Are You A Vigilante? - YES YOU ARE (pg.64)

Finally caught up with the thread, gooseberry fool moves strawberry floating fast. I'm happy to trust Falsey for now seeing as he killed a vigi but we'll see how things play out. Fair play for making an interesting first night in any case!

Safe to assume the vigi's have at least one or two recognised players of a few games considering their targets.

[iup=3571940]Tomous[/iup] wrote:Pssst, Mini E

[iup=3571904]Tomous[/iup] wrote:

[iup=3571893]Mini E[/iup] wrote:5 vigi's would not mean 5 kills. In the past we've started with 5 or 6 vampires and only started with 3 kills per night, down to 2 after the first lost vampire.

Op says:

The Tyol Nethon Vigilantes will be permitted as many kills per night as there are remaining numbers in their ranks

I'm on tapatalk and hadn't read the OP that's why I asked the question at the end of my post so as not to sound too dickish [FLUSHED FACE]

The number thing could be a useful clue, we will have to keep an eye on it over the next few days if the Falsey thread is still around.

While anything is possible...
I can't see the vigilantes sacrificing one of their own on day 1
Put the alpha out there as well
And lastly giving up another kill each night just to discredit staydead's story

but then dafter things have happened...

To be fair, only one of those could be true - all three don't have to be.

For example, Falsey doesn't have to be the alpha (I can't believe SD would give up the alpha, even if he was pissed off... Surely?) It would be a pretty gutsy move seeing as he could be Seered so easily.

Though if SD has just gone rogue and outed Falsey, what can they do? They have to sort of let him operate on his own from that point and just try to stay alive for as long as possible to spread confusion.

Likewise, the Vigis could have deliberately given up a kill to take the heat of Falsey, or to mess with us and make us think that is what they were doing.

Or there may just be three Vigis.

In short, who knows.

Dan?

[iup=3571951]Parksey[/iup] wrote:To be fair, only one of those could be true - all three don't have to be.

For example, Falsey doesn't have to be the alpha (I can't believe SD would give up the alpha, even if he was pissed off... Surely?) It would be a pretty gutsy move seeing as he could be Seered so easily.

Though if SD has just gone rogue and outed Falsey, what can they do? They have to sort of let him operate on his own from that point and just try to stay alive for as long as possible to spread confusion.

Likewise, the Vigis could have deliberately given up a kill to take the heat of Falsey, or to mess with us and make us think that is what they were doing.

Or there may just be three Vigis.

In short, who knows.

My thinking is that Falsey V SD was an unexpected rivalry and SD went off script by naming Falsey. The remaining vigis need to rally and protect Falsey, by reducing kills it makes people question SD and thus dismiss him as bitter player. This takes heat off Falsey.

Of course my track record in these games is woeful!

RIP Kanbei, Zellery and Drumstick. Thou art at peace now.

[iup=3571954]Pedz[/iup] wrote:Dan?

Is it voices? I hear them too.

Me saying 'Dan?' Was in response to the post above that ways 'who knows?' You'd assume Dan may know, being the game runner.

[iup=3571954]Pedz[/iup] wrote:Dan?

Who you talking to son?

Parksey wrote:To be fair, only one of those could be true - all three don't have to be.

For example, Falsey doesn't have to be the alpha (I can't believe SD would give up the alpha, even if he was pissed off... Surely?) It would be a pretty gutsy move seeing as he could be Seered so easily.

Though if SD has just gone rogue and outed Falsey, what can they do? They have to sort of let him operate on his own from that point and just try to stay alive for as long as possible to spread confusion.

Likewise, the Vigis could have deliberately given up a kill to take the heat of Falsey, or to mess with us and make us think that is what they were doing.

Or there may just be three Vigis.

In short, who knows.

See the line here that says who knows? Yeah, the post right above mine? Me saying Dan was in response to this

Pedz?

That's true. Either way I think we can afford to ignore it for a day or two and come back to it with some more evidence before lynching Falsey because StayDead said so.

I think there are far better clues from today we could pursue instead. StayDead mentioned his team backing him up.

[iup=3571634]Qikz[/iup] wrote:@Sykes, I decided to throw Falsey under the bus when I realised he was actually being serious. I am a vigilante and so is he. You don't have to believe me, but you probably should.

I think it's safe to say by now how annoyed this has made me and I'm hoping you can somewhat understand why when it's revealed I was telling the truth. If I really wanted to ruin the game I'd name the other three as well as there's no rule against it, but since they decided to back me up I don't see why I have to ruin it for them, people don't often get to play the badguys after all.

EDIT:

This could've been avoided if Dan had just let me be godkilled, but by making the decision he did, I decided to give Falsey a taste of his own medicene.

Could be more bullshit to confuse things but I would rather follow that than this Falsey thing right now.

At what point did QIKZ go in to complete meltdown and IRENE DEMOVA get nominated for lynching?

I am having trouble looking through search history on my phone.

Probably unrelated but it might make some sense in to the utter lunacy we witnessed today

While I'm alive, I'm going to turn into one of those guys who rushes home from work to see what is happening in a forum game

I am prepared to back Falsey. Maybe it's the gambler in me, but I'd argue that all specials need to take a risk early on. There's always a chance you're going to expose yourself to the Alpha, but you're better off taking those odds at the start of the game.

I agree with MM that citizens need to break this retarded cycle of putting the most trustworthy players in the game up for lynch.

BID0 wrote:At what point did QIKZ go in to complete meltdown and IRENE DEMOVA get nominated for lynching?

I am having trouble looking through search history on my phone.

Probably unrelated but it might make some sense in to the utter lunacy we witnessed today

I think it was after the lunacy started.

He does say people "don't often get to play the bad guys". Does this mean we can rule out people who were vampires with SD in the last game?

Does this mean these vigilantes aren't seasoned bad guys, and one or two may be first-time evil doers?

Or is SD's lie just the ramblings of a bitter, doomed man, determined to spread chaos and tarnish the name of Sir Falselot.

[iup=3571966]BID0[/iup] wrote:At what point did QIKZ go in to complete meltdown and IRENE DEMOVA get nominated for lynching?

I am having trouble looking through search history on my phone.

Probably unrelated but it might make some sense in to the utter lunacy we witnessed today

Regarding Irene >>>>>

It was Memento Mori who suggested it originally:

[iup=3571176]Memento Mori[/iup] wrote:Is anyone putting Irene up?

At this point I think Falsey was early in his electoral campaign. He replied with:

[iup=3571178]Falsey[/iup] wrote:I can change to a StayDead/Irene platform if people would prefer that.

After that, we all got behind Falsey

[iup=3571180]Memento Mori[/iup] wrote:

[iup=3571178]Falsey[/iup] wrote:I can change to a StayDead/Irene platform if people would prefer that.

I'd be cool with that.