Vote: Time extention
I think the majority is reached with Jabber's vote, but I'll vote just for precaution
(1) Personally I would prefer to let it rest at this point. Hypoclaiming is not the way to go in my opinion and I believe a couple people don't totally understand how I meant to employ it. If people want to talk about the hypo strategy more then it should be about the fact that I brought it up and why. Not whether we use it or not.
(2) Why are you not reading my posts? :wassat:
(1) - Ok, so how exactly do you meant to employ it? I've already explained why I think it makes no sense to use that strategy when the role that's supposed to be hypoed isn't an investigatory one.
(2) - I did.
I just didn't saw the phrase in "" on #59 on the wiki page and assumed you were lying about it to question someone. Decided to see how it went.
Now after this post I came back to it and realized that it was actually on the role description on the bottom of the page.
You seem to be questioning the usefulness of lynched trees still being able to talk. Can you elaborate on your thoughts here?
That depends on the way people look at "I was lynched".
If they understand that the threat of getting lynched is a way for people to keep the conversation flowing and that even after getting lynched they still will be able to give their input, it's a fine "ability".
If people take it personally, like what happened in many games in the past and get salty or butthurt about it, that will only obstruct their view of the game and they will funnel their analyzes, input and accusations on the guys that led their bandwagon.
This is what concerns me. People having tunnel vision on someone and directing the conversation against them, and ignoring other possible (and most likely/obvious) suspects. I fear this maycause a lot of distraction, but this problem is not on the rule/ablity, but on the player.
The player needs to understand that even if he is lynched, he can still win the game. Getting lynched is no "game over", as long as your party wins in the end, you win as well.
Typically I'd estimate we'd have one arsonist advocating for lynch and the other against. However, given the timeline of when we received our PMs and when the game began, I think it's a reasonable assumption that the scum haven't identified each other yet. Without established coordination and with fewer numbers, they have a lot more risk than usual involved with a lynch. I'd expect at least one, if not both scum, to be pushing back against a lynch.
Do you feel like there's a chance that one of the scum is laying low on purpose due to not having contact with his partner?
@Shinobu: Who do you think has taken a stronger stance on what the Forest should do today?
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
Vote: Day Extension Not sure the mod will be pesky about the wording.