TrumpetKing

That's why I said "at the end."

*sigh* Good game, scum team. Totally called it at the end, but good game. Disappointed that a loss had to come from my being "scummy", which all in all I still don't particylarly understand, especially when it came from Scuba, who I didn't recall making any note of it beforehand. I thought the entire situation was handled really badly near the end and having our loss come down to "doing the opposite of what Lynn does" was both disappointing and honestly made me feel a little bit bad. It felt like I was being treated differently for the situation, which confused me, because I was nowhere near confirmed, and I don't know where Scuba even got that idea from. The entire situation just felt (while I do understand the motive), a little rude without any real acknowledgement of what I had been saying, and honestly a little sloppy. There shouldn't have been a reason for Scuba especially to vote opposite of me just because it was where I was voting. Blegh. Oh, and before I forget, thank you for hosting DD! I'm very happy I got to play this game, even if I don't know that I enjoyed what actually happened.

Of course Theodore could be the godfather. I would say, however, that your "clearing" from both cops is a more poignant detail than his staying in at night, at least to me. Hush, you! I've been working on being more vocal. Worth note is both Theodore and Matthew's insistence that I'm scum. I understand having suspicions of me, but I am far from confirmed to be scum, nor am I "the scum you know" following the same logic. We have one confirmed scum in Patti and Derrick and it baffles me that you're going to risk that to try to lynch me, when there is nothing that has confirmed me as scum other than your own opinions on me, most of which seem to be centered around my lack of speech. Also interesting to me is that you didn't seem to be quite on board with a lynch on me, or even mentioning that I'm "the scum we know" until after I brought you up as who I thought to be the godfather. Up until that point it seemed to be between Patti and Derrick for you. Your willingness to risk lynching a town member over two counterclaims (when one of them is confirmed to be scum) leaves me uncertain of your motives, especially when you suggest putting the focus off until tomorrow. By lynching me, there will not be a tomorrow. Assuming there are two scum, my lynch would bring the total down to 2-2. This obviously would mean game over for the town. Now, you obviously won't know I'm being honest until my lynch. That still shows, however, that you're willing to end the game now instead of try finding the scum between the two cop claims and going from there. Risking the end of the game would be much more understandable if you were voting between the counterclaims, but there is no true evidence that indicates my affiliation other than weak points brought up by Desiree yesterday. As of now, I feel like Patti's calmed down from the initial claim and her theatrics, and I feel unsatisfied with Derrick's thoughts. As wary as I am of Matthew, I agree, he didn't really twist Derrick's words, and because of that, his central argument doesn't entirely work. Vote: Derrick (Dragonfire)

Well, if Theodore is "cleared" by not being seen killing, and Matthew is cleared by his investigation, then that would only leave me AND Derrick. Explain to me why it's an or situation. Especially since it's the wrong solution. I know that I'm town, which means, should we lynch the correct cop, Matthew or Theodore is the remaining scum. I think what's going to be most telling of this is the treatment of Matthew, assuming we are able to continue after today. It's very plausible that he could be the godfather, which could account for the town result from the actual cop, whoever he may be, and the scum, knowing his role, "cleared" him to do so. What I find especially interesting about this is Matthew's assumption that he was investigated for being the most suspicious, which is weird knowing Matthew's past experience. Sure, Derrick says he was suspicious of Matthew, but Patti doesn't. With the amount of games under Matthew's belt, I would see a cop investigating him to gain a clear and earn a number. Granted, we're not allowed to contact others outside of public communication, so in this scenario all that gives us is, well, a number. So, Matthew, are you assuming Patti was also suspicious of you? Or was your response to that point directed solely towards Derrick? Derrick, forgive me if I missed it, but why were you suspicious of Matthew? I don't recall him saying anything in particular that would have tipped off as scum. Other than the "clear", and perhaps his post I just addressed, I can't think of a reason in particular to investigate him. Would you mind pointing some specific phrases out?

Something about this claim seems off to me. How convenient is it that your first result died and your second result was also cleared by the person counterclaiming you? Especially coming as a second claim. Patti's claim isn't much better, though. Her defense of Desiree is weak at best, but I suppose it makes more sense than Derrick's. What? After you and Derrick claimed, there's no reason for me to be the other suspect. We have two counter-claiming cops, one of those is guaranteed lying. You could easily be lying, and by saying it should be me and Derrick, that would mean the town would be risking lynching a townie either way. That's a rather convenient way to push attention off of the scum. That didn't finish posting. I meant "off the scum and onto the town". And I don't recall anybody else being certain that your claim is the truthful one, Patti, so I'm not altogether too sure as to why you seem to think we do, given you seem to think it's between myself and Derrick, and not you for even being a conflicting claim. This is just starting to look more and more off to me with every post. You don't even seem to be making a case other than the fact that he counterclaims you as scum. This all reads to me as filler. You even say you read him as town. There's absolutely no substance to your accusations, and you're so tunneled in on him that once again, I can't help but ask you, why I'm the other suspect, when you're acting this way? You're a conflicting cop claim, and this is how you're trying to prove you're the true cop? That doesn't sit well with me.

You are the only one who has accused me of being the "scummiest living player". Other people have noted my silence but nothing more, and your accusation and "analysis" that you've used to label me as "the scummiest living player", as I've said before, is a very forced version of Alec's slight note yesterday. It isn't your defense that's scummy, either. It's the fact that not only are your defenses incredibly hostile and agitated that makes you scummy. Vote: Desiree Walters (mediumsnowman)

I'm a little shocked that Carla came up as town, based off of yesterday. That doesn't mean we can't recover, however. I understand that there's thoughts about me hiding and flying under the radar, but what I've been saying is truthful. Time has just unexpectedly not been on my side in recent days, and things are freeing up quite a bit that will hopefully prevent my little naps from occurring again. Now, it seems like Desiree is tunnel-visioned on lynching me and defending herself. I've already clarified my low-post count, there should be no reason you should take that as me lying, unless you're incredibly paranoid. There's zero use in lying over such a thing. Sure, my statements about the strongman can be seen as flip-flopping. Rather, I was just weighing out the possibilities. There were reasons for and against there being a strongman. I don't need to take a side on something we don't know exists, which I do believe I also made clear. As for the comment on the vigilante, I'm sorry that you find that ridiculous. Unfortunately, that speculation and question-asking was something I found reasonable to wonder of, as I've seen games smaller than this with a vigilante. Vigilantes aren't typically compulsory actions, meaning a vigilante can wait until they're convinced someone is scum to kill, and I was bringing up the possibility. The fact that you think bringing something up because of such a small town number is ridiculous is absurd in itself, because I even brought up that the lack of mention of one could just be because there isn't due to our low population. Then why bring it up in a post addressing your suspicions of me? This is the second time you've mistaken my discussion points as being wishy-washy. I was trying to gather another viewpoint for the town to help us proceed with making a decision, and how else was I supposed to do that? There's pros and cons to each role, and I clearly settled on a role, so what exactly is the point you're trying to make? Alec's affiliation is pretty irrelevant to mine, especially going off of a day one comment. Additionally, your implication by saying I was trying to "silence" him is clearly that I killed hi, but that's a rather odd conclusion to jump to. Why would I so easily place the suspicion on myself? Alec was the only one to mention my name yesterday, and with a very minor point, which I gladly clarified. Doesn't it seem a little odd for me to kill someone for making such a small accusation towards me? If I were scum, that would bring so much unnecessary attention onto myself. Given how interested you are in incriminating me, using what feels like a forced extended version of Alec's point, I can't help but wonder if it was you who killed Alec, knowing you could extend the case against me by saying I responded to the accusation with such hostility during the nighttime phase. I wouldn't even really call it a full paragraph. It was more "Lynn hasn't talked and sort of just repeated what others have said". Your own reaction to being brought up is equally worth note, considering you're so quick to declare that he's twisting your words and that you've been "pinged". So, who are you suspicious of then?

The timing being off is of reasonable note. I had mentioned that I had been gone, though, so truthfully, I was going through the day and replying to what I saw was worth replying to. There's nothing more to it.

Sorry for the absence this morning, I've had some business to attend to. Given the lack of a kill, and the note pointed out earlier about night actions not being sent in, I'm sure that's a given. Why wouldn't the scum take advantage of a night when we don't have kills? Carla's experience certainly contribute to this suspicion, and the OMGUS vote definitely doesn't help her case at all. I think just about everybody picked up on Carla's behavior, though. Carla's explanation to me doesn't really make sense. I don't know if it's just me not understanding what she's saying, or the mechanics behind the roles, but something about it doesn't sit right with me. To me, she gave a weak explanation for her words and immediately shifted to how Patti must be scum for jumping onto an "easy lynch". How, though, is a Carla lynch "easy", especially guven her experience? The only thing at this point that would make her an easy lynch would be her own comments, and from then, she is now inquiring as to why we need to lynch. Well, it's a pretty important way to gather information early, Carla. Given yor ambivalence towards a lynch, yet lack of unvote, combined with your earlier behavior, I have enough reason to feel more comfortable voting for you today. Vote: Carla (Dragonator)

I can see what he's saying. There's definite benefits to both. If I'm understanding it correctly, though, in both scenarios the watcher/tracker would remain quiet while the cop would come clean. Having a watcher here could definitely have its rewards, but the tracker isn't necessarily unmerited in itself. On one hand, with the watcher, we're more likely to get clues towards the scum in multiple scenarios - both as watch results on the cop and from cop results. With the tracker, we're going to get these results in a similar matter, but I think a lot of the main concern is in the clarity of these results - they are more likely to be less concrete or solidified results than they would sith a watcher, but then again, with a watcher that we seem to have planned to visit the cop every night, that gives the scum some wiggle room to move around with. That's where the element of surprise that the tracker brings comes into play. Both are valid roles with valid approaches. For now, I think I'll keep my vote on the tracker, but if we need a majority as we approach the deadline I would be eager to support a watcher.

I see what you're saying. I don't necessarily see a blocker is any more beneficial in that scenario, though. Both have similar purposes, just with different targets. I guess one could argue that the blocker is more likely to meet success, but that's only if they get a scum. Both roles are left with low chances at the start. I'm not certain there's a strongarm killer yet, in which I would suggest choosing the doctor for our second role. That being said, the possibility of a strongarm is still very much accountable for, and could be a good counter to the same theories brought up earlier about ways to take advantage of having a doctor and a cop. I'm willing to play this out safe. Vote: Cop Vote: Tracker

Ah, this is interesting for a first day. Let's not let this get in the way of thinking we should relax, though. The roles we choose are going to be very important given what's to come. The strongman is certainly a concern. I'm not sure how big of a concern it should be, though. It could just be mentioned to cause some paranoia (with so little of us this is a very plausible scenario), but at the same time, why would the Gods give a warning of such a thing if it weren't in existence? Regardless, I would say it's a given that we choose the cop for one of our roles. As for a second role, I'm left unsure. The tracker, as I see it, is more advantageous than the watcher, but then we are left with two information-based roles, which could be very risky given the fact that we'd be without a potential resistance role in a doctor or blocker. I lean towards the doctor right now, because the possibility of a strongman, as we've discussed, is only a possibility. For all we know, there might not even be one. Also, has anyone else noticed the lack of a vigilante? It seems odd that there wouldn't be one. Is that just because of the low number of us, or could there be a vigilante roaming the camp already?

Lynn Benton here! If you need help come give me a call! I got Ol' Faithful by my side here to take any calls! But no texts please. I don't think she can handle that much data.

A Scooby-Doo game! This is all I could have asked for! 1. 2. Of course not! I'm fluent in Soobese! 3. Velma, I'm a pretty intelligent person and can usually piece things together on my own for the most part. 4. I do. There's no messing around when it comes to Scooby-Doo. 5. Sure.

I'd love to play another game, but with my activity in Ragnarok, it's clear that I should probably take some time off before getting back into the swing of things. Good luck hosting DLL.

I'm a few days late, but hey, I was on vacation. A huge thank you to TPRU for hosting this game. It was the most fun I'd had in a while playing, even if I was inactive and was caught being converted to a doomed scum team right after being nearly cleared. Now you all know everything I said up until around Day 8 or 9 was sincere! Although I guess that means I need to sharpen up on my skills. I expected to have more thoughts written out, but I really can't express it into words as clearly as I want to anyways. Well done TPRU. Oh, and congrats to Hinck, Adam, the rest of the town, and Pandora as well for putting up a strong fight.

I'm being lynched, with reasonable thought. I wish you all luck. Vote: Canute (CallMePie) It's either you or Pudding-Head, and I think it's more likely to be you. If Pudding-Head continues to survive days, though, be careful when it starts to whittle down.

I don't know. It's been the talk everywhere and I still don't know what the heck he tried to do to me. I also don't know how to feel about this Canute/Pudding-Head ordeal from yesterday. Canute's general theory has been proven wrong, with Petr turning up corrupted, and I'm not sure what Canute is trying to do by continuing that discussion despite admitting that he's wrong, and from what it seems, thinks of Pudding-Head as town now. Or am I misinterpreting it all?

You have outlined pretty specifically that you think you know what Pudding-Head is doing and that he's scum. Doesn't sound like you think we're at square one if you think you have it all figured out. A Petr lynch doesn't mean that we don't know what's happening. We're testing a claim in the most reliant way possible.

Vote: Petr Half-Troll (Piratedave84) And this is why I'm not fully on board with your thought. You seem incredibly insistent that Pudding-Head is likely to be scum, but there isn't much proof in the night actions. It's more an educated guess from his behavior and his leadership, and while my sentiments are shared to a degree, I don't know that it's enough to derive a full lynch off of. What worries me is how dead-set you are on having him lynched today. Lynching Petr or Pudding-Head will verify each other, so what exactly is the problem with lynching Petr today?

I came back to a novel. Did I get targeted by Petr last night? I've only heard it approximately 20 times, 2 or 3 of which have been in private, and I have already disclosed with both people who have informed me, that if Petr did target me, I had no idea, and wasn't informed of the sort by anybody other than the two who messaged me. While I don't like how Petr has lied to you, Pudding-Head, I do think Canute's thoughts are valid, and a concern I have shared recently myself. It's no surprise that I suspected you early on, and that did fade for a while, but when we dwindle down to just the seven of us, it can't help but to start seeming fishy when the scum haven't killed in days and you come through unscathed, leading us through each lynch. You've certainly led us to the lynches of several scum, which is greatly appreciated, but the lack of experience from them appears as if it could have tumbled down, with you seemingly volunteering them. However, I don't necessarily think that's the case. I'm not sure that I quite believe that you would just voluntarily give up your team at the rate the scum have been going, but at the rate that we've been losing townies following Dar's lynch, it is becoming more and more of a plausible thought. Canute also brings up the valid point of you being one of the first to bring up the traitor, and if I recall, as soon as people began talking about it more openly, you said that there wasn't a traitor, and that it was a major misunderstanding, almost at the snap of a finger. Something here doesn't sit right with me from both you and Petr. As for Petr, I don't understand why he would lie about being vanilla. It makes absolutely no sense to me, especially if he trusted you enough to let you proxy vote for him. He obviously has disappeared, and probably won't speak for the matter, but I do hope he shows up to give his side so we can make a decision on whether we lynch or not before night falls.

Unfortunate that Tarr was town. Why are the last scum the trickiest to find? It does look like Pudding-Head is onto something though, so let's hope we have a good day.

How wouldn't scum voting patterns come into it if they directly involve you? As Pudding-Head said yesterday, my votes often fall in the middle too. It's a perfectly valid method of analysis. And your behavior has been quite weird, not only today, but in the past, though today it's been especially clear. As for solid choices, can't the same be said about Mist, Dar, and Jarl? Correct me if I'm wrong, but they were scum too. Everybody we have lynched has been the best, most "solid" choice. Three of them have been town, sure, but three of them have been scum too, so I don't quite know what point you're trying to make by saying that. Are you alright? I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say, other than Tarr can't be scum.

I share very similar sentiments. While Cranebeinn's argument was rather flat, the fact that you suddenly start working off of my ideas rather quickly after I accuse you is alarming, especially given my word seems to be the one trusted least, seeing how long I've been suspected. I think scum voting patterns and Tarr's exceptionally weird behavior today (though if I remember correctly, he's been brought up multiple times in the past) make him a solid choice for the lynch today, and he will get my vote. Vote: Tarr Egg-Chaser (Tariq j) And by "you", I meant Tarr, not Agnar.

I don't know why I didn't see this earlier. It is worth bringing up that The Rules state we just need to kill all of the Corrupted. Third Parties and Serial Killers are not a worry, at least in terms of us winning. I'm wondering the same. I wouldn't necessarily be surprised if he's scum, as he seems to be invisible lately, but it is still a rather random name to bring up. My fears about Tarr and the scum's votes early on are still existent, but it seems unnatural as to why the scum would risk placing their votes on him in case he got caught.