Mafia #27: Survivor ACville Island

Lady G said:
You do make a good point here Hooked...JL why are you so interested in who and why??
I'm not quite sure what to do with the information once given at this point anyway...anyone coming out and sayin I investigated so and so, are we to believe them from the jump and all vote the same way?? Would we even believe them??



I guess I have to say, I see what Fungi was saying...at the point he said it, not much had happened, I myself figured I would wait until someone peeked my interest before deciding on who I would investigate, I just don't see where him not wanting to investigate someone at the time was so suspicious?
Click to expand...

Lady G, you have made some valid points.

anyone coming out and sayin I investigated so and so, are we to believe them from the jump and all vote the same way?? Would we even believe them??
Click to expand...

So far no one has said that, but why wouldn't you believe them? This trick would work once. That very person would be on the chopping block the next day if they lied. Also, once they put their investigation out there, they would no longer be a threat to the mafia teams, just an innocent by-stander.

So I see no reason not to believe them.
 
Gracecat said:
Ya know JL... It makes me wonder, it really does.... Why would you post a question to get everybody hot and bothered. Are you drawing light from yourself?

I'm under the spotlight for discussing your question and people's response. But nobody is asking why you even suggested investigations the first night.

Just to clarify, where did Fungi protect me? I missed that one.
Click to expand...

Gracecat, I am drawing light to myself. How would my game play so far not?

Who has gotten hot and bothered about my question. I do not think anyone has. Now a few have gotten a little concerned about my first vote on Fungi, but with less than 10 hours left, I am more concerned about the lack of votes.
 
Well I guess a few are bothered by the question also. I just did not take it that way, but looking back, I can see it.
 
johnlarson66 said:
I think it was a valid question and was also curious to see what players might fly under the radar and not get inspected at all.
Click to expand...

Interesting... I also checked on players.

To my knowledge, and I may be wrong. The only person having not posted in the thread is JM. HN and Ice posted in the investigation discussion. A decision I disagree with, but they did post. I'm under strong consideration for being evil because I'm so danged mouthy, I'm drawing attention to myself.

Is it a game plan to lay very very low while until the mouthy ones get booted? At this time, I'm inclined to vote for Judgemax. But I'm not going to waste my vote on a possible UD though. I'll wait closer to nightfall.
 
johnlarson66 said:
Gracecat, I am drawing light to myself. How would my game play so far not?

Who has gotten hot and bothered about my question. I do not think anyone has. Now a few have gotten a little concerned about my first vote on Fungi, but with less than 10 hours left, I am more concerned about the lack of votes.
Click to expand...

I see the attention drawing to yourself for your vote, not your question.

"Hot and bothered" was directing to the way we were voting, not to the question itself.

I'm being confusing. I have a toddler boy distracting me. So it's my safest bet to run along until a couple hours before nightfall. :grinyes:
 
johnlarson66 said:
So far no one has said that, but why wouldn't you believe them? This trick would work once. That very person would be on the chopping block the next day if they lied. Also, once they put their investigation out there, they would no longer be a threat to the mafia teams, just an innocent by-stander.

So I see no reason not to believe them.
Click to expand...

I see a few plausibe hypo-situations here

1). the person is an innocent

They come out with who they investigated. We deicide to banish that person and get a scumbag. The person who invesitgated is most likely in the clear.

2.) the person is not innocent

We lynch who they say. Now remember that who they mention has a 50/50 chance of being innocent or not. If the person ends up innocent then the one who came out would be gone the next day. If they mention someone on the opposing team the town risks the chance of believing that they are innocent. Is that a risk the town is willing to take?
 
jpappy789 said:
I see a few plausibe hypo-situations here

1). the person is an innocent

They come out with who they investigated. We deicide to banish that person and get a scumbag. The person who invesitgated is most likely in the clear.

2.) the person is not innocent

We lynch who they say. Now remember that who they mention has a 50/50 chance of being innocent or not. If the person ends up innocent then the one who came out would be gone the next day. If they mention someone on the opposing team the town risks the chance of believing that they are innocent. Is that a risk the town is willing to take?
Click to expand...

jpappy, explain this 50/50 chance.

I do not understand your answer 2.
 
If a "mafia" comes from one team they can name a person either innocent or on another team (Most likely they will not name a teammate). They will not know what role that person is but at this point there would be a 50% chance that they are innocent and a 50% chance that they are on the other team (3 and 3).
 
Let's just get this out of the way.

I had an investagation and I used it on Fungi, mostly because I felt that the other players with investigations would not investigate Fungi.

Fungi is a member of the Emerald Alliance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom