Mafia Mafia Carnival ~ Unofficial ~ [Game Over]

[Cariad]

I think we should no lynch tomorrow. Everyone is third party and it's not as if we'll ever get evidence by killing another third party.

 

[BlueLeaf]

I think we should no lynch tomorrow. Everyone is third party and it's not as if we'll ever get evidence by killing another third party.

That's the thing, we don't need evidence for lynches. The premise of voting is to vote for someone you don't want to win the game.
----
Still taking anyone up for the offer I made:

Also, if someone doesn't know who to use their action on, feel free to use it on me. It has to do something with my role, but I won't share all of the details just yet. What happens only works if I guess who used an action on me, though. The result is beneficial to the both of us, so sharing publicly (or at least hinting) if you use your action on me is in your best interest.

 

[Jeremy]

That's the thing, we don't need evidence for lynches. The premise of voting is to vote for someone you don't want to win the game.

Or for someone who is a threat to you. Therefore, it makes most logical sense to vote for someone who is a threat to most people in the game. That would be whoever has the stronger roles in the game in terms of killing other players.

 

[BlueLeaf]

Or for someone who is a threat to you. Therefore, it makes most logical sense to vote for someone who is a threat to most people in the game. That would be whoever has the stronger roles in the game in terms of killing other players.

Yes, that too, of course. But, I kind of doubt a player would say that they could kill, unless they have a death wish (the Clown role could possibly be a Fool).

 

[Byngo]

Goodluck trying to get a killing role to claim, since they know they'll die if they do. lol.

 

[Farobi]

Ok - I have no idea what to do at this point.

Hi

 

[Crazy-Gamer]

Hi just checking in!

 

[BlueLeaf]

Ok - I have no idea what to do at this point.

Hi

I don't mind helping you, if you're confused.

 

[Farobi]

In the OP it only includes only x/5 to fulfill their win conditions. Does that mean only the first five players to win are the only true winners, with no succeeding winners despite fulfilling their win con?

- - - Post Merge - - -

I don't mind helping you, if you're confused.

Betch dont touch me !! uvu

Ok sure. what can you do to help?

 

[BlueLeaf]

In the OP it only includes only x/5 to fulfill their win conditions. Does that mean only the first five players to win are the only true winners, with no succeeding winners despite fulfilling their win con?

I'm not the host, but yes, only the first 5 are the true winners. The game ends after they win, I assume, so no one else can't fulfill their condition anyway.

 

[Farobi]

I'm not the host, but yes, only the first 5 are the true winners. The game ends after they win, I assume, so no one else can't fulfill their condition anyway.

Interesting.

Should we lynch or no lynch tomorrow? I think we should lynch someone so that we can get a higher chance on winning faster :}}

- - - Post Merge - - -

#lynchwaffles2k14

 

[f11]

I think we should lynch someone tommorrow. Maybe someone like Crazy-Gamer.

 

[BlueLeaf]

Interesting.

Should we lynch or no lynch tomorrow? I think we should lynch someone so that we can get a higher chance on winning faster :}}

I don't really mind either way, seeing as how dangerous roles probably won't claim. Though I would like to get rid of pesky inactives. Waffles and Crazy are known to be on the inactive side, but the former can be contributive at times.

 

[Farobi]

I think we should lynch someone tommorrow. Maybe someone like Crazy-Gamer.

Will it fulfill your win con if you do?

- - - Post Merge - - -

I don't really mind either way, seeing as how dangerous roles probably won't claim. Though I would like to get rid of pesky inactives. Waffles and Crazy are known to be on the inactive side, but the former can be contributive at times.

I can see Dangerous roles tweak their role PM from the host to mess around a bit, so we're not all safe.

Which means we shouldn't trust any claimers yet. And perhaps only strike for our win condition.

 

[Byngo]

I do think we should lynch someone that is usually inactive (because anyone inactive doesn't deserve to win (sorry xoxo I'm not trying to be mean))

 

[Farobi]

I do think we should lynch someone that is usually inactive (because anyone inactive doesn't deserve to win (sorry xoxo I'm not trying to be mean))

I want some of the newbies to get the feeling of winning so I think we should lynch a strong player and cause chaos and dRAMA LOL

 

[f11]

Will it fulfill your win con if you do?

- - - Post Merge - - -



I can see Dangerous roles tweak their role PM from the host to mess around a bit, so we're not all safe.

Which means we shouldn't trust any claimers yet. And perhaps only strike for our win condition.

yes.

 

[BlueLeaf]

yes.

Everyone, don't lynch Crazy-Gamer!!!

 

[Capella]

Posting from mobile 4g bcus internet sucks hi

 

[Farobi]

yes.

Ok. But I want to win as much as you guys so I'm not in favor of lynching Crazy-Gamer - which make the spots available to win lower for the rest of us. :[

- - - Post Merge - - -

But the problem is if Crazy-Gamer can fulfill their win con faster than us... js