Ragnarök Now 3: Day Two

[Lady K]

Yeah, Lambi seemed like quite a logical vig kill after yesterday. Possibly a SK kill, but the amount of attention on her makes it less likely. Patrekr was a more likely SK kill IMO.

Why was Patrekr the scum kill? Give some reasons, mate. And why couldn't the scum have been blocked - or their target protected?

This defense doesn't sit well with me either. Scum are known to attack other scum on Day One. A common scum tactic, and one I myself have used in a mafiascum.net game, is to call out/accuse your partner on Day One, when nobody else suspects them, and then to back off/unvote them when they start gaining suspicion. Notice some similarities between Tarben's play and this tactic?

I believe Jarl just straight up quoted Tarben's post, which included the part about me and Mist.

People have started claiming to you already, I see.

You seem awfully certain that the scum killed someone last night. How can you be so sure, unless you yourself are Scum or the SK?

The quote just says 'quote', your name isn't even mentioned so it isn't a straight up quote at all. And it really has nothing to do with the Lambi situation at all. That quote is in reference to Mist so why did he even bring it up. What does Mist have to do with Lambi?

And yes Jarl you were defending Tarben.

[JackJonespaw]

I would have preferred the scum get no kill and blocked in the night and for Brand to have turned up scum, but we know that is not the case. And yes, I am comparing it to the last game where they were being killed left and right. Stupid, I'm sure, but it's the most recent game and in my mind.

Lauga does make an interesting point above me regarding Tarben and Jarl.

Someone had to have been blocked, yea? Scum or SK or vig, right? I can't remember exactly how it works, I haven't had one of those roles in a long time, but usually there are three kills per night. Now, I'm just wondering...but could it be possible that Brand was the vig? If he was, we lost a power role super-early...not great. Basically, one of two things happened:

Someone was blocked. Lambi's death obviously wasn't the scum kill, so it was either SK or vig. Someone had to have been blocked, or the vig had to have been killed, right? Could Patrekr have been the vig? If you're killed during a night, can you still get your night action in?

[Hinckley]

Someone had to have been blocked, yea? Scum or SK or vig, right? I can't remember exactly how it works, I haven't had one of those roles in a long time, but usually there are three kills per night. Now, I'm just wondering...but could it be possible that Brand was the vig?

I think he would have said something.

Someone was blocked. Lambi's death obviously wasn't the scum kill, so it was either SK or vig. Someone had to have been blocked, or the vig had to have been killed, right? Could Patrekr have been the vig? If you're killed during a night, can you still get your night action in?

Or a target protected or the vig stayed home and Lambi was killed by the Serial Killer.

What are you, new?

[Duvors]

Thoughts yourself? That's not even an accurate portrayal of what actually happened. I'm very curious to hear what you think that could possibly mean. Please enlighten us.

Thats what I thought happened, apparently I was wrong. I wasn't trying to accuse him of anything, I just found it interesting, and somewhat confusing.

I'm not clear what you're saying here, as all you've done is make a statement and ask for other people's opinions. Are you saying you think Tarben was trying to bus Lambi, or are you saying he's a fool for not keeping his vote on someone we now know to be scum, or something else entirely?

No, no, and I don't know. I really just wanted to point out something I found interesting and see what people thought about it.

The only case where anyone would know that is if they were Scum. So, thank you for confessing.

How is that a confession exactly?

[Hinckley]

How is that a confession exactly?

It's hyperbole. Are you defending Kapmaud?

[Duvors]

It's hyperbole. Are you defending Kapmaud?

Again no, I just wanted to know what you were thinking.

[mostlytechnic]

Caught up on today's reading, so here's my thoughts. And some will be things people already said, because when I didn't comment all over yesterday so I didn't repeat the obvious, I got yelled at and voted for

I mean, I think he's more Einherjar than not now - common scum strat is to pick out one quiet guy and just say "hey, speak up!!" and vote them. Doesn't usually happen to scum.

Toki and Munud are sweet choices for lynches today.

So based on this logic, you're scum and I'm loyal. I know I'm town, and you're basically (but with different words) saying "vote for the alchemist because he was too quiet!"

What did you find? [he was quoting me, where I said I need to look back at day 1]

Nothing, because I haven't had time to go reread yet.

Munud and I went to this really nice salad place. It was a great time.

Liar, we did no such thing. Mead and meat for me. Salad is food for the creatures that I eat! And since you lie, you need to die. Lynch all liars, right?

I know the fact that he voted and then changed has been well documented, but this was just the 4th vote placed yesterday. Also, he blatantly called Lambi scum. It seems to me that if we're a scum teammate, he wouldn't have been so harsh so early when the lynch was yet to be determined. Also, he didn't know Lambi would be killed on night one so he would have had very little to gain with such a strong accusation if he were scum. I know I'm making assumptions with this, and remember this is simply my opinion, but that's the way I currently see things.

Really? You think calling someone scum during the normal day 1 craziness is harsh and too much for one scum to do to another? Votes and name-calling that early are meaningless, and a GREAT time for scum to accuse each other without danger.

I've been contacted by the Town Tracker. If you are a Town Tracker and need to counter this claim, please inform someone you trust to post it here or by PM to me.

REALLY PEOPLE? Claiming to Pudding on day 1 AGAIN? Haven't any of you learned from the previous games that early claims are dangerous?

Now, I'm just wondering...but could it be possible that Brand was the vig? If he was, we lost a power role super-early...not great. Basically, one of two things happened:

I'm assuming that brand was not a power role of any kind, or he would have claimed when the votes were piling up so high. 99% sure he was vanilla.

[Hinckley]

Thats what I thought happened, apparently I was wrong. I wasn't trying to accuse him of anything, I just found it interesting, and somewhat confusing.

What was interesting about it? You pointed out that Tarden voted for Lambi, then unvoted and voted for Munud. Then you asked for thoughts. Why? And you're not trying to accuse him of anything, then why point it out?

Again no, I just wanted to know what you were thinking.

Perhaps Kapmaud was saying we know it isn't the case that Brand is Scum, but the participle is dangling. It sounded, at first, to me that he was saying we knew the Scum were not blocked.

Caught up on today's reading, so here's my thoughts. And some will be things people already said, because when I didn't comment all over yesterday so I didn't repeat the obvious, I got yelled at and voted for

Scum!!!!

REALLY PEOPLE? Claiming to Pudding on day 1 AGAIN? Haven't any of you learned from the previous games that early claims are dangerous?

I know, right? Especially to me. I did get everyone killed last time. Every...last...player... Fortunately, there's only one dummy so far.

[Duvors]

What was interesting about it? You pointed out that Tarden voted for Lambi, then unvoted and voted for Munud. Then you asked for thoughts. Why? And you're not trying to accuse him of anything, then why point it out?

It was the only thing I could think of to say on the first page.

[Hinckley]

It was the only thing I could think of to say on the first page.

Why do you need to say something on the first page?

[Duvors]

Why do you need to say something on the first page?

To start off the conversation, what else? Apparently I succeeded.

[Dragonfire]

The quote just says 'quote', your name isn't even mentioned so it isn't a straight up quote at all. And it really has nothing to do with the Lambi situation at all. That quote is in reference to Mist so why did he even bring it up. What does Mist have to do with Lambi?

And yes Jarl you were defending Tarben.

I'm not Jarl, and as I said before, Jarl quoted Tarben's whole post, which included his vote for Lambi, and his reply to my vote for Mist. Tarben said both of those things in the same post, and Jarl didn't bother to remove the irrelevant parts of the post.

Someone had to have been blocked, yea? Scum or SK or vig, right?

Nope. There are countless possibilities. The vig could have chosen not to kill, the target could have been protected, or there could be no SK.

could it be possible that Brand was the vig?

Nope, he would have claimed if he had a role.

[KotZ]

Sorry, I was thinking that the role blocker used his ability on a vanilla loyal last night. Dar's quote below states what I was thinking, but clearer.

Nope. There are countless possibilities. The vig could have chosen not to kill, the target could have been protected, or there could be no SK.

[Hinckley]

Sorry, I was thinking that the role blocker used his ability on a vanilla loyal last night.

What are you basing this on?

[Tamamono]

So I'm mobile and will get caught up later, but Cranebeinn is messaging me accusing me of being the vigilante because someone i accused is dead. Or, as he puts it, I might be in contact with the vigilante.

Scum tactic? Or curious town?

It's just not pro town to try to out the vigilante.

[Dragonfire]

Sorry, I was thinking that the role blocker used his ability on a vanilla loyal last night. Dar's quote below states what I was thinking, but clearer.

What do you mean? This was what you said:

I would have preferred the scum get no kill and blocked in the night and for Brand to have turned up scum, but we know that is not the case.

This strongly implies that you know for certain that the scum were not blocked and did kill someone (presumably Patrekr). How on earth does what you said above explain this?

So I'm mobile and will get caught up later, but Cranebeinn is messaging me accusing me of being the vigilante because someone i accused is dead. Or, as he puts it, I might be in contact with the vigilante.

Scum tactic? Or curious town?

It's just not pro town to try to out the vigilante.

Fishing, eh? Very anti-town behaviour. Ping.

[Lady K]

I'm not Jarl, and as I said before, Jarl quoted Tarben's whole post, which included his vote for Lambi, and his reply to my vote for Mist. Tarben said both of those things in the same post, and Jarl didn't bother to remove the irrelevant parts of the post.

Nope. There are countless possibilities. The vig could have chosen not to kill, the target could have been protected, or there could be no SK.

Nope, he would have claimed if he had a role.

The last bit was at Jarl because we were discussing him and he did defend Tarben.

Ok, I see what you are saying, however is still feels like Jarl intentionally left that part about Mist in there.

[Adam]

Along the same lines, by extension do you hold with Munud's view that Lambi was bussing Tarr?

It's definitely possible. Looking back with the knowledge that she was scum, Lambi's vote reads like scum trying to vote off-bandwagon so as to say the next day, "Look, he showed up town and I didn't vote for him! That must mean I'm town, and you people are the scum!"

As I said before, the silent players always pass under the microscope, sooner or later. It wasn't unreasonable for Lambi to call Tarr out and subsequently think that he might be attacked in the coming days. So yes, it could be that Lambi was bussing Tarr.

Say what you guys want, my job is simple. Look at the evidence and try to get reads on every player. One day down, 3 results received, i want to start advancing the game. I'm not defending tarben, just giving my views from day one. If we can't attempt to make assumptions based on players actions then why are we even here?? You can look at the same stuff I did and form your own opinion, that's your job. My job is to make the most informed decision based on my interpretation of the given data. I could sit idly by and wait for someone to start a bandwagon, but I'd prefer advance this game beyond a game of follow the leader.

And speaking of follow the leader, are people already claiming to pudding?

Your job may be to interpret the given data, but it's impossible to interpret the current data in a way that makes Tarben confirmed town. It's an oft-stated tenet that only the scum can say for sure that someone's town.

Also, it's more than a little strange to say that you're not defending Tarben, then to say that you don't want to "sit idly by and wait for someone to start a bandwagon." So which is it? Are you not defending Tarben, or do you not want people to bandwagon him?

So based on this logic, you're scum and I'm loyal. I know I'm town, and you're basically (but with different words) saying "vote for the alchemist because he was too quiet!"

Let's pause for a moment. People aren't suspicious of you because you were "too quiet," we're suspicious because you were quiet and, when you did speak, you did your damnedest to not say anything useful.

Sorry, I was thinking that the role blocker used his ability on a vanilla loyal last night. Dar's quote below states what I was thinking, but clearer.

Except Dar's post doesn't support what you're saying, outside of the fact that the role blocker targeting a vanilla is technically one possibility. Here's a funky idea, and technically it is one of the many possibilities: what if the role blocker targeted the scum killer last night, and you're trying to direct her/him elsewhere?

So I'm mobile and will get caught up later, but Cranebeinn is messaging me accusing me of being the vigilante because someone i accused is dead. Or, as he puts it, I might be in contact with the vigilante.

Scum tactic? Or curious town?

It's just not pro town to try to out the vigilante.

Cranebeinn, I didn't realize you were so outdoorsy! Or do you just... love fishing?

Seriously, this is suspicious as all Loki. Especially after yesterday, when you had that weird post trying to figure out if Jarl was the serial killer (in your words, "vigilante") based on one fluff post.

[Mencot]

So is Jarl lame or scum... or both for trying to burn me bringing that shit up in an irrelevant place. One can only imagine, maybe not the best lead to go on.

But a player that tries to get info on the vig, is it then in PM or in thread. That isn´t a townie move and this was not the first time Crane the redder had done something similar in this game, I asked yesterday about the vig but switched the meaning that he meant to ask about the serialkiller. Maybe he meant that yesterday but what he did today will be harder to explain.

[Dragonfire]

#

Ok, I see what you are saying, however is still feels like Jarl intentionally left that part about Mist in there.

I don't see any possible reason for him doing that, as scum or as town. What are you trying to insinuate?

Cranebeinn, I didn't realize you were so outdoorsy! Or do you just... love fishing? Seriously, this is suspicious as all Loki. Especially after yesterday, when you had that weird post trying to figure out if Jarl was the serial killer (in your words, "vigilante") based on one fluff post.

Good point! Our red friend here seems to be obsessed with the vigilante...

[Hinckley]

So is Jarl lame or scum... or both for trying to burn me bringing that shit up in an irrelevant place. One can only imagine, maybe not the best lead to go on.

But a player that tries to get info on the vig, is it then in PM or in thread. That isn´t a townie move and this was not the first time Crane the redder had done something similar in this game, I asked yesterday about the vig but switched the meaning that he meant to ask about the serialkiller. Maybe he meant that yesterday but what he did today will be harder to explain.

So, did he contact you in private too?

[KotZ]

Crane contacted me as well, but I thought little of it. And now that I mention it, he contacted Patrekr as well at the same time.

[Hinckley]

Crane contacted me as well, but I thought little of it. And now that I mention it, he contacted Patrekr as well at the same time.

He contacted you about what?

[TrumpetKing]

Disappointed to see that Brand was actually innocent, but not surprised. However, getting a scum night one is a good accomplishment, and not usually a common one, so good job to the vigilante or serial killer, whichever one of you killed Lambi.

What I wonder, though, is what Lambi gained at all from trying to catch Tarr's attention the way she did. The focus of the town was never going to shift, and to try and shift the focus away from someone who wasn't even on her side makes me wonder if Tarr could be disloyal to us as well, and that was her way of reminding him to show up eventually, not realizing it would make her look as scummy as it did.

Cranebeinn fishing for information is also interesting. It never has been a town-like thing to go looking for information in such a way, especially two days into the quest.

While I was typing, I guess Cranebeinn talked to even more people. What are you trying to do, sir?!

[KotZ]

He contacted you about what?

He asked both of us if we were town. He mentioned how he's in a predicament about being read as scummy and how he just normally seems scummy, of course claiming he's loyal.