Unrest in the Forest - Day 4: 2112

[Zepher]

Are you suggesting that Waldorf is scum with Simon? Right now, Barry looks most like a maple, and at the very least neutral. Waldorf was the first person to really accuse him yesterday.

Um... what? When did I mention Waldorf at all? What are you talking about?

I personally feel William is an oak. Why would a maple out themselves this way? It doesn't really make any sense. I can't think of an advantage, EVEN assuming that he's vengeful. Right? It won't really harm the town block too much (sorry Simon) and no trusts the town block all that much anyway. And maples can't win now if they trade one for one.

I have gone back and looked over Adelaide's activity over the last few days. It is still very questionable. She put a lot of effort into developing the codes, which SEEMS to have been genuine effort (she explained them at least 100 times to Simon!) but what have the codes really gotten us? She's also been close to the hammer of a band wagon three times. Could easily be a scum pushing that final push, but seeming reluctant. I may vote for her.

But there are so many floating under the radar. Where is Maggie? Why does Chester never contribute anything but confusion?! If he a player who got his brains scrambled by the lovely warm sun, or is he sowing seeds of confusion deliberately?! Has Sue Sumac done anything even remotely noteworthy?

[Hinckley]

The big thing - why on earth did Barry claim anything to anyone? I don't remember him being a focus of any attention yesterday, at least until the very end. Worried that he pinged enough there that a vig would kill him so he was trying to claim to the town to be something? I strongly suspect that got him killed instead.

Maybe he was also covering his bases in case he was tracked. He was talking about killing people and being a passive bomb. I would guess he was concocting a claim that tells Townies "Don't kill me and in case I'm tracked or my target is watched". As a solid suspect after Waldorf accuse him, he probably figured he would be targeted. If he was Scum, he was their killer.

So, if he initiated contact with William, that would mean William is an Oak. ...Or WIFOM

I agree with your conclusion but you're muddying the waters.

Can you clarify this for me? I thought I was being very clear. I thought my explanation was a strong theory that would help people see it clearly.

But there are so many floating under the radar. Where is Maggie? Why does Chester never contribute anything but confusion?! If he a player who got his brains scrambled by the lovely warm sun, or is he sowing seeds of confusion deliberately?! Has Sue Sumac done anything even remotely noteworthy?

Barry's claim was ill-advised. Who would allow such a sloppy and weird claim? I'm glad Berty brought it to Bruce's attention.

Berty, did he ask you advice about who to kill? If so, what did you answer?

[Zepher]

The Barry situation seems pretty clear cut to me... though not easy to tell in either direction. Essentially there are two ways things could have fallen out, though I have no way to know which is correct:

a) The scum CAN janitor. It seems almost certain that Barry was maple in that case. Before today, there was little indication that he was a player of particular prominence who would deserve to be janitored if he were oak, right? I can't imagine why they'd pick over, say, the lynch.

b) The scum CAN'T janitor, and all maples/SKs are removed from the forest upon their death, not becoming oaks. In this case, he was probably the SK.

The thing is, I find b both less and more believable. It's weird that we'd have to figure out removed=maple/SK, because... I don't know, that's not really a twist so much as the town has to sort of just figure out how results are revealed over a long time. Right? It doesn't seem as normal as a janitor. On the other hand, his claims seem to be concocted in a vacuum - how could his fellow maples possibly allow for him to make such crazy claims?!

The point is there's literally no way to know! So we might as well all enjoy the sun while we can and focus instead on getting a lynch today.

[Hinckley]

The point is there's literally no way to know! So we might as well all enjoy the sun while we can and focus instead on getting a lynch today.

Well, would a PGO know if they had been set off for them to confirm with someone they trust? Is my logic sound there? If the Scum killed Clem and vig killed Bobby, then a PGO would've had to kill Berty, like Jack suggested. Unless one of the other victims was a bomb. Wouldn't that be funny? Perhaps we can get an answer, after all. Otherwise, who would've killed Berty? Without a passive kill trigger, there are three kills.

I think it's worth looking over Alastair and Berty's posts, in case all Maples are taken from the forest and that's the balance to the bombs.

And by bombs, I of course meant stumps.

[jimmynick]

How?

For the same reason this game doesn't have a flying hippo that shoots lasers out of its butt; an inflatable wavy-armed car dealer sign thing role is ludicrous to even entertain.

Am I still tunneling my focus on him? Or are my new concerns about him legit? Because now what he's saying sounds downright ridiculous. No offense, William.

You both sound like you're going at each other way harder than anyone else really cares to.

I just realized something. Barry first told me he was going to target Clem. Later he changed that to Bobby. Both are dead. I assume Bobby is most likely to be a vig kill. That must mean the scum kill was Clem.... I have no idea what this means...

It means Barry is almost certainly a maple. Why is that hard to grasp?

Um... what? When did I mention Waldorf at all? What are you talking about?

Yeah. Where did I come in, Lassie?

But there are so many floating under the radar. Where is Maggie? Why does Chester never contribute anything but confusion?! If he a player who got his brains scrambled by the lovely warm sun, or is he sowing seeds of confusion deliberately?! Has Sue Sumac done anything even remotely noteworthy?

Hear, hear.

[Bob]

I'm going to Vote: Peter Cedar (badboytje88).

Why? He seems genuinely useless and hasn't contributed much of anything these last few days. Let's look at his one (and only) contribution for the day:

Well don't do that. You'll be handing out t he power roles o team scum on a silver platter. Big time NAY from me.

Wow, how insightful. He's not been doing much of anything and most his votes he's simply said "I'm just hopping on the bandwagon!" He's either scum trying to lay low or he's incredibly unhelpful as a townie.

[Yzalirk]

I'm honestly not sure who to vote for as of right now.

I agree with you, Sue, about Peter and his only post seeming kind of "fluffy" in a way. The grammar in it also kind of scares me a little.

[Scubacarrot]

You just remembered that? Why didn't you mention him talking about me when it was first mentioned you had talked about killing me? That's a huge lapse in memory. Why did he trust you so much that he "had your back"?

William, did you press him at all about the weird kind-of-vig-but-neutrally claim he made? I imagine if I had made such a weird claim you would've PMed every player in the game about it.

And why were you focused on me when Bobby and Clem were dead and Barry had been talking to you about killing them? You're trying to get lynched. You have to be.

I hope the first point has been sufficiently adressed by the fact that I sent pms to people stating I was going to try to get myself lynched to kill you, as a form of security.

I said this: Did you just claim vig to me? He responded with: Not vig per se, this game is more intricate than some people realize. Or something to that effect. He did not claim neutrality at any point to me. I did not press him further, not when he apparantly changed his target to Bobby either. I figured he was just a vig variant, as I've said before. To be fair, the way he worded that does make you immediately think neutral. I don't know.

I can't lynch Barry. He's dead as dicks, blown up, even. Even if he was a neutral or something. I can lynch you. It changes nothing. I am not trying to get lynched, that plan is out of the window, you didn't want to anymore, remember?

How?

A vengeful scum would basically mean a scum with no role other than being a slight unavoidable punishment to the town (presuming protection in the night doesn't work and there is no rolecop). It's weird. I never really thought about it, but scum vengefuls are not really a thing that happens. Also as a general rule, scum usually has one way to take someone out.

[jimmynick]

I agree with you, Sue, about Peter and his only post seeming kind of "fluffy" in a way. The grammar in it also kind of scares me a little.

When you come to the thread, do you only read one post? Berty commented on Peter's behaviour earlier today and also voted for him. Plenty of attention went to Peter over his very sheepy vote yesterday. How about some original contribution from you? Whom were you thinking of voting for? Your great comment today has been to suggest that "Alignment Unknown" is the same as "Neutral".

You're clearly flying on the seat of "trying to contribute".

Vote: Hazel Hazelnut (Goliath)

[Scubacarrot]

First, why did you think vengeful was such an important role to share early on? What does that accomplish as an oak?

Second, you're the only one that hasn't yet voted along with one of the primary lynch candidates, twice casting throw away votes at players who got no other votes and voting Bruce on Day 1. We don't know Alastair for sure, but it seems like you've been intentionally playing away from the other saplings.

Mostly, I figured if you have a role, you shouldn't be dead on night 1 and have no one know about. That's a bad thing. So first thing I did is made it known to a few people that I had some kind of role. I later claimed to Bruce. I believe my thought process was that it seemed like there were a bunch of passive roles about, and I should make sure if scum tried to claim one of those, they'd be caught.

Not intentionally. I've tried to decide for myself what would be the best thing to do. On day two I obviously didn't think much of the bandwagon and instead decided to vote for someone that hasn't been contributing at all. Still, by the way. Yesterday I judged Simon a more important person to put in the spotlight by way of voting.

[Zepher]

Well, would a PGO know if they had been set off for them to confirm with someone they trust? Is my logic sound there? If the Scum killed Clem and vig killed Bobby, then a PGO would've had to kill Berty, like Jack suggested. Unless one of the other victims was a bomb. Wouldn't that be funny? Perhaps we can get an answer, after all. Otherwise, who would've killed Berty? Without a passive kill trigger, there are three kills.

I think it's worth looking over Alastair and Berty's posts, in case all Maples are taken from the forest and that's the balance to the bombs.

And by bombs, I of course meant stumps.

If the PGO knew, don't you think they would have told us by now? It again circles back to the idea that there's really no way to prove this thing either way - it's the same reason we shelved the discussion of the Pear on Day Two - there's simply no conclusive evidence either direction. I think it's important to debate, and it certainly has raised important questions (again, before today I would have never considered the theory that maples were instantly removed without their identity being revealed, but now it seems possible though not probable). But at a certain point we have to give it up and lynch.

Why can't there be three kills? Maples, SK, Vig. Maybe some have been blocked previous days, or their targets protected. It is not uncommon for the big to hold off for a day at the beginning.

Didn't all three claim to the stumps yesterday? Wouldn't they know if they were bombs? That would certainly help clear some things up, for us. I don't think oaks would lie about that... even if they're clinging to their roles bombs aren't the absolute worst roles to have out in the open.

[Yzalirk]

When you come to the thread, do you only read one post? Berty commented on Peter's behaviour earlier today and also voted for him. Plenty of attention went to Peter over his very sheepy vote yesterday. How about some original contribution from you? Whom were you thinking of voting for? Your great comment today has been to suggest that "Alignment Unknown" is the same as "Neutral".

Alright genius, tell me, what makes thee Nash so high and mighty? You have been a person of interest to some people. So, what do you want me to contribute, all so powerful Nash? I will gladly contribute whatever it is that want if it pleases you. I'd also like you to find me saying that I blatantly said that Unknown Alignment means Neutral when I believe I asked rather than saying, directly, the two mean the same.

And, tell me, when is it a crime to be unsure of who to vote for? Do you want me to vote for someone just for shits and giggles?

[Zepher]

Oh, little ol' me? Well, I'll tell you, since apparently you're asking me! I didn't know that I warranted so much attention! Must be one of the perks of being a tall tree!

If you could present a case against someone that wasn't stated by the tree who spoke directly before you, that'd be awesome! Thanks so much!

[fhomess]

Um... what? When did I mention Waldorf at all? What are you talking about?

Sorry... after multiquoting so many people I misremembered your quote as being in response to Waldorf rather than Adelaide. Apologies for this.

Can you clarify this for me? I thought I was being very clear. I thought my explanation was a strong theory that would help people see it clearly.

I said as much in the previous sentence. You made Barry out to appear like he was a major suspect at the end of the day. The reality is that Waldorf brought him up and voted for him. I felt like you were trying to make more out of that then there was.

[Hinckley]

I need to communicate with the Stumps about something.

Clem, I need to send you some codes for names in order to communicate something more intricate that just claiming a role. These are names of players. Reference 1: our PM, reference 2: the second PM

Code key. post 5.3 is the fifth post on the page referenced and the third name in that post.

Names codes:

1 pg.1 post 1 N3378

1 pg.1 post 4 N7964

1 pg.1 post 5.1 N4439

1 pg.1 post 5.2 N4478

1 pg.1 post 5.3 N6472

1 pg.1 post 5.4 N5288

2 pg.1 post 1.1 N2398

2 pg.1 post 8.4 N6425

2 pg.4 post 5.2 N5655

I'll send a couple of messages in a bit.

[Hinckley]

Add

2 pg.2 post 16.1 N5477

[Duvors]

For the same reason this game doesn't have a flying hippo that shoots lasers out of its butt; an inflatable wavy-armed car dealer sign thing role is ludicrous to even entertain.

It is painfully obvious that that was not what I was talking about.

A vengeful scum would basically mean a scum with no role other than being a slight unavoidable punishment to the town (presuming protection in the night doesn't work and there is no rolecop). It's weird. I never really thought about it, but scum vengefuls are not really a thing that happens. Also as a general rule, scum usually has one way to take someone out.

It is avoidable if you kill him at night instead of lynching, at least that's how I read it. And 'as a general rule' does not really seem to apply here.

[Hinckley]

It is avoidable if you kill him at night instead of lynching, at least that's how I read it. And 'as a general rule' does not really seem to apply here.

This is going to sound crazy coming from me, but I wouldn't advocate killing William at night. I do believe that Barry was Scum. If that's the case then him appealing to William makes it less likely that they are on the same team. Way less likely...unless it's WIFOM. But, thinking through everything and getting consistent answers from everyone involved, my suspicions of William are much lower.

[jimmynick]

Alright genius, tell me, what makes thee Nash so high and mighty? You have been a person of interest to some people. So, what do you want me to contribute, all so powerful Nash? I will gladly contribute whatever it is that want if it pleases you. I'd also like you to find me saying that I blatantly said that Unknown Alignment means Neutral when I believe I asked rather than saying, directly, the two mean the same.

And, tell me, when is it a crime to be unsure of who to vote for? Do you want me to vote for someone just for shits and giggles?

When did I suddenly become Nash?

The fact is you don't have any ideas, and just saying "I don't know for whom to vote" is useless. You should, instead, say something like "I'm thinking about about voting for XXX or YYY, for these reasons:" and then explain your thoughts.

[Yzalirk]

When did I suddenly become Nash?

The fact is you don't have any ideas, and just saying "I don't know for whom to vote" is useless. You should, instead, say something like "I'm thinking about about voting for XXX or YYY, for these reasons:" and then explain your thoughts.

It still worked out because you knew what I meant. I have been doing that but being unsure of who to vote for at the current time is a crime? Still, you, Waldorf, and the real Nash are of the few people with names that have been thrown around quite a bit. But yes, I will have my vote up with some reasoning behind it, as usual, eventually.

[Hinckley]

It still worked out because you knew what I meant. I have been doing that but being unsure of who to vote for at the current time is a crime? Still, you, Waldorf, and the real Nash are of the few people with names that have been thrown around quite a bit. But yes, I will have my vote up with some reasoning behind it, as usual, eventually.

Why are you just looking for names? What are your thoughts and suspicions? Picking a name and justifying it later is Scummy

[jimmynick]

It still worked out because you knew what I meant. I have been doing that but being unsure of who to vote for at the current time is a crime? Still, you, Waldorf, and the real Nash are of the few people with names that have been thrown around quite a bit.

Since when has my name been thrown around in a way that isn't accidentally referring to someone else?

But yes, I will have my vote up with some reasoning behind it, as usual, eventually.

Translation: "I'm going to pick a townie to vote for and hastily kludge together some 'reasons'."

[Lego Spy]

But there are so many floating under the radar. Why does Chester never contribute anything but confusion?!

Excuse me? What have I said that's confusing?

I agree that the stumps should not divulge all their information in public. That would be giving the names of every Oak tree that has claimed to the stumps, to the Maples. Not a good idea.

This seems pretty straightforward if you ask me.

[Yzalirk]

Why are you just looking for names? What are your thoughts and suspicions? Picking a name and justifying it later is Scummy

Actually, I don't know. I like the sound of that though for some reason.

Since when has my name been thrown around in a way that isn't accidentally referring to someone else?

Translation: "I'm going to pick a townie to vote for and hastily kludge together some 'reasons'."

I could have sworn I've seen your name thrown around a few times as either a poke or suspicion but I looked back and saw the Nash seems a bit more popular than you since Adelaide voted against him two days in a row. That's gotta count for something.

Also, for your information, any reason is better than none, must I tell you. Unless you'd prefer I don't justify my reason, which would make things so much easier.

[Fugazi]

There were three major suspects yesterday: Larry, Bobby and Barry. All three are dead, why would the Scum janitor Barry if they were all three Town? I'm assuming the Scum are told the dead at the NA deadline (that's how it's been done before on EB) and then they choose who to clean up. If Barry really was a neutral bomb, how would the Scum know he was neutral? Why wouldn't they stick with the bandwagon of Larry since that would throw off our ability to analyze another lynch vote? And it would keep the janitor action consistent with the lynch to further confuse us. His case was brought up late in the day by one person. It was arguably the weakest case since it was the first time major suspicion had been brought up about Barry. Why would cleaning up Town Barry help the Scum? If they were all three non-Maple, Larry or Bobby make much more sense to janitor. My conclusion: Barry was Scum.

I think this makes the most sense. There's one more possibility though that hasn't been addressed..

I bolded the parts of the quotations I thought were suspect. I think you made a half-baked deal to get Barry to kill Simon in order to pretend to be vengeful. That makes me think you were both very open with your roles and, because I am certain Barry was scum, that makes you scum too.

That kind of deal wouldn't have helped WIlliam, because for him to act as a Vengeful he needs to die. Why would scum Barry need to back lynched scum William's fake claim?

1) There is scum, a vig and a SK

2) Barry was the SK

3) SK and scum killed on Night 1 and Night 2

4) When I told Bruce about Barry's odd claim, Bruce alerted the Vig, who didn't kill anyone on the first two nights

5) Vig killed Barry, Barry killed Bobby, scum killed Clem.

That's another good theory, but why would scum janitor the SK, if Barry was really janitored?

It doesn't hinge on that at all. Three dead people, Larry and Bobby more suspicion than Barry, so why was Barry janitored? The Scum wouldn't have known if he was neutral. They would've known if he was Maple or not. Why are you resisting the theory?

Thinking about it some more, Barry did talk to a lot of people about his role. Well at least William, Berty and Bruce knew that he could kill. If this came to the ears of a Maple, they might have figured our Barry was the SK. When he turned up dead, they might have decided to janitor Barry... perhaps so that Oaks would think they killed the scum killer? I'm trying to figure out if it's possible that scum decided to janitor the SK... because from what we learned today, Barry had a very weird out there behaviour for a Maple killer.

There's something about this that makes me feel like you're trying to distance yourself from the janitoring activity. The great Sammy Sycamore isn't familiar with janitoring?

I have been scum a few times in my mafia career, but in none of those roles did we have a janitor. I don't think there was such a role in the game I helped host either. So no, I'm not sure about the mechanics of the role.

The Barry situation seems pretty clear cut to me... though not easy to tell in either direction. Essentially there are two ways things could have fallen out, though I have no way to know which is correct:

a) The scum CAN janitor. It seems almost certain that Barry was maple in that case. Before today, there was little indication that he was a player of particular prominence who would deserve to be janitored if he were oak, right? I can't imagine why they'd pick over, say, the lynch.

b) The scum CAN'T janitor, and all maples/SKs are removed from the forest upon their death, not becoming oaks. In this case, he was probably the SK.

The thing is, I find b both less and more believable. It's weird that we'd have to figure out removed=maple/SK, because... I don't know, that's not really a twist so much as the town has to sort of just figure out how results are revealed over a long time. Right? It doesn't seem as normal as a janitor. On the other hand, his claims seem to be concocted in a vacuum - how could his fellow maples possibly allow for him to make such crazy claims?!

I tend to agree with your analysis. I wouldn't put past scum to janitor the SK, but I don't think I have found a totally convincing justification for them acting so.

Well, would a PGO know if they had been set off for them to confirm with someone they trust? Is my logic sound there? If the Scum killed Clem and vig killed Bobby, then a PGO would've had to kill Berty, like Jack suggested. Unless one of the other victims was a bomb. Wouldn't that be funny? Perhaps we can get an answer, after all. Otherwise, who would've killed Berty? Without a passive kill trigger, there are three kills.

I thought the town block knew who the vig was... Someone can possibly confirm the target of the vig. Why do we need a PGO again? Isn't it possible that Barry killed Clem or Bobby, the vig took out Barry, and scum killed the third player?

This may look like a whole lot of idle theories, but it may actually be important to know with a degree of certainty whether Barry was scum or neutral (SK). His interactions with some other trees are being scutinized and perhaps that the reason he was janitored was to prevent us from drawing some obvious conclusions... More on this later.