Right now I'm under the impressions that the information you gave on your ability is really vague and ambiguous. First there was


And then there was



Reading the first post made me think the "bit of information" is an inherent feature of your ability. However, apparently that isn't the case. Instead, it seems like the "bit of information" you got was your own conclusion that the ability didn't go through, based on Axel saying he succeeded in Lynching Shoop.

I mean, if I were Vigilante and my kill doesn't go through and I conclude with the information that my target is bulletproof, I wouldn't say "My Night Ability lets me kill someone and then get a piece of information".

Feel free to explain yourself though, since I'm trying to figure out exactly what you meant by those posts.

I was being ambiguous on purpose, because I didn't want to release all of my information if I didn't have to. When more scrutiny came upon me I clarified, admitting that the 'piece of information' I got was that it didn't go through on Axel, which led me to believe he mightve had a protective ability.

"Reading the first post made me think the "bit of information" is an inherent feature of your ability. However, apparently that isn't the case. Instead, it seems like the "bit of information" you got was your own conclusion that the ability didn't go through, based on Axel saying he succeeded in Lynching Shoop.


I mean, if I were Vigilante and my kill doesn't go through and I conclude with the information that my target is bulletproof, I wouldn't say "My Night Ability lets me kill someone and then get a piece of information"."

You're exactly right. It was my intention to be ambiguous, but once I was demanded a claim I clarified.

However, it was not clarified by a claim, or at least not by his claim: it was clarified by MY claim. As such, there's a chance you are actually looking for possible role-blockers to take them out of game. It would go fine with your own role-blocker claim.

Geno's currently null, leaning scum, in my opinion. The fact of the matter is that a lot of things he says (Which he claims to be "Intentional ambiguity") don't match up. He isn't such a big scum read though that he should instantly be lynched, but if we end up at the deadline, we'll probably have to. I'm keeping my vote right where it's at.

Could you detail what exactly doesn't match up


No it wasn't, your claim just made it clear that Axel didn't have a protective ability like I first thought. I wouldn't have guessed someone role blocked me. That accusation makes no sense.

I'll claim if enough people want me to, but I'd really rather not. I consider my ability to be pretty useful if I use it right, so I don't really want the Mafia to kill me because of it.

...which they will now consider doing because I just said that.

...unless I was bluffing and my ability isn't actually helpful at all

#mindgames

No really though, I can claim but I don't really want to

There's no need to rush those claims. Players who have claimed did so to clarify situations, to accuse players, or to save themselves from lynching. The four players you have named haven't done any of the above.

So with essentially one day left we have to decide if we're lynching or not.

I don't think we have a good enough target to lynch ATM.

Also claim wise, I'd rather not currently. Any of the town players that haven't claimed might just be the secret weapons we need, after all, if the mafia knows everyone's ability they would know exactly who they needed to target first.

My biggest suspicions are Unlimited Vig, and Vanilla Towny. I would go for the "Vig" if we had to lynch, but we aren't at that point yet.

I honestly think there's no need to lynch today. We got some leads anyway today.

Vote: No Lynch.

Convinced that Deciton is scum. Have seen potential 194/Dec team for a couple days.

Hasn't really answered my questions, avoids discussion when it gets too heated, etc.

Concerning Vaneloppe though, I'd like to present a case. I'm not 100% convinced that it's leak-proof, but you guys can evaluate and improve/discredit it.

1. Two people died last night. One of them was probably the mafia kill, but the other had to have some outside influence. Unless the Mafia has double kill or we're dealing with two mafia families, which we will get to evaluate better on Day 3.

2. Of all the possible ways for an extra person to die, vig or serial killer are by far the most likely, because someone claimed vigilante.
If Dephius or Shoop had been a mason or something, a mafia player couldn't claim vigilante without fear that a real vigilante would counter claim.

3. Vaneloppe limits himself to a vigilante claim before Day 2. Before he gets to use it or anything, he says that Dark Ermac's character depiction of him is accurate.
It gets a tiny bit iffy because Vaneloppe confuses his character with Johnathan, but still, he's limiting himself to a claim that's on Ermac's list, and I just don't see scum or serial killers doing this. It's dumb from their perspective.

4. If Vaneloppe is a serial killer, everything he has done so far would either be extremely stupid or ridiculously intelligent. I don't think he would do either.

I'm fairly convinced Vaneloppe's town.

Like I said, real life has got me pretty busy and I might have just missed your questions, as for discussion it matters when it happens, typically I see the bottom end, where any opinion I might have has already been voiced. At that point I'll only say something if it's very major.

So if you repost the questions I'll see what I can do (if any are still relevant).

I hadn't really seen scum-Deciton when you mentioned it earlier, but after him randomly coming in and saying we should no-lynch, I can see it. I'm going to be reading back through the game tonight so I'll give him a look.

Also, DJ, why did you feel the news to make a case for Vanellope?

I'm interested in town confirming as many people as possible. I'm not sure it's possible with Vaneloppe but I'd like to try.