TWG LVIII - The Boy's Forest of Tears

[fank009]

We know that two people died last night, one of which was a wolf.  It's possible there's a vigi, but I think it's also likely that there is a third party killer.  We know he needs to die at some point.

Maybe he wants to die???

[Liggy]

Also, besides the semi-legitimate and honestly predictable reason of getting lynched for being a loner (despite, y'know, me not being overriding), I fail to see why I was being targeted for calling Verm out earlier.  It was a legitimate reason, and it was the only time this phase ANYONE has actually called anyone out on something, but it netted me three votes.  In about an hour.  Yeah.

Some other points:

Where did that suspicion go, Verm?  Why am I sufficiently suspicious enough to be lynched without Sauce approval, but your other suspicion wasn't?
Why did you wait until two other people voted for me to actually vote for me yourself?
If I have a killing power, and I killed a wolf, why exactly is that grounds to lynch me?  I don't have a killing power, and I'm non-overriding, but if you assume I was then I just killed a wolf, wouldn't that be grounds to keep me alive?  After all, I'm helping us all?

[Liggy]

Alternatively, I can assume that I was your original suspicion, which is definitely something you should have brought up when I first called you out on it.

[SlowPokemon]

Wow. Someone's getting desperate.

Go eat your red onions. You're just talking in circles and I really would like some proof that you wouldn't use your killing power (which you obviously have) on one of the humans.

[Liggy]

Yeah, I'm going to say no.  I can't give proof that I don't have the power to Vigi, and it's not like I can prove that I wouldn't use it even if I did have it.  So instead, I'd have to argue this myself.

I could argue that you guys are shifting the burden of proof; you're the ones making the claim that I'm anti-human, yet none of you have made a sufficient argument against the fact that I would be working against the humans.  I've proved all my claims, with the exception of the specifics of my role, which I very well can't prove.

I could argue that three people placed a vote on me within a hour, despite that none had posted any argument against me besides the third.  Who, by the way, admitted that he originally didn't want to lynch me for that reason, but never really said what changed his mind so dramatically and so quickly.

I could argue that being a Loner isn't enough to lynch me, because the phrase "non-human" is not nearly as specific as you think.  I count for the human win condition, I win if humans do and if I'm alive.  My role PM was very clear as well, and my victory did not prevent any other team from winning.

I could argue that I've already been more productive than most humans, calling out a player for doing an action that I felt to be suspicious, and then defending my points when called out on it myself.

All of these points are valid, and they're all reasons to think twice before lynching me.  But I really can't argue them, because no one actually responds to my argument.  Instead, I'm evidently portraying myself as both desperate and red onion-deficient.  Somehow.

[Bubbles]

I'm kinda on the fence for the Liggy lynch.

Verm is being a bit too passive.  He asks Bird who we should vote for, and then when other people start voting, he follows suit.  He also said he had an idea of who Bird might think is a wolf, but instead of acting on it, he safeties instead.  This really isn't productive behavior, and it's really invoking a feeling that he doesn't want to call out anyone he doesn't "have" to, which is much more of a behavior of a wolf than a human.  A human would want to call out everyone they find suspicious.  A wolf would be more hesitant in the hopes that they can just bandwagon some other vote.

I do think this was a weak argument, but it didn't make me want to vote him. But within a half hour, two people did! But what really struck me was when verm voted for him, since I still didn't see much of a reason for there to be that many votes on him.

Anyway, so what if Liggy has a night kill? Last night no humans died, so theres no harm yet. If he does end up killing a human then I understand going after him, but so far I don't see him as a threat. If humans start to die, then we know exactly who to lynch! Non-overriding third parties usually side with one of the two teams, so wouldnt it be better to have him on our side instead of killing him?

I'm not adding in any reasons why we should lynch him since you guys seem to already have that figured out

ninja'd

[vermilionvermin]

Yeah, I never considered lynching anyone other than Liggy this phase.  I didn't want to say anything before because I assumed bird was going to say something.  I didn't want to reveal that before because bird's the alliance leader, not me.  He knows more of the claims than I do.  But he's not here right now and we need a lynch.

I think if, in the win condition, Toby meant wolves he'd just say wolves.  "Non-human" is definitely not the most common way to say "wolves", especially in a game with a loner where that's potentially confusing.

I think that if you are a fool (which I think is possible) bird would just have our vigi nightkill you and be done with it.  If we don't have a vigi, then you probably aren't a fool!

[MaestroUGC]

I don't think you all are realizing you're playing the wrong game. This is the same reason most of you played so badly during the Mephistopheles game.

Verm strikes me as the kind of player who would take advantage of the mystery of this game and would make a bold claim at the beginning. If he waited, then that would lead to doubt of his claim, which wouldn't work. He's taking such a passive role after making a strong claim like that? No, he's not one to typically sheep, so he's clearly acting in his own interests.

If you have such a strong conviction, why wait for Bird, who's clearly absent, to make your opinion known? You've never waited like that before, you always push your suspicions. You would've acted and then Bird would've just corrected you and you would've stepped back in line, like you normally do in similar circumstances.

No. You are acting rather subversive, trying to steer the game even though you claim to be deferring to the alliance leader. This I don't like.

[vermilionvermin]

In terms of people iI'd normally rely on to make a necessary post, bird's normally up there.  Revealing to the wolves that bird trusted me enough to let me know early who the lynch of the day was wasn't something that was high on my list on the off chance they do have a strongman power.  But with things getting as late in the phase as they got, I don't think I had a choice.

[Bird]

Yeah, I'm going to say no.  I can't give proof that I don't have the power to Vigi, and it's not like I can prove that I wouldn't use it even if I did have it.  So instead, I'd have to argue this myself.

I could argue that you guys are shifting the burden of proof; you're the ones making the claim that I'm anti-human, yet none of you have made a sufficient argument against the fact that I would be working against the humans.  I've proved all my claims, with the exception of the specifics of my role, which I very well can't prove.

I could argue that three people placed a vote on me within a hour, despite that none had posted any argument against me besides the third.  Who, by the way, admitted that he originally didn't want to lynch me for that reason, but never really said what changed his mind so dramatically and so quickly.

I could argue that being a Loner isn't enough to lynch me, because the phrase "non-human" is not nearly as specific as you think.  I count for the human win condition, I win if humans do and if I'm alive.  My role PM was very clear as well, and my victory did not prevent any other team from winning.

I could argue that I've already been more productive than most humans, calling out a player for doing an action that I felt to be suspicious, and then defending my points when called out on it myself.

All of these points are valid, and they're all reasons to think twice before lynching me.  But I really can't argue them, because no one actually responds to my argument.  Instead, I'm evidently portraying myself as both desperate and red onion-deficient.  Somehow.

I guess the secret's out; Liggy was my back-up option. I didn't want to just come out and say "we're lynching Liggy" since I thought it would be nice if other players put some effort into finding the actual wolves, rather than falling back on an alliance lynch pick! I knew in the back of my mind that a Liggy lynch was probably inevitable, but was hoping this phase wouldn't be a total waste because of it!

Anyway, Liggy, there are a couple of problems with your defense. The most important being that you can't possibly count for the human win condition when the human win condition says specifically that all non-humans must be eliminated. Loners have always represented non-human teams, regardless of whether they count for us, meaning that killing you is a part of your win condition. Your very existence prevents us from winning. So we have to lynch you! Sorry!

Maestro: I think your misgivings about verm are well-placed, but I don't know if now would be the best time for us to lynch him, especially when an obvious non-human is just asking for the axe!

verm: Yeah, I forgot to plug my laptop back in. Sue me!!!!

[Bird]

Killing you is part of OUR win condition*

bah

[MaestroUGC]

Go ahead, then, I have no real reservations against a Liggy lynch. I for one show no support for Verm at this point.

[fank009]

The sad thing about today, is that there has been no sdiscussion whatsoever, and liggys going to be lynched cause there is no alternative, no use scum hunting if no ones making an effort.

As much as I don't want liggy dead at this time, we have no choice.

[Toby]

Actually, I think I may have made a mistake. If in the chance that there is a non-overriding loner, I see him more of a ghost wanting to find himself put somewhere. If he can, he'll be a human or maybe even a wolf. If the non overriding loner wished could win with a certain party at a given moment in time, then they will become part of that team.

Which means, if there is a non-overriding loner, he shall not have to be destroyed in order for human victory.

[fank009]

I think if, in the win condition, Toby meant wolves he'd just say wolves.  "Non-human" is definitely not the most common way to say "wolves", especially in a game with a loner where that's potentially confusing.

Im gonna lay my 10 cents down, and say that there has been time where hosts have said hints of possible 3rd party scum,  and there hasnt been any 3rd party scum