct chat, email or any other form of online or offline communication. Any information you had becomes void and may not be passed on. The same applies for living players making contact with those who are no longer playing, no matter what the stated purpose. Both situations can appear to be an attempt to gain information or cause influence that would be unfair to the remaining living players. Whether you are still playing or have already died, if you are contacted inappropriately, please notify the host immediately. Violation of this rule will result in instant mod-kill and probably something worse after the game.
  
• You may not edit your posts. Editing your post will result in a 2-vote penalty. This is your only warning.
  
• You must post in every Day Thread. Failure to do so will result in a 1-vote penalty at the start of the next day.
  
• You must vote in every Day Thread. Failure to do so will result in a 2-vote penalty at the start of the next day.
  
• These rules will not change through the game. Do not pester the host about changing any rules.
  
• If you encounter a problem or have a question, please contact the host using your role PM. All other forms of communications will be ignored.

The Host


Julia (Darkdragon)

The Living


Oscar (Hinckley)


Wild Dragon (Dragonator)


Dansmith IV (Dannylonglegs)


Patty (DarthPotato)


Carl (CallMePie)


Walter (WaterbrickDown)


Dave (Piratedave84)


Fred (def)


Cece (Cecilie)


Daisy (Scubacarrot)


Ginny (Captain Genaro)


Tammy (Tamamono)


Penny (VolcanicPanik)


Shadell (Shadows)


Billie (badboytje88)


Amy (iamded)


Katie (PsyKater)


Heather (fhomess)


Matilda (Zepher)


Sara (TheBoyWonder)


Jane (JackJonespaw)


Jimmy (JimButcher)


Mike (Bob)

The Dead


Zara (zakura) - Town - Killed Day One


Trisha (TrumpetKing67) - Town - Lynched Day One

[Tamamono]

What the hell was Trisha thinking, acting like that as town? If she wasn't telling some idiotic lie to get out of being lynched, then we just lost a semi-useful role/lunch, although we've rid ourselves of someone who would be near-impossible to read on lylo/mylo.

I don't think Zara's alignment is a real surprise, though. The odds of scum being daykilled were pretty low, and it's even lower for them to be godkilled.

Nice to see there were no nightkills, however. The only problem is whether it was caused by a protection, a block, or if, god forbid, a conversion went on.

However, the lack of any nightkills at all leads me to believe that the serial killer is a day killer (I can't really see a situation this size without at least two killing roles); either that or both killers were simultaneously blocked/their targets proteted.

[Hinckley]

Trisha did send me her lunch. It was an ice cream sandwich. Sorry Trisha. By the time I woke up and found your lunch you were already dead. So now I have two lunches. Unfortunately I wasn't able to use either or give either away, but hopefully I can do that tonight.

Our vigilante must work during the day. Kill Jane next, maybe? I thought Zara was a good target. No Scum kill during the night? Protector and blocker take note of that.

There's quite a bit of activity going on behind closed doors. A few people have contacted me and there's a lot to talk about but I wouldn't be surprised if at least one or more of those people are Scum. I have nothing to reveal at the moment. I think I'll eat my lunches now to make sure they're put to use in case the day ends without me knowing.

I'm quite busy at the moment so I'll post more in a minute.

[DarthPotato]

Well this is all very interesting. Trisha being Town is quite surprising, but did she really have a lie-detector role? I'm betting on no, and the reason I'm asking is just because it was such a confusing day yesterday. Personally, I still don't find Oscar too suspicious. Yeah, he lead the lynch on Trisha, but no Townie would make their voice that open, especially not on Day 1.

Tamamono, on 07 December 2012 - 04:54 AM, said:

However, the lack of any nightkills at all leads me to believe that the serial killer is a day killer (I can't really see a situation this size without at least two killing roles); either that or both killers were simultaneously blocked/their targets proteted.

This is an interesting theory. Probably not good for the Townies who have night actions, but I guess we'll see how today plays out.

[Tamamono]

DarthPotato, on 07 December 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

Well this is all very interesting. Trisha being Town is quite surprising, but did she really have a lie-detector role?

Trisha said herself that there was never any lie detector - the role she claimed was Schizo.

[DarthPotato]

Tamamono, on 07 December 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

Trisha said herself that there was never any lie detector - the role she claimed was Schizo.

Ah, okay. Sorry for the stupid question then, with everything going on yesterday it was hard to tell what was truth and what was lie.
Even though I didn't vote in time, I'm going to be honest now and say I probably would have gone for Trisha. Still, even with her gone there'll be less confusion.

[Hinckley]

What has the dog eaten?

VolcanikPanik said:

Here's my opinion, buddy boy. Right now you say I have short responses with little input. And there were many of us. So why would you just use your vote on someone you randomly picked?

So, Penny, what did you end up doing yesterday that was more helpful than Matilda? Did you do anything?

I'd also like to hear more from Jane. Your sheep vote following the dearly departed Zara was super lame.

[Tamamono]

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 05:29 AM, said:

What has the dog eaten?

I think the dogs ate Trisha...

[Dannylonglegs]

Wow, I just blinked after composing a response in my head. Boy do I feel foolish now.

Honestly, I'm not surprised about either of these revelations. What happened yesterday was ridiculous! I'm quite annoyed that she didn't clarify what was going on earlier. She had sooo many opportunities to avoid that chaos, but that's besides the point. After she explained to me in certain terms her role, I was convinced she was a Townie. (Which apparently she failed to do for Oscar and anyone else with whom she was in contact.) I should have fought for her to not get lynched more than I did, but A. I had no alternative, aside from a loose argument, based on what was possibly a mistake. and B. If she was still here now, her confusion would be almost as great a threat to us as the scum.

Trisha aside, Zara I also figured would be Town. No self respecting (or otherwise) scum team lets a member get killed by God.

I am somewhat surprised there was no night kill though. This probably means protection, but it could also mean the killer was blocked, or that there was a conversion though, which would stink.

[Hinckley]

Bad dog. Hedgehogs make much better pets but everyone loves dogs because they're so cute and dumb. They eat people. How's that for cute? Stupid humans...

I mean, nice humans.

Dumb dogs...

[JimButcher]

Well that sucks, but like I said, scum or dumb. Trisha was as much of a hindrance to the town as she would have been as an evil horse killer. If we hadn't lynched her yesterday, we'd still be wondering and wasting our time with her today.

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 05:05 AM, said:

Our vigilante must work during the day. Kill Jane next, maybe? I thought Zara was a good target. No Scum kill during the night? Protector and blocker take note of that.

What makes you assume it's the vig that's been day killing? We obviously didn't have a scum kill (or any kill) last night, so I'm led to assume that the scum killer is a day killer. Unless you know something we don't, Oscar?

I do agree with you about Jane, though. If I recall correctly, she made only one or two responses yesterday. When she voted for Trisha, her basis was agreeing with something Zara said, which had little substance itself. Jane said something along the lines of "yeah, I agree with what this person right before me said" (I will find the actual quote later).

In other news, my lunch that I was saving got stolen last night. Yes, I had a lunch. Had. Who would steal from a kid, though? People these days...

Hey, wait, how does Oscar have two lunches? Yesterday he seemed pretty confused at the whole lunch concept. Trisha did give him one, but what about the second one that he claims to have? That wouldn't happen to be from yesterday, would it Oscar? Or did you somehow manage to get someone else to give you their lunch, too?

[Hinckley]

Dannylonglegs, on 07 December 2012 - 05:35 AM, said:

I am somewhat surprised there was no night kill though. This probably means protection, but it could also mean the killer was blocked, or that there was a conversion though, which would stink.

It's odd to see your thought process progress. You start with the assumption the target was protected. I'm curious as to why that would be your first and most likely possibility.

Conversion is possible. It would be a risk to convert so early when nobody has yet established themselves as trustworthy. To be egotistical, the conversion targets would most likely be me or Fred. So watch the both of us for signs of conversion.

[Dannylonglegs]

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

What makes you assume it's the vig that's been day killing? We obviously didn't have a scum kill (or any kill) last night, so I'm led to assume that the scum killer is a day killer. Unless you know something we don't, Oscar?

How does a scum day-killer make more sense than a successful night-prevention or some form of conversion? When has there ever been a scum day-killer? I'd be pretty surprised if that were the case.

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 05:38 AM, said:

In other news, my lunch that I was saving got stolen last night. Yes, I had a lunch. Had. Who would steal from a kid, though? People these days...

Well that's interesting. I wonder if that was by a Scum role or a Town role? Thievery sounds scummy, but if the scum have lunches too it could be a useful role for the Town as well.

[Hinckley]

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 05:43 AM, said:

What makes you assume it's the vig that's been day killing? We obviously didn't have a scum kill (or any kill) last night, so I'm led to assume that the scum killer is a day killer. Unless you know something we don't, Oscar?

It may be obtuse, but I refuse to believe Zara was killed by the Scum. Why would they kill someone who made one post that basically demonstrated they hadn't paid attention. Perhaps a serial killer, but that would mean they would assume Zara wouldn't be protected. Do we have a day protector? Don't answer that...

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 05:43 AM, said:

Hey, wait, how does Oscar have two lunches? Yesterday he seemed pretty confused at the whole lunch concept. Trisha did give him one, but what about the second one that he claims to have? That wouldn't happen to be from yesterday, would it Oscar? Or did you somehow manage to get someone else to give you their lunch, too?

I stated clearly yesterday that somebody gave me their lunch. It was cookies. Did I not tell you this in our private talk? Maybe that's because I don't necessarily trust someone who I caught stalking me...although you had a legitimate non-Mafia reason for doing so.

[Shadows]

Disappointing results, but we have an entire day of conversation to consider before making a decision today, plus an entire night of actions and late-night lunches, I'm sure.

Reminder: This isn't the usual situation, you don't need to be quite as afraid to come forward with things you learn, we're actually at an advantage here. Since so many of us have lunches, as vague as their results may be, you can feel safe presenting what you learn without the fear of making yourself a target of the scum. Take advantage of that if you know something helpful, or even something confusing, it might take more than one of us looking at their results to piece together something useful.

That said, I saved my lunch until such time as I see an appropriate use, so today for me will be a matter of listening, learning, and hopefully analysing something from what is said.

Also, please don't be stupid today, townies. We don't need to make another mistake with our lynch, and the best way not to do that is for none of us to act suspicious. I know that can be rough, but really really try. For example, let's not make jokes about our roles or crazy claims. Look to day 1 and then don't do anything that happened there.

[DarthPotato]

Like others have said, I don't think there's a scum day killer. They could easily kill amore powerful Townie than Zara because there would be no chance of them being protected or watched. I'm thinking that our protector or blocker just used their role wisely last night.

[Hinckley]

Shadows, on 07 December 2012 - 05:51 AM, said:

Disappointing results, but we have an entire day of conversation to consider before making a decision today, plus an entire night of actions and late-night lunches, I'm sure.

Reminder: This isn't the usual situation, you don't need to be quite as afraid to come forward with things you learn, we're actually at an advantage here. Since so many of us have lunches, as vague as their results may be, you can feel safe presenting what you learn without the fear of making yourself a target of the scum. Take advantage of that if you know something helpful, or even something confusing, it might take more than one of us looking at their results to piece together something useful.

That said, I saved my lunch until such time as I see an appropriate use, so today for me will be a matter of listening, learning, and hopefully analysing something from what is said.

Also, please don't be stupid today, townies. We don't need to make another mistake with our lynch, and the best way not to do that is for none of us to act suspicious. I know that can be rough, but really really try. For example, let's not make jokes about our roles or crazy claims. Look to day 1 and then don't do anything that happened there.

I get all nervousy when you get all Town-helpy. More metagaming. Sorry. It just means I like you...

DarthPotato, on 07 December 2012 - 05:52 AM, said:

Like others have said, I don't think there's a scum day killer. They could easily kill amore powerful Townie than Zara because there would be no chance of them being protected or watched. I'm thinking that our protector or blocker just used their role wisely last night.

As previously mentioned, conversion is also a possibility.

[Shadows]

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

I get all nervousy when you get all Town-helpy. More metagaming. Sorry. It just means I like you...

Uh huh, and every time you get all nervousy because I'm trying to help the town, you get me killed. And we both end up town.

Sometimes I think you like me to death.

[Hinckley]

I forgot to mention, despite being disconcerted, I agree with Shadell. Even if you have results that are that of an Action, you can pretend they were a lunch.

Then again with this many lunches flying around, results may be easy to fake.

Or are they?

I'll tell you right now then: I have cookies and an ice cream sandwich. They both do the same thing. Give me a clue to the role the person has.

Shadows, on 07 December 2012 - 05:57 AM, said:

Uh huh, and every time you get all nervousy because I'm trying to help the town, you get me killed. And we both end up town.

Sometimes I think you like me to death.

Well, people change so I won't nervous you to death at this point. I'll just keep telling other people my suspicions and let them decide if I'm being a typical dipshit and let them like you to death if I'm actually right.

[Dannylonglegs]

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 05:45 AM, said:

It's odd to see your thought process progress. You start with the assumption the target was protected. I'm curious as to why that would be your first and most likely possibility.

Conversion is possible. It would be a risk to convert so early when nobody has yet established themselves as trustworthy. To be egotistical, the conversion targets would most likely be me or Fred. So watch the both of us for signs of conversion.

Well, the way I see it is of the three most likely (and probably only) things that could have gone down last night, conversion is somewhat unlikely because of the timing. As you yourself suggest, no one had a particularly strong influence on the Town yesterday, and therefore, there wasn't much of a point to a conversion. A successful block is also unlikely, as the role is essentially a shot in the dark. (or rather the prevention of one.) If the blocker doesn't block the killer then there's a night kill. A protection seems to be the most likely by far. Night one kills are usually meta. By that logic, so too should Night one protections be. If the protector accurately guesses the most likely target (the best meta target who would be least likely to be protected), then the kill is foiled. At-least that's what I figure.

Also, I'd like to congratulate myself on successfully surviving day one without dying!

[Hinckley]

Jimmy, this is what made you suspicious of Jane:

JackJonespaw said:

I've been trying to follow this conversation as best I can, and what Zara has said makes the most sense in the shortest time. To me, it seems that Trisha is trying too hard with ridiculous stories about "inventions" so that she can remain seen as innocent.

Vote: Trisha (TrumpetKing67)

I think this cookie deal has gone on a bit too long, and gotten a bit too much out of hand.

So suspicious in fact, you told me in private that if Trisha was Town, Jane just had to be Scum.

Jane seems pretty lazy to me here, but I don't think she's definitely Scum just because Trisha turned up Town. I don't follow your logic.

Dannylonglegs, on 07 December 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:

Also, I'd like to congratulate myself on successfully surviving day one without dying!

Good job.

Trisha sent me a list of suspicions before she died. For what it's worth:

Sara
Wild Dragon
Fred

I don't necessarily agree, especially the Fred one ... though I've been wrong in the past.

She said Tammy may be pulling a Darth Potato. Whatever that means.

[JimButcher]

Dannylonglegs, on 07 December 2012 - 05:48 AM, said:

How does a scum day-killer make more sense than a successful night-prevention or some form of conversion? When has there ever been a scum day-killer? I'd be pretty surprised if that were the case.

Umm... how does it not make sense? Just because it hasn't happened in previous games... of life doesn't mean it will never happen. If you have that mentality about these types of situations then how can anything ever be possible? I suggest you consult the 'day killer' entry on the encyclopedia for these games... of life.

And why would that surprise you? Why have you been assuming that the target was blocked or protected? It's the simplest solution (something about a razor...) to assume that there was a scum day kill.

I'm not saying that there's no possibility of the day killer being the vig, I just think it's strange that that we had no kill last night. Yes, block/protect/conversion are possibilities, but the likelihood that one of those people chose wisely is very slim. And if it was our blocker, then I hope he or she can come forward with whoever they blocked so we can lynch the killer. Preferably without revealing their role, but results are results...

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 05:49 AM, said:

It may be obtuse, but I refuse to believe Zara was killed by the Scum. Why would they kill someone who made one post that basically demonstrated they hadn't paid attention. Perhaps a serial killer, but that would mean they would assume Zara wouldn't be protected. Do we have a day protector? Don't answer that...

Refuse to believe? Now that's close-minded. We must consider all possibilities, and if we can't do that we might as well be doomed...

I've noticed that quite a few of you are quick to automatically dismiss even the slightest possibility of the day killer being scum....

Quote

I stated clearly yesterday that somebody gave me their lunch. It was cookies. Did I not tell you this in our private talk? Maybe that's because I don't necessarily trust someone who I caught stalking me...although you had a legitimate non-Mafia reason for doing so.

No, you told me in private that Trisha gave you her sprinkled cupcake. Did you mention cookies yesterday in public? I must have misunderstood, and thought you were referring to Trisha's lunch. I will have to go back to confirm this.

Shadell, I'm not so sure about putting all of our lunches on the table, so to speak. We are at an advantage now, you're correct, but doing what you suggest seems like an easy way for the scum to get all of the info quickly, as well...

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 06:03 AM, said:

Jimmy, this is what made you suspicious of Jane:

So suspicious in fact, you told me in private that if Trisha was Town, Jane just had to be Scum.

Jane seems pretty lazy to me here, but I don't think she's definitely Scum just because Trisha turned up Town. I don't follow your logic.

Don't put words into my mouth, I said I was fairly sure that Jane was scum. And why are you calling me out on this now? I was agreeing with one of your suspects that you told me in private. Heck, I don't even need the private conversation as proof, you said today, right here, that the day killer vig should aim for Jane. What makes me suspicious of Jane? I'll ask you the same question. But since you asked first:

As I said before, Jane's lazy response is an indicator to me of scummy behavior. She literally picked the response before her (which was lazy and didn't add much to the conversation to begin with), and simply said "yeah I agree", and voted. Considering the fact that Trisha was town, I'm more than certain there were at least some scum on the bandwagon yesterday. This response struck me as particularly scummy.

[DarthPotato]

Hinckley, on 07 December 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

She said Tammy may be pulling a Darth Potato. Whatever that means.

I think she's referring to Police Infiltration (whatever that is...).
I think it's interesting that she was suspicious of Sara and Wild Dragon, because they didn't do much yesterday. Unless that's the point... Wild Dragon didn't even vote. Did she talk to any of these people in private to back up her suspicions?

[Hinckley]

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

Umm... how does it not make sense? Just because it hasn't happened in previous games... of life doesn't mean it will never happen. If you have that mentality about these types of situations then how can anything ever be possible? I suggest you consult the 'day killer' entry on the encyclopedia for these games... of life.

And why would that surprise you? Why have you been assuming that the target was blocked or protected? It's the simplest solution (something about a razor...) to assume that there was a scum day kill.

I'm not saying that there's no possibility of the day killer being the vig, I just think it's strange that that we had no kill last night. Yes, block/protect/conversion are possibilities, but the likelihood that one of those people chose wisely is very slim. And if it was our blocker, then I hope he or she can come forward with whoever they blocked so we can lynch the killer. Preferably without revealing their role, but results are results...


Refuse to believe? Now that's close-minded. We must consider all possibilities, and if we can't do that we might as well be doomed...

I've noticed that quite a few of you are quick to automatically dismiss even the slightest possibility of the day killer being scum....

Why are you insisting? I just doubt Zara was a good Scum target. Yes, I could be wrong. I realize my wording was obtuse. That's why I put it that way. But Occam's Razor to me is that it is more of a vig or serial kill than a Scum. That's just my opinion. You didn't even remember that Zara had died. She was on your list of suspects when I contacted you ... for stalking me.

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

No, you told me in private that Trisha gave you her sprinkled cupcake. Did you mention cookies yesterday in public? I must have misunderstood, and thought you were referring to Trisha's lunch. I will have to go back to confirm this.

Ice cream sandwich. I don't have a sprinkled cupcake and I certainly never said that.

JimButcher, on 07 December 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

Don't put words into my mouth, I said I was fairly sure that Jane was scum. And why are you calling me out on this now? I was agreeing with one of your suspects that you told me in private. Heck, I don't even need the private conversation as proof, you said today, right here, that the day killer vig should aim for Jane. What makes me suspicious of Jane? I'll ask you the same question. But since you asked first:

As I said before, Jane's lazy response is an indicator to me of scummy behavior. She literally picked the response before her (which was lazy and didn't add much to the conversation to begin with), and simply said "yeah I agree", and voted. Considering the fact that Trisha was town, I'm more than certain there were at least some scum on the bandwagon yesterday. This response struck me as particularly scummy.

Yeesht. No offense. I don't know why you're getting so defensive. So, looking back you said you were "pretty sure" Jane is Scum if Trisha is Town. That's a marginal degree of certainty. I just don't see it in the quote we referenced. I agree Jane was someone I wanted to hear more from, but I'm not "pretty sure" she's Scum as I haven't seen enough to feel that way. Yes, I agree I'm latching onto two words now, but that's just how I felt.

[Captain Genaro]

Assuming that there are two killers, ( a SK and a scum killer), I would assume that it was the SK that killed Zara. Killing Zara seems like a wasted kill for the scum considering how quiet she was, especially when they had so many more valuable, unprotected targets. Unless, of course the scum knew something about Zara which we don't (but I doubt that).

I believe that, as unlikely as it may seem, the scum were blocked or their target was protected. As it has previously been stated, it is too early for a conversion to make sense (unless they have multiple conversions and a low number of starting members). Besides, just because it's statistically unlikely does not mean that it was impossible for the blocker/protector be successful on night one.