AWKWARD ZOMBIE

I think that's the first time I've seen someone face a lynch mob (party?) with a vote of no lynch. Hot daisies. Now what?

He's still the most suspicious, IMO.



Probably my favorite wordfilter.

Idunno, I'd put him below Barabba at this point. They've both acted in kind of suspicious ways, but Barabba seems more dedicated to making this mistake. /u000 stopped joking when we got serious, Barabba just made even sloppier posts.

Though each or both could just be making beginner's mistakes :/

I'm paying more attention to everyone else's reactions, considering that's what we'll have to pay attention to when/if someone's lynched. It is still fairly surprising that /u000 didn't automatically go for the counterclaim defense.

Then again, the implications for that could go either way. He's either a traitor who's being thrown under the bus by other traitors, because then "Oh, the people who voted for him must be innocent!" even though that ignores the idea that innocent people will vote for someone without knowing for sure who exactly they're lynching. Traitors are the only ones who know with 100% certainty that who they're voting for either is, or isn't on their side.

Or he doesn't want to counterclaim because he understands that those voting for him could just be good innocent pirates who are misguided in their actions, due to the implications I noted in the second half of the last sentence.

Thing is...if the traitors were to go with the plan to throw one of their own under the bus to make one or more of their own look innocent, what is the harm in /u000 counterclaiming? If he comes up guilty from the lynch, he was just a traitor trying sway the public into lynching a pirate because "It's suspicious to vote first!", but if /u000's counterclaim comes up guilty from the lynch, that serves the same purpose to make him look innocent since "Well his suspicion was well placed in that 'only traitors vote first'."

Hm. I don't think it's likely the traitors would try something like that so early, if at all, since there are so few of them. Is there any other reason a traitor would vote no lynch?

I could see traitors voting no lynch on the first day in normal conditions - it would run counter to the expectation that they'd want as many people gone as possible and reduce suspicions. Being targeted, though, I'd expect a push back outwards. I have to say, /u000's behavior is shaping back up.

Issue is that it could just be a clever response to mistakes already made - "I'm tempted to reveal my role" and strong hints he was seductress are a bit too weird for me to trust him just for one statement.


Also, just to split hairs, the Mutineer also knows for certain who to kill. Nothing /u000 has done points towards that, though.

I forget if this was answered in the thread already; do people who are converted by the Mutineer lose their powers? Or do they keep them?

I'm dead either way. I could reveal my role, but the traitors would simply kill me. Ah well.

Well just giving up like that isn't going to help you either.

You could always get protected by the doc or the blocker couldn't you?

I'm a convenient pirates for the traitors to get rid of without suspicion. Would the rest lift a finger to stay the execution? I do not find it likely. That said, illusion into the sea before I face the gibbet. At least the sea would welcome me unto its bosom.

There are a lot more implications at play here. You can claim, and then the presence, or absense of a counterclaim can give substance to the situation. Then, if it proves legit, the doc can save you, which provides the typical wifom issue of "well do the traitors kill you or go after someone else. Methinks you're a lot safer than you think, depending on what the role is you have to claim.

Think of it like this, you're already under suspicion. If the traitors can use you as a viable scapegoat for a lynch, they will. If you're a power play, all that changes is the fact that the seductress will be on you to essentially make you a regular pirate. Heck, she might still be on you even if you don't claim a role because "just in case.". Point is when you're a candidate for lynching, no matter how you look at it, you're more valuable alive than dead to the traitors.

I'm kinda worried I might be a target on the next night since they sent the seductress after me.

I've never been a huge fan of the "wildcard" method of playing. It pretty much just uses reverse psychology to make people assume that the person is acting so suspicious that they can't be guilty. Thing is though... it usually doesn't work and just ends in the "wildcard" getting lynched. It's never a good strategy to use because it puts your team at a disadvantage which is unfair to the other people on your team. I don't know if /u000 or Barabba are Pirates, Traitors or Mutineers, but I'd imagine their teams would be rather displeased if they ended up getting lynched because of using this strategy.

If s/he's an especially powerful town role they might have to worry about the Traitors' assassin, though. So depending on that, role claiming might be an even worse choice as far as surviving goes.