And here I had a post as well about some slight nitpicks I saw drawn up, but I honestly really didn't want to because it just feels, well, scummy. And scummy not in the mafia/antitown sorta way. but just that it feels like a cheap way to start up a discussion because of what caffy said about it being just bad word choice or just bad editing with bolding or italicizing something to make it more pronounced and drawing the conclusion that "it may actually be a hint!" when it actually isn't.
My nitpicks actually aren't as good as I think Sam's is in theory, because if you're town you should actually know what your win condition is. We all got our PM's with our role explanations and our win conditions. The only reason to
not know(ala "i think") is either 1) you forgot, or say you're just paraphrasing to make your sentence/argument role smoother or 2) you aren't actually sure. When you play scum, you have to obviously pretend to be town (or claim otherwise like a townie-friendly 3rdparty), or in general just try not to appear scummy. To a degree it's easy to pass off initially if there's not a lot of personal info going around, in this case we have the "win conditions" being tossed around. However, when discussion does start to get heated involving such info as the win condition or etc, things tend to get a bit iffy, and throughout it scum always have to (unless players explicitly state what the towns conditions are) try and base themselves toward what the actual towns win conditions are.
And that goal itself is a bit iffy, because for some reason, even though I don't think the town's win
(that being "you win when all threats to town have been eliminated") has
EVER changed or just slightly modified to fit x theme over the course of Blocktopia's Mafia history, we always tend to end up in an instance where we debate about the win condition...
...Though that may just be me remembering GmK's TBD game awhileback where almost half the game was
third-party and thus the argument of third-parties always/not always being scum and win condition explaining from 3-parties trying to pass as town or friendly was rampant!
Now I'm actually interested in going back and seeing how scum actually played out their win conditions to see if there's a pattern of what Sam quoted (I know I certainly did it to a degree! hehe).
But that's just me thinking Sam had a better basis in terms of the nit-picking than I do and hold no strong opinions on if that actually makes fiesta suspicious or not (as that's what I believe is part of what Sams post was asking, then again, most posts indirectly ask opinions or evidence to see if someone'ssuspcious or not).
My nitpick quote that was probably nothing was something raxo said:
1) Did anyone have anything interesting happen to them last night? Did they receive a vest or other item? Anything paranormal?
-Nothing interesting enough.
And I was going to say, "
not interesting enough you say? Saying it wasn't interesting enough must mean something must have happened!, its just not interesting enough to warrant interest or you're hiding something!" and something along the lines of interesting could mean something like something boring happened with a role or a boring item (hey, vests are sort of boring... right? It's definitely not as extreme as getting a invention item or something in say Supernatural hotel or from some other game).
But then I scrapped it alongside other bad nitpicks that I've forgotten besides this one.
...But if nitpicking helps pick up discussion, so be it! (but mine was still bad, sorry raxo)
I don't have much to contribute otherwise (yet!) at the moment. I need to reread because my brains a bit fried from just starting college and getting used to things
(Yay?) so I don't really know what we're talking about besides this page and parts of others. x)
I definitely want to go back and look at that win condition from other games though; it has my interest.