Mafia - Round 9 (Town wins!)

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 6:00 am

Abs. wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote:
Abs. wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote: Since if you get tricked/intimidated, you don't get results, but if someone investigated you it will still come out as true (even tho it was tricked/intimidated)
Wait Kleene, what?

So if Laurell investigated if Schillok killed Beastly.
Kleene tricked Laurell.
nomemory investigated if Laurell investigated Schillok.
nomemory --> Laurell investigated Schillok (true)

I was under the impression that it would be false.
No. It will be true. Otherwise the "Balck Suitcase" wouldn't work either, because it's considered "being tricked" too.

So if it would be the was you described it:
Kleene Onigiri (BO), Schillok (Megure)
Kleene Onigiri uses Black suitcase: Investigate 5:
"Beastly killed nomemory" (no results because of black suitcase)
Schillok investigates: Kleene Onigiri investigated beastly (true, because it's a fake investigation)

Schillok to Kleene: "So, what results did you get with investigation?"
Kleene: "I was tricked, so I didn't get any results"
Schillok: "What? but if you got tricked, then I shouldn't have gotten a "true" response! You're BO with black suitcase!"
Kleene: "erm... damn..."

See what I mean? :p Of course the BO could try to guess the right answer. Or investigate something they know anyway. But that's not the point from the black suitcase. And always being tricked is suspicious too.
Nooo did you just contradict yourself?

Okay in your example:
Kleene false-investigated
Kleene claimed TRICKED
Schillok investigated if Kleene investigated (true)
In conclusion: Kleene false-investigated, and was not tricked. Schillok investigates and gets a (true) response.
But if Kleene false-investigated (OR real investigated) and WAS tricked, Schillok should get a (false) response. This is what your example says!

In the example I gave above:
Laurell investigated
Laurell WAS TRICKED
nomemory investigated if Laurell investigated (true)

And you said this was correct as well. But it should be (false) as per your example above!

My example was in case if someone get's tricked and the investigator investigated the tricked action and would get a false.

But the investigator always get's a true as long as the action was done. (whether it was a fake investigation or a real investigation) So if that person get's tricked, the investigator still gets a "true" response.

so:

In the example I gave above:
Laurell investigated
Laurell WAS TRICKED
nomemory investigated if Laurell investigated (true)

is right.

NVM the example I gave then if it's confusing. My example was to show what would happen if that isn't the case (so black suitcase would be better to spot).

D:

Akonyl · Post by **Akonyl** » June 24th, 2010, 7:26 am

Kleene Onigiri wrote: My example was in case if someone get's tricked and the investigator investigated the tricked action and would get a false.

But the investigator always get's a true as long as the action was done. (whether it was a fake investigation or a real investigation) So if that person get's tricked, the investigator still gets a "true" response.

well though this is your round so you can rule it how ya want, the way I always ruled it was that a tricked action acts as if it'd never happened in the first place, so if you're tricked, someone investigating you doing your action would return a false. So in the case of the Black Suitcase, you wouldn't want to claim to be tricked, and would instead juts have to guess as to what happened (which isn't necessarily hard, because you can choose to mimic other actions than investigating, which are easier to guess what would happen with).

Abs. · Post by **Abs.** » June 24th, 2010, 7:30 am

Kleene Onigiri wrote: My example was in case if someone get's tricked and the investigator investigated the tricked action and would get a false.

But the investigator always get's a true as long as the action was done. (whether it was a fake investigation or a real investigation) So if that person get's tricked, the investigator still gets a "true" response.

I think you just contradicted yourself again with those two lines above. (Sorry Kleene, but I'm trying really hard to nail this one down so that I understand it.)

But the action is NOT DONE if the person was tricked!

Okay let's back up here. Maybe "tricked" is the word that's the problem. I guess you could say someone tricked someone else by saying they did an investigation but actually used the black suitcase.

Spoiler: Example.

Is there anything wrong with the examples above?

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 7:51 am

Abs. wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote: My example was in case if someone get's tricked and the investigator investigated the tricked action and would get a false.

But the investigator always get's a true as long as the action was done. (whether it was a fake investigation or a real investigation) So if that person get's tricked, the investigator still gets a "true" response.
I think you just contradicted yourself again with those two lines above. (Sorry Kleene, but I'm trying really hard to nail this one down so that I understand it.)

But the action is NOT DONE if the person was tricked!

Okay let's back up here. Maybe "tricked" is the word that's the problem. I guess you could say someone tricked someone else by saying they did an investigation but actually used the black suitcase.

Spoiler: Example.
Kleene INTIMIDATES Jd-.
Jd- INVESTIGATES GinRei.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if Jd- investigated GinRei.
---> Jd-'s investigation of GinRei fails. Jd- gets no results.
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of Jd-, the results: Jd- did not investigate GinRei
---> PM from the GM: "Jd- investigated GinRei (false)"
kyuuketsuki: "Jd-, I investigated if you investigated GinRei, and I found out that you didn't. You told me you did."
Jd-: "Dude, I was intimidated."
kyuuketsuki: "Well that makes sense. But I'm still suspicious that you're B.O."
Jd-: "Whatever dude. You want to try again? Try investigating whether I investigated GinRei AND whether I was intimidated."
kyuuketsuki: "Alright, fair enough. I don't have any other leads, so let's do this."

Kleene INTIMIDATES Jd-.
Jd- INVESTIGATES GinRei.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if Jd- investigated GinRei.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if cutepeipei intimidated Jd-.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if kirite intimidated Jd-.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if Kleene intimidated Jd-.
---> Jd-'s investigation of GinRei fails. Jd- gets no results.
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of Jd-, the results: Jd- did not investigate GinRei
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of cutepeipei, the results: cutepeipei did not intimidate Jd-
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of kirite, the results: kirite did not intimidate Jd-
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of Kleene, the results: Kleene INTIMIDATED Jd-
---> PM from the GM: "Jd- investigated GinRei (false); cutepeipei intimidated Jd- (false); kirite intimidated Jd- (false); Kleene intimidated Jd- (true)"
kyuuketsuki: "Jd- I believe you now. Kleene's the one that's been intimidating you. You have earned my trust. Can you investigate Kleene for me? I think she's going to kill Chekhov." (Jd- is still suspicious as heck! Intimidated two times in a row? I'm gonna test him again.)
Jd-: "Sure bro, no problem." (Aw man, but I'm actually Gin and Kleene is Vodka and helping me out, and she really is going to kill Chekhov, we have no way around it. Plus she has to intimidate GinRei tonight so that our plot is not revealed! What do I do... Aha! I'll use my black suitcase to investigate Kleene and then I can use my real investigations to fool some other fine citizens! Besides I'm sure kyuuketsuki will not investigate me again now that I've earned his trust. Plus the fake investigation of Kleene by myself will throw others off the scent! I'm a genius!)

Jd- uses BLACK SUITCASE to investigate Kleene.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if Jd- investigated Kleene.
kyuuketsuki INVESTIGATES if Kleene killed Chekhov.
---> Jd-'s investigation of Kleene was fake. Jd- gets no results.
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of Jd-, the results: Jd- investigated Kleene
---> kyuuketsuki's investigation of Kleene, the results: Kleene killed Chekhov.
---> PM from the GM: "Jd- investigated Kleene (true); Kleene killed Chekhov (true)"
kyuuketsuki: "Mannn Chekov died last night! What did your investigation say, Jd-? Did Kleene do it?"
Jd-: "Uh... Uh..." PANIC! "Uh I was intimidated again man! So I don't know!"
kyuuketsuki: "Really. Well I happened to investigate if you investigated Kleene. And it turns out you did."
Jd-: "Oh, right! Haha I forgot, I got mixed up with the last times I was intimidated. Yes I investigated Kleene and she didn't kill Chekhov."
kyuuketsuki: "Wonderful, wonderful! Since I investigated Kleene as well, I know that she DID kill Chekhov, so I will arrest her for that now and give all this evidence to the town to have you lynched! Have a great day, Jd-!"
Jd-: :(
Is there anything wrong with the examples above?

Sorry it's my fault then. I thought I made a tricked action appear as "true" anyway if it's investigated. But It's actually as akonyl and abs. said:

"- If a tricked action is investigated, then the action will be shown as "false", because the action wasn't done in the end."

I wonder why I put those rule list up anyway if no one is reading them.

Edit: I mistakenly made investigations that investigated tricked actions as "true". So in case you want to know about your investigation and if that person was tricked, so your actual answer should have been "false", then PM me :p

nomemory · Post by **nomemory** » June 24th, 2010, 7:55 am

@Kleene: I'm sure most people read it, I know I did at least.

Abs. · Post by **Abs.** » June 24th, 2010, 7:58 am

Kleene Onigiri wrote: Sorry it's my fault then. I thought I made a tricked action appear as "true" anyway if it's investigated. But It's actually as akonyl and abs. said:

"- If a tricked action is investigated, then the action will be shown as "false", because the action wasn't done in the end."

I wonder why I put those rule list up anyway if no one is reading them.

I read it, that's why I asked you when you said "Since if you get tricked/intimidated, you don't get results, but if someone investigated you it will still come out as true (even tho it was tricked/intimidated)" since it contradicted with what you wrote in the rules

But everything is clear now.

Thank you Kleene

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 7:58 am

nomemory wrote: @Kleene: I'm sure most people read it, I know I did at least.

Thanks. But seems it's still not clear enough. Looking into the rule section could have shown my mistake easily :p

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 7:59 am

Abs. wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote: Sorry it's my fault then. I thought I made a tricked action appear as "true" anyway if it's investigated. But It's actually as akonyl and abs. said:

"- If a tricked action is investigated, then the action will be shown as "false", because the action wasn't done in the end."

I wonder why I put those rule list up anyway if no one is reading them.
I read it, that's why I asked you when you said "Since if you get tricked/intimidated, you don't get results, but if someone investigated you it will still come out as true (even tho it was tricked/intimidated)" since it contradicted with what you wrote in the rules

But everything is clear now.

Thank you Kleene

Good to hear XD

Doing all those rules writing gave me a wrong impression on what I actually decided on XD Sorry again. Hope that doesn't affect any people/investigations.

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 8:04 am

So, do I get also the title "Fail GM" now? XD T-T

Beastly · Post by **Beastly** » June 24th, 2010, 8:14 am

So Laurell is really a protector, but can't get why BO APTXed him. Maybe _____________ (can't say as im dead)

Conia · Post by **Conia** » June 24th, 2010, 12:43 pm

Kleene Onigiri wrote: So, do I get also the title "Fail GM" now? XD T-T

Welcome to the club

Detective Tommy · Post by **Detective Tommy** » June 24th, 2010, 1:12 pm

4* hours and 50 minutes (about).

I wanted to add this,
You guys will know everything once/if I die tonight.
And if I do die, then automatically lynch James Rye.
If he is BO, which I am sure of, you guys can choose whether to lynch Conia or someone else (after getting evidence).

But once I die, you all will get some clarification and a lead.

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 1:34 pm

conia wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote: So, do I get also the title "Fail GM" now? XD T-T
Welcome to the club

Or should I be happy now? D:

Conia · Post by **Conia** » June 24th, 2010, 1:49 pm

Kleene Onigiri wrote:
conia wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote: So, do I get also the title "Fail GM" now? XD T-T
Welcome to the club

Or should I be happy now? D:

We are always happy here!

Kleene Onigiri · Post by **Kleene Onigiri** » June 24th, 2010, 1:54 pm

conia wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote:
conia wrote:
Kleene Onigiri wrote: So, do I get also the title "Fail GM" now? XD T-T
Welcome to the club

Or should I be happy now? D:
We are always happy here!

Mafia - Round 9 (Town wins!)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)

Re: Mafia - Round 9 (Night 3)