Let me start with what day it is today. It's friday, but it's also Day 0. Most of our day 0's lead to no lynches and for good reason because none of our power roles have had any actions yet and we have nothing concrete and barily any reads to formulate a successfull lynch. So let me just start this off by saying if we're not lynching Danni today we should be no-lynching. And before Aqua repeats 'we have good solid suspicions on Ltin and ??? right now', pretty sure that's only you and maybe Inf but I don't think most of us have seen any suspicion from Ltin and other whose name I can't remember other than standard Day 0 gibberish.
I can agree on this, but one thing, we got quite a long day ahead of us, is there anything we can do at this day? Claim names? Get the AFK people to respond, is there anything we should do day 0?
So to recap: he currently has no win condition. If he's lynched he gains the Mafia win condition. If he's nightkilled(by mafia) he gains the town win condition. Meanwhile he claims stays dead so this 'win-condition-after-death' of his is absolutely irrelevant to us as he poses no threat as a dead mafia member nor is he of use as a dead town member. Also if he's lynched Mafia will gain a nightkill and if he's nightkilled town will gain a kill somehow.
So why should we lynch him if we're looking at this supposed win condition? First of all as Oog pointed out a lynch doesn't mean death-by-village and him claiming that it does is weird and doesn't seem to make alot of sense. Sure town has the majority players during the day but that doesn't mean the majority votes on a player aren't Mafia. It simply doesn't make sense that any mechanic works this way.
Second of all, the mechanics of the extra kill seem super bogus and also don't make alot of sense. So town leader/vig/extra lynch is Danni's supposed theory of how the town gets that extra kill. Any specific role getting this extra kill is improbably because what happens if they're dead and then Danni is nightkilled? What town now doesn't get this extra 'benefit'? No role would get this extra supposed kill. Furthermore the town getting an extra lynch is also impossible because of the complete and utter mess the day voting would be if we had to vote for two people. All in all town somehow getting an extra kill seems extremely unlikely and because of that I don't believe that that, or the mafia getting an extra kill, will actually happen on Danni's death.
Third, do we really think Ender would put in a third party role whose win condition is 100% out of their control? Hosts tend to be careful with placing survivors in their game because such a game is super hard as one does not have any control over the mafia's night kills. Putting a role like this in the game where they can't even play like anything because they don't have their win condition yet seems not like something any host would do. Furthermore why would Ender make a role where the player has to die in order for them to win? Nobody likes dying in Mafia and forcing a player to die because of their role isn't just a bastard thing to do but cruel to whomever receives their role as they're basically robbed of their fun.
Everything in thee quote above me, are basically reasons for that you dont believe me, correct notty? I cant explain them, either you are saying ender is a bad host, or you are saying that im lying, so not much I can respond do that, good solid logic though.
Fourth, think about his win condition claim and how he's played this day. He can only win if he's dead, yet this entire claim of his is set up to not only try and convince us not to lynch him but to scare both the town and mafia into not killing him because of this supposed 'extra kill' the other side gets. Why would he try to scare us all into not lynching/nighkilling him any day ever when his win condition means he has to be dead by the end of the game. It doesn't make any sense for him to play against his supposed win condition like this.
Its literally just the way I wanted to play, I did not really think too much about it, but it seemed it would give me a plesant game where I would be free to work with the town, trying to figure out the mafia, if neccesary die in the attempt, and give the town a benefit. I honestly did not care that much about if my name stood at the end screen, gambling that the mafia would hopefully kill me, but that it would be several days out, either way I wanted to help village. If you want to argue that my points in this pargraph are stupid, you might be right, but that does not make them lies, I am no perfect player, and the last game Inffy got me and rune killed, because of overanalyzing the way we played. Still salty about that.
And lastly, Danni said this: 'As I say, if I prove a competent villager/mafia hunter, I will be very useful to you guys, because I am confirmed as not mafia, and the mafia dont want to lynch me either'. He said this before he claimed that either side could get a nightkill and has so far only called it a 'benefit'. If the mafia gain a nightkill then they have alot of incentive you lynch you so what's up you saying this if according to your later claim mafia gain a nightkill? This proves to me Danni is either making this up on the spot or he doesn't really know at all things about the claim he's making.
I simply did not want to reveal more about my role, as this might make the mafia still kill me,
and as you stated previously, this would make sense. I am not saying I had some grand scheme about it, but I simply did not want to reveal more, found it a fine spot to be in, where mafia might kill me, might not, and I hoped village would stop bugging me from there. They did not.
If I think about the 5 things I just mentioned then, to me, it seems pretty obvious that something here is wrong here. Now let's look at some (in my opinion)lies Danni has said so far:
He said this earlier in the day about name claiming yet nothing of his claim alures to having any information about names. That means this statement right here is a complete lie to have us claim names.
From the information I have, it would not throw the game. I dont actually remember what I thought here, but you do agree it would be very stupid that knowing all names would straight up throw the game?
I stand by my reasoning for claiming names, and I did claim my own name to stand as an exmaple that I do not fear any mafia abilities that instakills us etc if they know our names.
:thinking: you say it won't help either side yet later you claim that it does help a side via an extra kill. You're gonna say that you didn't want to reveal that at this point but honestly if you had that in mind you wouldn't of talked about you dying helping any side. Not only that but you claim you don't need us to win yet you also claim you need to die to win so you definitly need us since you can't just sudoku unless you're planning on being modkilled by Aqua. This entire quote just screams to me that his win condition here(whether his true win condition or if he was planning on claiming something else) is something different than what he has claimed later.
I dont need you to win, I could just afk and I would eventually be lynched be one side, and gain a win condition, and afk the rest of the game. However that would be extremely boring, this is way more interesting. Also I would have no controll over my win, I dont like that. (inb4 but you are saying you wont win by this danni) (probably right but afking the entire game seemed rather boring too)
What ability? I'd classify ability as having a day or night action. Having something out of your control happen once you die is not an ability as far as I'd say. Plus even if you classify someone getting an extra kill as your ability, it doesn't seem at all impossible for that kill to be switched according to Inf's theory. Although this one is more up to interpretation I find this still a blatant lie trying to put down inf's theory about names.
I just thought that inffys theory was too far fatched and complicated, to with with my ability, I dont know what to fucking call my thing, if my role instantly exploded upon death, and killed two others, I would call it an ability, wouldnt you?
That's most of it for what I find about his claim. In my opinion it's a big mess of improbable-impossible mechanics, counter intuitive playing, vague statements over multiple posts and a bunch of Danni seemingly lying. The only thing danni has actually got going for him in my opinion is that he's just stated his rolename 'Third Party Mimic' (I was gonna make some fuzz about how he hasn't even claimed a role name). And for his claim it does seem like a plausible name.
Most people have said they don't think Danni would play like this as that's not his general style. Well you're right and I have a working theory on why Danni is acting like this.
this is exciting
As far-fetched as it might sound, I think Danni was
forced to make a claim. Sounds like a pretty bastard thing to do doesn't it? I think Ender (or someone with a day ability who used it very very early in the day but thats unlikely so for now I'll keep it at Ender), as part of Danni's role, told Danni he had to make a claim. One of the following three(in order of likeliness) is what I'm thinking:
- Make a Third-Party claim on day 0
- Make a Third-Party claim on day 0 that has the role name of Third Party Mimic
- On day 0 you have to claim Third Party Mimic. Your supposed abilities that you have to claim are: *insert all supposed mechanics danni mentioned*.
And if he didn't make a claim by the end of the day he would die. I've previously in one of GmK's games been a role where I had to claim something to get an ability so a role like this could very easely be possible especially when it's a bastard game.
I mean this is false, but if I say its true, is it less chance that you vote for me?
I still think Danni is Third Party, whether he is actually whatever he claims or if he was forced to claim by Ender. Although sure it's possible, forcing a town player to make a third-party claim seems like an extremely bastard thing to do, I find it more likely Ender wanted to make Danni's actual third-party role harder by forcing him to claim Third Party.
TL;DR: improbable mechanics, playing against his supposed win condition, vague statements(although later clarified when asked specifically), bunch of statements he made that seem to be lies.
Fair enough.
I really enjoyed your post notty 10/10, at least 70% of it was very solid arguments, and its actually fun to respond to.
Cant wait for the 40 new posts that have been posted while I wrote this.
