The Syndicate

Hedgeowl wrote:
Mongoose wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:I finally get to vote for Hawaii! No coats needed! ...in other news Snow Dog was strangely and oddly NK'd at the end of the game... Some suspected a Mod-kill
Wait, in this game Snowy was legit NK'd? You lost me a bit, but maybe it's just the caffeine not reaching my brain yet.
Just a joke because of his poll answer.

No joke!

Kate you are amazing.

ebwop

in fact I just voted to save you for heaven's sake.

Bullzeye wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:Ok bullz it is because while i dont know for sure who you are. i know who are not for my win.
Interestingly the other two you mention are claiming to be the same person, I'm claiming to be someone else. I'm actually gonna put my vote on Snow because I'm no longer sure if he's the person I used to think he was, and while I doubt he'll be lynched I'd rather not go into the final night a fool.

I've never pretended to be someone I am not. Either you ARE the person I need to win or someone else is. I haven't lied about a single thing.

I can't risk a late vote coming in for Bullz. I feel I need him alive so with regret I must vote Owl. The risk is too great if I don't. My hand is forced more or less.

Votes Hedgeowl

Anyone else voting?

Hedgeowl wrote:
Mongoose wrote:But if Mrs. Torrance had blocked Lloyd from serving then Snow Dog wouldn't have been served. Something else is going on here.

Kate, we haven't heard from you lately -- do you have any theories on the twin situation?
Was Snow dog served? I think the Port comment was a joke yes?

Yes. I was given a glass of port.

Is this our last day?

Bullzeye wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:Has anyone else received a drink? I am curious to this, because I have yet to experience any drink symptoms. I have also now received a 2nd drink.
I've never had one, I'm beginning to think the barman doesn't love me! Actually I think I know what they're doing to people and if I'm right it would make sense that the same people are getting more than one rather than the barman working his way through all the players, which is why I was asking about it earlier.

I had a drink last night. Port and apparently I enjoyed it. Well as it was my only drink I was bound to. Any Port in a storm!

Although there is no evidence you were bad. So, sorry.

Well done everyone for getting that right. RIP Vompatti

Vompatti wrote::'(

*votes mongoose*

You've made me sad now.

I withdraw my vote. Screw the night power.

Vomps is done for now. Can't be saved. So I have nothing to lose by retaining my NP and voting for Vomps.

Votes Vompatti

Kate wrote:And I bet Hedge is the other.

Interesting. I may go along with this for now. Vomps and Hedge.

Mongoose wrote:We can spread the vote out like Snow Dog said and then maybe the hotel will see we are a united front. Let's take back our power!

And we should all probably never be in a lifeboat together.

Too late for that, Vomps has two votes. I hope he isn't the one.

Two votes for Vomps? Did I miss a clue about him? He has been unusually helpful I suppose. I mean vocal more than helpful. He trusts me for a start. Don't think he ever did that before.

I'm confused.

We could give evryone one vote thus avoiding any penalties. Still might and as a random lynch though

Vompatti wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:
Vompatti wrote:I'm currently under the impression that someone has been posting false hints about their role and that someone is either Bullz or Mongoose.
It's not me. It's either Snow or Mongoose. I thought Snow was one of two roles, now Mongoose has made me wonder... I have no idea which I'd trust tbh.
I was under the impression that you and snowy trusted each other? If that's not the case that changes everything.

I trust Bullz. Then it seemed that S~V~S was hinting at a role that could fit. And then Mongoose recently said something that interested me. Those three I can't afford to see die. I think I trust you too.

Kate wrote:And here's something else, even if you vote for me...I will not vote for you.

Why not?

if you were forced to vote. Who would it be. This is to everyone.

S~V~S wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
Bullzeye wrote:
Vompatti wrote:
Mongoose wrote:I am going to be heartbroken if we kill off another good character. I don't want to lose Mrs. Torrance. I think I would lose a piece of myself.
If this is true, I may have been wrong about two (2) people I've somewhat trusted so far.
I would think Danny can prove you're not wrong about him
Really, how?
This response confuses me a bit.I think

I need no onedead, and I need one role alive. Based on several things, I. Think it is one of 3 people.

I will vote to protect those people if need be.

I'm a sad panda that all the talk in this thread happens while I am at work linki x many

I am in exactly the same position as you strategy wise. But I may vote for one of those people not in my three. Just to avoid a random lynch. Don;'t worry you are one of the three I am protecting.

If we could work out who is the hotel we could vote for that.

Mongoose wrote:I am going to be heartbroken if we kill off another good character. I don't want to lose Mrs. Torrance. I think I would lose a piece of myself.

This is an interesting statement. I have two people in mind to be a certain character. Was I wrong I wonder?

I haven't had a drink. Which is odd for me.

This could be interesting. i think most of us will wait and see who vote first. A bit like an ebay auction. Maybe some frantic voting will come at the end?

I don't care if I lose my night power. But I will vote if needed.

I don't know what to do. No vote equals random lynch I'm guessing. Or does it? Llama was deliberately unclear. Worth the gamble everyone?

So here we go again.

Cozy fan tutte

Epignosis wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
Hedgeowl wrote:RIP MP. (Is this ok to say when they're "bad"?) Also, I am now realizing that first lynch of Epi really sucked for you both.
The hilarious thing is that Epi was role hinting like crazy and MP, failing to pick up on it, led the charge against him.

ha..I was right!

I am sorry MP. You brought this on yourself. Even though it's three to you against my one vote I will have to keep solidarity with those that voted for you. With no great pleasure *Votes MP*

I want to know what Bullzeye thinks. If he is who I think he is, he doesn't want me dead and I not him. So I suspect we may vote together to save me if it needs to come to that. Which I hope it doesn't.

MovingPictures07 wrote:Well, I won't have time at lunch after all, so I literally only have like a minute.

Snow Dog wrote:I think the risk of no one voting is not good. I strongly believe a random person will be lynched and that suits nobody. I seemed to have touched a nerve with you MP. I don't know the diffference between dead and a role being "gone". However you look at it, it comes to the same thing.
You strongly believe a random person will be lynched and yet you don't want to vote?

You have not "touched a nerve"; you seem to ignore the fact that I've been posting about all of this discussion for quite some time now, during which time you said nothing in response to me, and now all of a sudden you're attempting to subtly push things in my direction. It irritates me that I know now I'm likely to be lynched today because I'm actually attempting to come out and have a discussion with everyone, and I am very strongly beginning to suspect there is at least one individual (probably more) sitting back and dropping off the radar OR lying and going along with what you and S~V~S have been saying.

I don't know the difference either; I explained this EARLIER. It's something to the effect of immobolization, and since I'm unaware of any such state, I do believe there are evil roles this game that do NOT actively NK that need to be gone. If your win condition is different, good for you. I've already discussed this. That would make you an independent-esque role. Mine is not.

It seems this'll be my last post in this game, likely, because I can sense that I'm pre-emptively being railroaded. All I want for people to realize is that I seriously doubt every single role left alive has a condition where no one else needs to be dead. Someone is lying.

I'm voting for Snow Dog for his apparent contradictions. I think a lynch in his direction would be very illuminating. I'm hesitant to vote anyone, but it had to be someone, as my win conditions align with those of what you could call a typical civvie, and I don't put trust in testing out the no-vote scenario (and it would be incompatible with my condition).

I think Kate might be lying as well. Call it a gut feeling. Mongoose or Vompatti could likely be the bartender or someone else as well. Not sure about any of this, but thought I would throw out my thoughts just in case they are my last.

It is a shame that you have voted for me out of spite, because I wasn't going to vote for you. There is a difference between not wanting to vote and actually not voting. I probably will vote now. And it may have to be you as you have forced my hand,
Merely pointing out what you have said seems to have been the trigger you needed to react. Kate agrees it seems. No comment about that?

Vompatti wrote:As if everyone would agree with not voting.

You're right. I don't think it will happen. But i will hold off and see what happens.

I think the risk of no one voting is not good. I strongly believe a random person will be lynched and that suits nobody. I seemed to have touched a nerve with you MP. I don't know the diffference between dead and a role being "gone". However you look at it, it comes to the same thing.

Well it seems to me that myself and S~V~S have win conditions that do not need another lynch. MP you seem to be claiming you DO need deaths to win. That makes you the enemy of those certain people and as far as I know me myself.
I'll go further and say that I think you are one of these "bad" characters that you say should be lynched. Either the bartender, the twins or that other guy...the waiter or whatever he is.

^My guess is a random lynch. Just like you said.

I guess if you drink what the bartender gives you, and he is a ghost of sorts I guess, you become part of the mad world of the Hotel. What that means for SVS I do not know. Let's getb riid of the bartender I say. maybe

Ouch...who knows?

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Well, llama said we could choose not to vote~ we will then be role blocked at night. My power is not "all that" that I am unwilling to give it up. I may choose to not vote tomorrow. My conditions involve others being ALIVE, not dead. So I would have no problems with no more death.

If other people choose to vote, that is cool, so long as they don't vote for me~
Ok...I have the same conditions. I'm glad you understand what I was doing now. My NM is not something I care much about either. So I may vote...I May not. I won't vote for you if you prefer not.
How do I know neither of you are lying?

Does anyone else have a win condition similar to this?

Snow Dog wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Well, llama said we could choose not to vote~ we will then be role blocked at night. My power is not "all that" that I am unwilling to give it up. I may choose to not vote tomorrow. My conditions involve others being ALIVE, not dead. So I would have no problems with no more death.

If other people choose to vote, that is cool, so long as they don't vote for me~
I can understand that.

However, didn't you previously agree with the assessment that the Gradys and maybe the Bartender were bad news?
Are they though? What evidence do you have? I am not so sure. I concede you may be right though. They may have a bad influence, whilst not being actually bad.
I don't have any evidence; it's all supposition. I honestly don't know, but I have my doubts they are good. I do know that my win conditions are relatively similar to a typical civvie's, if that makes sense, so I personally think they are bad news.

Ok. I don't mind them dead. And maybe their win conditions are both to survive?

MovingPictures07 wrote:
S~V~S wrote:Well, llama said we could choose not to vote~ we will then be role blocked at night. My power is not "all that" that I am unwilling to give it up. I may choose to not vote tomorrow. My conditions involve others being ALIVE, not dead. So I would have no problems with no more death.

If other people choose to vote, that is cool, so long as they don't vote for me~
I can understand that.

However, didn't you previously agree with the assessment that the Gradys and maybe the Bartender were bad news?

Are they though? What evidence do you have? I am not so sure. I concede you may be right though. They may have a bad influence, whilst not being actually bad.

S~V~S wrote:Well, llama said we could choose not to vote~ we will then be role blocked at night. My power is not "all that" that I am unwilling to give it up. I may choose to not vote tomorrow. My conditions involve others being ALIVE, not dead. So I would have no problems with no more death.

If other people choose to vote, that is cool, so long as they don't vote for me~

Ok...I have the same conditions. I'm glad you understand what I was doing now. My NM is not something I care much about either. So I may vote...I May not. I won't vote for you if you prefer not.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:
MovingPictures07 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:I definitely do not have btsc Alex. Hence my recent post that Bullz understood the meaning of.
I'm not sure about you; I could foresee a scenario where you do or where you do not have BTSC. I honestly have no clue. Lol.

What are your current thoughts?
My best bet is to see what happens. My win conditions are specific. They do not include the harm or death of anyone. I literally do not want to lynch anyone. But will do so because if I don't it seems odd to you and other people. This is an odd game though. A Llama game. Why expect normality?
I'm willing to consider that perhaps I was too hard on you, but at the same time, it very much appears that if many of us refused to vote, then anyone who has a win condition by which other individuals need to be dead can just as easily vote. Also, in most mafia games I've played, even if all players have 0 votes, someone still has to die and it is thus randomly determined.

Yes. I hadn't really considered that. I can see that you consider me abandoning my duties.

Well. I agree. I will vote from now on and take my chances.

MovingPictures07 wrote:
Snow Dog wrote:I definitely do not have btsc Alex. Hence my recent post that Bullz understood the meaning of.
I'm not sure about you; I could foresee a scenario where you do or where you do not have BTSC. I honestly have no clue. Lol.

What are your current thoughts?

My best bet is to see what happens. My win conditions are specific. They do not include the harm or death of anyone. I literally do not want to lynch anyone. But will do so because if I don't it seems odd to you and other people. This is an odd game though. A Llama game. Why expect normality?

I definitely do not have btsc Alex. Hence my recent post that Bullz understood the meaning of.

Hmmm. So Nev wasn't the hotel. Was he going to die anyway? Is that it?

Anyway there is no way i am not going for the bourbon.

Votes Nev

I think I will test that theory whatever the answer and vote Nev.

Unless Nev is saying, hey I'm the hotel just lynch me evry day and we all win,

Search found 113 matches