Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Viewing Single Post From: Rooster Teeth Mafia Game Thread
Member Avatar
You've been counting stars, now you're counting on me
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Mar 30 2016, 12:56 PM
He came to the conclusion that he was innocent, but then later explicitly tells us how much he's killed Frouge in previous games. Call me Mr.Over-analysis, but it seems a little too defensive.
There's a lot here to break down that I'm not fond of, but I'll start by addressing this. My killing Frogue night two is a running joke between us at this point, so I was just referencing that. Nothing defensive about it, just tongue in cheek.

Now, getting into the rest and what I don't like:

My declaration of suspicion
re: Danny, I missed the pre-edit posts (that, for the record, is why we don't allow edits--makes it too easy to, say, claim cop with certain investigation results, then edit it out to frame someone/because you think better of it/whatever, leaving half the game ignorant). I'm a bit skeptical overall, though, especially coupled with what seems to be a call to roleclaim. That's awfully odd to start a game with. The whole attitude is rubbing me a bit wrong, so I'm gonna UNVOTE and VOTE: Danny to request some detail on the thought process that led to these decisions.
Danny's response
Responding to MasterWeasel here:
Old habits die hard. I've never played forum RP before, and we do things differently IRL, so gimme a break here. I'm actually curious as to why you'd get all suspicious, when I specifically said this earlier on in the game. Seems odd to me. So, I'm gonna VOTE: MURDERWEASEL
What Danny actually said earlier
I've played a lot of Mafia IRL, but we called it Werewolf. Basically the same game, although we had special roles, which I've seen some people do, but not others. Forum-wise, I haven't played a single game.
So yeah.

A few things stand out, but one of the big ones is that a lot of what I touch upon goes unanswered and is instead met with excuses. I said that I didn't like Danny's attitude (which is, to be fair, pretty vague), but also said that the call for a roleclaim seemed a really weird way to start the game. I voted for pressure and to request an explanation of the reasoning leading to these decisions (both the decision to apparently post role info and the one to suggest others claim). Instead, what I got was "We do stuff different IRL" (I'm fully aware of that; I ran werewolf for years IRL before picking it up online). That's not awful on its own, but it doesn't address "What was the thought process behind these decisions?" and instead uses unfamiliarity as an excuse. Worse, it throws blame my way for asking questions (implying to some extent that "I'm new" explains everything without explaining, say, what about IRL mafia leads to doing things these ways), and couples that with a vote without a lot of reasoning behind it. It feels rather chainsaw defense, especially in response to a lukewarm vote that really only requested information.

So all of that's a little iffy, but where it goes from there rates a noticeably raised eyebrow from me. When pressed, Danny said:
I'm suspicious at his over-suspicion of my not-at-all suspicious (considering the circumstances) behaviour. Yes, I did word that to get 'suspicious' in as many times as humanly possibly.
Now, some of this may be a difference in meta (Danny, in online mafia, you need a clean majority to lynch unless stated otherwise--that's six players right now, if I've done my math correctly, so a single vote isn't nothing but is not that major a deal and is frequently used to express suspicion and pressure for response), but the overall is still dismissing the possibility of his own behavior being suspicious, something that's been soundly called out since.

Then, when pressured over it, Danny backs off really easily:
"Flailing around". Fair enough I guess. It really dosn't seem that much, just got me thinking.
Probably over-thinking to be honest. I've been looking through the posts so far and I've not got any overtly scummy behavior from... well... anyone. It seems pretty calm, albeit with loads of hidden charge and plotting. These next few days look set to be reaaaaaaaaaaly fun.
What's weird to me here is that, when pressured, Danny quickly shifts gears to downplay the suspicion and vote seen before. All the behavior coming I've noted so far has been very defensively-focused, trying to bury suspicion and move on to the next thing. That's something that can work really well in IRL mafia, but that starts to stumble in forum games because of the presence of a log; that is to say, we can go back and comb through statements and find which things don't quite add up.

It's also interesting to me that Danny backs off, then doubles back and comes up with more reasons to be suspicious, then unvotes. There's a lot of justification going on here, but what I want more of and am looking for is discussions of the whys, the thought processes, that sort of thing.

So, let's try it from the top (I'll even leave off the vote this time... for the moment :P ). Can you walk me through your thought processes, Danny? Can you address my read on the situation and walk me through your reasoning in any areas I may have gotten wrong?
Juliette Sargent drawn by Mimi and Ryuki
Alton Gerow drawn by Mimi
Lavender Ripley drawn by Mimi
Phillip Olivares drawn by Ryuki
Library Vee
Misty Browder drawn by Ryuki
Offline Profile Quote Post
Rooster Teeth Mafia Game Thread · Mafia