JN Mafia Thread: Superheroes Unite!

[Klecko73isGod]

Tie a pork chop around your neck and he will follow you anywhere?

Hardy Har Har.

[Pac]

Kleck, you aren't playing like you. Now, that could just be a natural evolution of playstyle, especially since this is only your second game, which would be a good thing. So I won't vote for you based on that alone.

But there's another possible explanation, which is that you're being coached. Which would make you scum.

I think just as telling, if not more, is the fact that he's been asking some pretty silly questions. This is after a game under his belt and supposedly having read a couple past games. Anyone who's played this game for 5 minutes knows mafia isn't going to withhold a NK on night 1. Killing off townies is uh.. how they win.

[The Crusher]

Better yet, lets sit here and not lynch anyone who even hints at possibly having a role, regardless of how scummy they act. Then we can just sit here all day every game day and hope for the best each time we get a random lynch.

This is the problem, you are reaching so far here to try to validate your feelings on certain players, that you are throwing all common sense out of the window. Next thing you'll be telling us that we should take the word of anyone as soon as they say "trust me". The bottom line is nobody in this game deserves to be trusted "just because" and SMC gave us absolutely NO reasons to vote him other than his word that we should. Sorry, but that just doesn't cut it. If you have a real argument to make, then make it, otherwise stop wasting our times with this nonsense.

Good points on SMC. His argument looks really good looking back now. But at the time I don't think it was his argument that got his goose cooked but his attitude. He let some of that arrogant doomed scum hostility get in their and that was it. Didn't help that zealot one and zealot two where cramming their arguments down his throat like Crusher at a pastry buffet.

[The Crusher]

I think just as telling, if not more, is the fact that he's been asking some pretty silly questions. This is after a game under his belt and supposedly having read a couple past games. Anyone who's played this game for 5 minutes knows mafia isn't going to withhold a NK on night 1. Killing off townies is uh.. how they win.

I hardly call Doggins mind fock game a game of mafia. It was the mafia equivalent of playing horseshoes with toilet seats. But Kleck has kinda calmed down and not being his zesty self. Maybe being coached? Or maybe he skipped a meal? tuff call.

[Smashmouth]

From Page 43 (post 437) LONG before SMC was lynched adding to my other 3 posts ( that Doggin asked me to produce bringing the total now to 5) that it was possible he could not reveal.

Right he said he did not have a game specific power but Im saying its possible he can have a role thats controlable but not revealable.

I think everyone could have a role or power but they are 2 diffeernt things and in this debate everything is getting twisted and confusing. Chan seems to be at the heart of this and it has my attention as do you and Arsis. Is it possible your making too much out of this for a reason to lynch someone ?

Here I am Again on page 44 sticking up for SMC. We were discussing roles and powers at this point and My idea was he had a power but it was PASSIVE meaning he had no control over it, it just Triggers when an action is applied at night or during the day, such as a lynch or a Night kill attempt.

So what your saying is its impossible that earlier he could have worded things wrong and you pounced all over him for it ?

You claimed the "game specific" and "role" were identical when SMC claimed they were not and your trying to cloud that with past posts that were not even relevant. They are not identical chan sorry.

A role you can control and a role you can Not control are 2 different things and ithink thats what SMC meant all along.

here is yet another post

Correct. But if he is separating them as 2 different things and denying one of those 2, there is obviously one left for him to have which he does not want to reveal or can't reveal.

So what he might be saying is his power is controlable.

Chan stated you have two options after SMC posted this

"game specific power" and "role" is that same in your book?

Besides, if I had a "role", why would I even hint at it now? That makes no sense.

It is too me..

A game specific power = roled. No powers = townie..

What chan was arguing at this point seemed to have no relevance as to what SMC was actully asking him or trying to say. He continued on attacking but I picked up on the 2 posts above.

Now its possible chan misunderstood what SMC was saying here and thats when I got involved saying is it possible to have a power thats "passive" meaning you have a power but cant control it ? My thought process here is that if you have a power you can't control are you roled in the traditionl sense ? NO because its uncontrolable.

But what SMC is saying is POWERS are NOT Relevant to actual ROLES. So if he told you he was superman what good would that do other than alerting Scum exactly who he is . Its very hard to get deeper into an expalnation here but this also is why I feel SCUM has a power that can be directed at specific Heros IF THEY FIND OUT WHO SAID HEROS ARE>

I want ALL of you who are Heros to ask yourselves this simple question. If SMC revealed he was Superman would you have any Idea at all what his powers were ? The answer is NO. BUT there is a good chance this would open him up to Villians who could actully take him out due to what some have speculated (incuding myself) a power related to killing a specific HERO. If your a hero and you can't see this fact I can't help you further.

[Smashmouth]

Better yet, lets sit here and not lynch anyone who even hints at possibly having a role, regardless of how scummy they act. Then we can just sit here all day every game day and hope for the best each time we get a random lynch.

This is the problem, you are reaching so far here to try to validate your feelings on certain players, that you are throwing all common sense out of the window. Next thing you'll be telling us that we should take the word of anyone as soon as they say "trust me". The bottom line is nobody in this game deserves to be trusted "just because" and SMC gave us absolutely NO reasons to vote him other than his word that we should. Sorry, but that just doesn't cut it. If you have a real argument to make, then make it, otherwise stop wasting our times with this nonsense.

Bleedin to be Honest I dont think you have a clue as to what the hell is going on in this game at all.

[Klecko73isGod]

I think just as telling, if not more, is the fact that he's been asking some pretty silly questions. This is after a game under his belt and supposedly having read a couple past games. Anyone who's played this game for 5 minutes knows mafia isn't going to withhold a NK on night 1. Killing off townies is uh.. how they win.

If you read the thread, I've already explained this. You just need to read. You have absolutely no case against me other than, "he's not acting like himself."

How about I made one comment in regards to Doggin voting for me at the outset and before I knew it, I had five people voting against me? Now you tell me, isn't a smart strategy at that point to lower your profile a bit and let things calm down?

Well I was at work and very busy which made it easy and my strategy obviously worked because within a day all but one person who voted for me was voting for someone else.

Just because I got better at this game than you after only playing once don't hate. You're 10X more suspicious in this game than me as I pointed out last night. Conveniently, you haven't addressed my post.

Gee, I wonder why.

Right now I am torn between voting for you and Smash. The only reason you might be spared today is the fact that there is more momentum in Smash's direction than yours.

[ZachEY]

This is very true. Watch him in any of these games, and his arguments are almost always "XYZ is scum. it's obvious. how can you not see that"

That said, given the defenders he seems to be picking up, lynching Smash might not be a bad idea.

I have 2-3 guys in my head right now IF smash is guilty that I think strong cases can be made against.

Based on this suspicion, there's NO WAY he's NK'd ever... so, eventually, a decision needs to be made on him... I think it's now.

[Smashmouth]

I have 2-3 guys in my head right now IF smash is guilty that I think strong cases can be made against.

Based on this suspicion, there's NO WAY he's NK'd ever... so, eventually, a decision needs to be made on him... I think it's now.

Not sure what your up to here EY but man does this make you look Scummy.

[CTM]

From Page 43 (post 437) LONG before SMC was lynched adding to my other 3 posts ( that Doggin asked me to produce bringing the total now to 5) that it was possible he could not reveal.

Here I am Again on page 44 sticking up for SMC. We were discussing roles and powers at this point and My idea was he had a power but it was PASSIVE meaning he had no control over it, it just Triggers when an action is applied at night or during the day, such as a lynch or a Night kill attempt.

here is yet another post

Chan stated you have two options after SMC posted this

What chan was arguing at this point seemed to have no relevance as to what SMC was actully asking him or trying to say. He continued on attacking but I picked up on the 2 posts above.

Now its possible chan misunderstood what SMC was saying here and thats when I got involved saying is it possible to have a power thats "passive" meaning you have a power but cant control it ? My thought process here is that if you have a power you can't control are you roled in the traditionl sense ? NO because its uncontrolable.

But what SMC is saying is POWERS are NOT Relevant to actual ROLES. So if he told you he was superman what good would that do other than alerting Scum exactly who he is . Its very hard to get deeper into an expalnation here but this also is why I feel SCUM has a power that can be directed at specific Heros IF THEY FIND OUT WHO SAID HEROS ARE>

I want ALL of you who are Heros to ask yourselves this simple question. If SMC revealed he was Superman would you have any Idea at all what his powers were ? The answer is NO. BUT there is a good chance this would open him up to Villians who could actully take him out due to what some have speculated (incuding myself) a power related to killing a specific HERO. If your a hero and you can't see this fact I can't help you further.

From the horses mouth:

JVoR didn't say there was consequences to revealing powers. You just couldn't reveal who you were.

Tell me why he couldn't say "doctor", or, I have a traditional role (which he him himself equated to a 'suped' up character)

[Pac]

If you read the thread, I've already explained this. You just need to read. You have absolutely no case against me other than, "he's not acting like himself."

How about I made one comment in regards to Doggin voting for me at the outset and before I knew it, I had five people voting against me? Now you tell me, isn't a smart strategy at that point to lower your profile a bit and let things calm down?

Well I was at work and very busy which made it easy and my strategy obviously worked because within a day all but one person who voted for me was voting for someone else.

Just because I got better at this game than you after only playing once don't hate. You're 10X more suspicious in this game than me as I pointed out last night. Conveniently, you haven't addressed my post.

Gee, I wonder why.

Right now I am torn between voting for you and Smash. The only reason you might be spared today is the fact that there is more momentum in Smash's direction than yours.

Addresse what post??

I'm not surprised you're considering voting for me since your M.O. for 2 games has been to vote for anyone who votes for you.

[ZachEY]

I think just as telling, if not more, is the fact that he's been asking some pretty silly questions. This is after a game under his belt and supposedly having read a couple past games. Anyone who's played this game for 5 minutes knows mafia isn't going to withhold a NK on night 1. Killing off townies is uh.. how they win.

In fairness to Klecko, he hasn't played any games in which he's actually seen mafia operate.

I just don't see how it makes sense to go after a player like Klecko this early, if he's scum, there's no way he's experienced enough to survive to the end of this game... we'll get him... There are bigger issues to attend to now though.

[Smashmouth]

From the horses mouth:

Tell me why he couldn't say "doctor", or, I have a traditional role (which he him himself equated to a 'suped' up character)

Chan at the time I can see what your asking here making some sense. But on the first vote in the game could you not given someone who told you 5 times not to lynch him the benifit of the doubt since there was some evidence he could not reveal ? Would that have been so hard ? IF YOUR A HERO YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS !

Right now i think the Clark Kent Theory on SMC makes the most sense and really should answer all your questions Chan. Sure that would have been hard to pick up on at the time but like I said he told you a bunch of time to back off and in all honesty your arguement aganist him seemed to be based more on past game play than it was for this game.

Im going on my theories on how this game is set up and I will continue to go on those theories until convinced other wise.

[Klecko73isGod]

Addresse what post??

I'm not surprised you're considering voting for me since your M.O. for 2 games has been to vote for anyone who votes for you.

Originally Posted by Pac2566

ha! I didn't say I necessarily agree with everything he says but it's usually put together in a pretty articulate fashion.

This whole babe in the woods nonsense he's been spewing is borderline insulting. "Do you think Mafia withheld their NK".. really?

Couple that with the fact he didn't react when needled by Slats and I'm starting to think he wants to keep a low profile and come off as harmless... all scum like activities.

First of all, it's impossible for me to keep a low profile. I wouldn't to even know how to attempt that.

Second of all, I did react when Slats needled me. You need to read.

Third, I noticed that you attacked me the second I questioned Smashmouth and you are currently the only person agreeing with Smash. A real easy way to distract attention from yourself to accuse others, a real scummy move.

But for right now, I am focusing on the case against Smash and wanto hear more before I vote.

Post #856

No offense Pac, but you suck at this game.

[ZachEY]

Not sure what your up to here EY but man does this make you look Scummy.

Umm...

You've got votes from Me, slats, and sharrow...

You've got FOS from Norway, CTM, Doggin, shutout, and Klecko.

If you're innocent, you stay alive as the obvious scum target... If you're guilty, you stay alive obviously.

In other words, you need to be resolved, because you'll live to the end of the game otherwise, and that would be a problem.

[Doggin94it]

Umm...

You've got votes from Me, slats, and sharrow...

You've got FOS from Norway, CTM, Doggin, shutout, and Klecko.

If you're innocent, you stay alive as the obvious scum target... If you're guilty, you stay alive obviously.

In other words, you need to be resolved, because you'll live to the end of the game otherwise, and that would be a problem.

You know, Smash can be "resolved" by investigation as well as lynch. Why are you acting like lynching him is the only option?

[ZachEY]

Chan at the time I can see what your asking here making some sense. But on the first vote in the game could you not given someone who told you 5 times not to lynch him the benifit of the doubt since there was some evidence he could not reveal ? Would that have been so hard ? IF YOUR A HERO YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS !

Completely wrong.

The only people that I think ever get the benefit of the doubt are new players. If we left SMC alone for what he said, then we turned out attention to CTM, he'd say the exact same thing... Then we'd have to let him off the hook... Then we turn our attention to EY, and I say the exact same thing... Well, if SMC and CTM got the benefit of the doubt, why don't I? So, from there, we move onto the next person.

Are you seeing a pattern developing here? Or, much like the SMC argument, are you convienently missing it.

[ZachEY]

You know, Smash can be "resolved" by investigation as well as lynch. Why are you acting like lynching him is the only option?

Yes, he can be investigated. But, then the finder would have to reveal...

And what if the cop is killed before the reveal...

And what if the cop is NK'd immediately after the reveal...

And what if the cop is Parnoid/Insane/Naive...

And what if he is the godfather...

[Bleedin Green]

Bleedin to be Honest I dont think you have a clue as to what the hell is going on in this game at all.

No, its quite clear, you're still wasting our time with a nonsensical argument regarding SMC's lynch and how it makes you clearly innocent and the people who you are always suspicious of look scummy. You also continually try to make the point that SMC shouldn't have been lynched due to his absurd ominous warnings of doom. Meanwhile, everyone else is busy telling you why that doesn't make any sense. All of this conveniently taking place while it is helping us get absolutely nowhere and doing zero to help towards deciding our next lynch. You may not be scum, but you're certainly not helping us get anywhere either.

[Dan.]

Chan at the time I can see what your asking here making some sense. But on the first vote in the game could you not given someone who told you 5 times not to lynch him the benifit of the doubt since there was some evidence he could not reveal ? Would that have been so hard ? IF YOUR A HERO YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS !

Right now i think the Clark Kent Theory on SMC makes the most sense and really should answer all your questions Chan. Sure that would have been hard to pick up on at the time but like I said he told you a bunch of time to back off and in all honesty your arguement aganist him seemed to be based more on past game play than it was for this game.

Im going on my theories on how this game is set up and I will continue to go on those theories until convinced other wise.

Smashmouth, another thing to consider is that maybe heroes receive different amounts of information. For example, someone like Iron Man wouldn't necessarily be warned about one specific archvillain, whereas Superman might have been warned about Lex Luthor or some other villain with kryptonite in the game.

I haven't made up my mind on you because I'm trying to do this without role fishing. But when you make certain assumptions is it because you're scum who slipped up and are trying to dig yourself out of a hole, or is it because you're (possibly incorrectly) assuming all heroes may have received the same information you did.

[CTM]

Chan at the time I can see what your asking here making some sense. But on the first vote in the game could you not given someone who told you 5 times not to lynch him the benifit of the doubt since there was some evidence he could not reveal ? Would that have been so hard ? IF YOUR A HERO YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS !

Right now i think the Clark Kent Theory on SMC makes the most sense and really should answer all your questions Chan. Sure that would have been hard to pick up on at the time but like I said he told you a bunch of time to back off and in all honesty your arguement aganist him seemed to be based more on past game play than it was for this game.

Im going on my theories on how this game is set up and I will continue to go on those theories until convinced other wise.

Doggin already explained this to you so I won't again. But tell me how would we lynch anyone if simply saying "if you lynch me it'll be horrible for the town" was enough to get out of a lynch??

[CTM]

You know, Smash can be "resolved" by investigation as well as lynch. Why are you acting like lynching him is the only option?

This is the second time you seem to be cop directing.

With 5 scum, and potentially no doc, the wisdom of a cop reveal with 1 guilty is questionable to begin with anyway..

[Smashmouth]

Umm...

You've got votes from Me, slats, and sharrow...

You've got FOS from Norway, CTM, Doggin, shutout, and Klecko.

If you're innocent, you stay alive as the obvious scum target... If you're guilty, you stay alive obviously.

In other words, you need to be resolved, because you'll live to the end of the game otherwise, and that would be a problem.

Assuming im scum yes this would be a problem. But im not scum

Where did you come to the conclusion about the NK ? or was that a slip up ?

[Bleedin Green]

Doggin already explained this to you so I won't again. But tell me how would we lynch anyone if simply saying "if you lynch me it'll be horrible for the town" was enough to get out of a lynch??

I also brought up this point, which of course received no response. That apparently lead Smash to the conclusion that I have no idea whats going on in this game, so you better be careful Chan or you might be accused of the same. All I can figure is he thinks we should just sit around and hope for the best with a random lynch every time.

[Smashmouth]

Doggin already explained this to you so I won't again. But tell me how would we lynch anyone if simply saying "if you lynch me it'll be horrible for the town" was enough to get out of a lynch??

Chan and bleedin Im done discussing mafia strategy. Im also done concerning SMC I have said my peace.

[Pac]

First of all, it's impossible for me to keep a low profile. I wouldn't to even know how to attempt that.

Second of all, I did react when Slats needled me. You need to read.

Third, I noticed that you attacked me the second I questioned Smashmouth and you are currently the only person agreeing with Smash. A real easy way to distract attention from yourself to accuse others, a real scummy move.

But for right now, I am focusing on the case against Smash and wanto hear more before I vote.

These are questions??

- Yes you sheepishly reacted to Slats when he needled you... that was my point.

- You'll have to let me know what I was the only one agreeing with Smash about... I saw a number of people who don't see the case against him either... he does only have 3 votes!

Is that all?

[CTM]

I also brought up this point, which of course received no response. That apparently lead Smash to the conclusion that I have no idea whats going on in this game, so you better be careful Chan or you might be accused of the same. All I can figure is he thinks we should just sit around and hope for the best with a random lynch every time.

Lol.. I have to say that him seemingly being so sure of SMC's innocence is making him look more and more guilty. I don't understand how it could be obvious to anyone who didn't have some additional info..

Thoughts on the pac and his unvote? Nobody seems to like it

[ZachEY]

Assuming im scum yes this would be a problem. But im not scum

Where did you come to the conclusion about the NK ? or was that a slip up ?

What conclusion about the NK?

[ZachEY]

Chan and bleedin Im done discussing mafia strategy. Im also done concerning SMC I have said my peace.

If all goes well, you'll be done in this game soon too.

[ZachEY]

Lol.. I have to say that him seemingly being so sure of SMC's innocence is making him look more and more guilty. I don't understand how it could be obvious to anyone who didn't have some additional info..

Thoughts on the pac and his unvote? Nobody seems to like it

Welcome to 4 pages ago...

As for Pac... Don't love him, but it's going to take a lot to get me to look in another direction right now.

[Pac]

In fairness to Klecko, he hasn't played any games in which he's actually seen mafia operate.

I just don't see how it makes sense to go after a player like Klecko this early, if he's scum, there's no way he's experienced enough to survive to the end of this game... we'll get him... There are bigger issues to attend to now though.

Well if kleck is scum, and now been shown why he's suspicious, doesn't it stand to reason that he'll alter his style accordingly? In fact he already has.

I know you are hot and bothered to get Smash lynched but I just don't see it right now. Perhaps it's because I happen to agree with some of his theories in regards to SMC's death and it doesn't make sense to me that mafia would provide intel about how SMC died with 10 votes.

[CTM]

Welcome to 4 pages ago...

As for Pac... Don't love him, but it's going to take a lot to get me to look in another direction right now.

Lol.. I know but the way he keeps making it like you had to be an villian not to see it is making it worse. He's kind of confirming the theory with posts like that..

[Pac]

Lol.. I know but the way he keeps making it like you had to be an villian not to see it is making it worse. He's kind of confirming the theory with posts like that..

You know he's a basket case... the fact that he's frothing at the mouth while posting doesn't make him much more suspicious to me.

and don't try to spin this into me being his great defender either... it's just right now I don't see the case.

[Verbal]

Assuming im scum yes this would be a problem. But im not scum

Where did you come to the conclusion about the NK ? or was that a slip up ?

The conclusion on the NK is just simple logic. If the mafia know you are a potential lynch target, then won't bother NKing you. And if you are actually mafia, then you obviously won't be NKing yourself......therefore you will continue to live as long as you are a potential lynch target.

[ZachEY]

Well if kleck is scum, and now been shown why he's suspicious, doesn't it stand to reason that he'll alter his style accordingly? In fact he already has.

I know you are hot and bothered to get Smash lynched but I just don't see it right now. Perhaps it's because I happen to agree with some of his theories in regards to SMC's death and it doesn't make sense to me that mafia would provide intel about how SMC died with 10 votes.

1) Don't edit your posts.

2) Kleck could alter his style if he were scum, or he could alter his style because he's learned something. Klecko's a guy that doesn't make me nervous at all... I think he's innocent... and if he's guilty, he'll be caught in time. No doubt.

3) TBH, I know you're not 'getting it' with smash, because I believe that if he is in fact scum, there's a pretty strong possibility you're aligned with him.

4) All the theories of how SMC died are kind of irrelevent, honestly, I think bringing them up repeatedly is a scum tactic to draw us away from the task at hand and confuse us. In reality, there's either 1 hero who knows the answer to this, or 5 scum who do, and either way, the bulk of the innocents don't know... and honestly, it doesn't really change much...

If it's scum that can cast 2 votes, or a secret vote, then guess what we need to find scum... and if it's someone casting a secret vote on the good guy side... well we wouldn't want them to reveal, lest they be killed. And, we need to find scum.

How SMC died, IMO, doesn't really change anything, except we need to perhaps consider putting more weight on L-1.