VOTE: Chomps
hell
VOTE: Kiiruma
My case on kiiruma is as follows:
.
And that’s all I have on kiiruma so we should vote them
4 Likes
agreed, they didn’t do anything towny yet.
2 Likes
curious that this role exists when there’s anticlaim
it def points to anti claim not being usable on neutral
VOTE: Canping
My least favorite slot i think
I think it’s purpose might be that it buffs up evil by enabling anti-claim.
But buffs up town by providing the benefits on top of this.
I do not think there is too much need to read into it at this point.
SMILEY is a balacing act somewhat and if we’re able to take advantage of it, hey maybe we can get SMILEY to win by just sweeping evil.
I’ll be completely unable to play tomorrow morning and afternoon. I’ll be at a freelance work and prob won’t be allowed to use my mobile.
2 Likes
VOTE: Canping
me when i wield the nefarious tennis racket that spills battery acid
1 Like
Reveals being false would be bastard.
Agreed. He is right. VOTE: Canping
Good night.
Please explain this vote. Seems a bit too opportunistic to me. Giving Willow a very slight scumlean here.
Now calling it a night so good night everyone. 
2 Likes
What if the anti-claim is an ability?
In that case SMILEY would be immune towards anti-claim.
(I just don’t think ZONE would overlook the interaction between the anti-claim and a self-revealing role.)
It’s certainly a possibility.
I’d think it’s either an assigned ability or a factional based ability.
Of course this is just contemplation but 
I don’t think Zone would overlook it, I think it might be something on purpose idk
I am preparing an opening post, but I would like to separate out any questions I find myself having so that they do not get lost.
Leafia, would you say you are self-resolving this game? Do you think your ability will clear you?
1 Like
Would you say you stand by the read, even despite this observation, or do you think that this confrontational nature is not alignment indicative?
If you absolutely had to make a call, would you say that Jarek is more villagery or more wolfy off of this joke (or non-joke) vote?
Could you elaborate on this? Is there anything at all which you could cite as a reason that you feel this way?
Hello, everybody. I’m excited to play again.
Inexplicably, I find this post wolfy. I believe it is due to the sense of meaningless correction here, as it forms an assertion of game-knowledge without any actual productivity.
This is something I feel others might find to be a wolfy post for the reason I mentioned regarding Canping above, but from my knowledge of Marluna in particular, I don’t especially feel this way.
I find this brief pop-in lightly villagery.
Similarly, this rebellion is utterly pointless on its surface, so I like it.
A piece of mechanical speculation: I do not think Zone_Q11 would have added this role without a greater purpose. While the revealed rolecard cannot contain overt lies, as this is a bastard game, I feel there must be some interesting intention here, and so I suspect there is a “tradeoff” to keeping this role alive, whether it is the ability to anti-claim it or otherwise. Does that mean we should execute it? I do not know for sure.
The other potential “function” of this role is to create a tradeoff for the mafia, whether they choose to kill or roleblock the NPC with a known powerful role or a villager with an unknown role. I would find this an interesting choice, but I am not sure if that is exactly Zone_Q11’s style.
As a note, if the mafia have any blocking power whatsoever, they can roleblock Smiley and then claim its benefits for themselves, so it is not clearing for a player to say they received a benefit from Smiley. I believe the only announced benefit is the private vote, so this strategy is only possible on Night 3. It is obvious enough as a strategy that I will not play coy about this possibility.
While this backpedals on the rebelliousness I found villagery, it feels natural and unforced as a clarification, so I am not modifying this read.
I continue to feel rather neutral about Marluna’s discussion here: it is something that is utterly fakeable, and yet something that a villager does have every incentive to say.
Jarek is my top town for the time being.
This is also good thought.
I appreciate the mindmeld with Willow here (and the indignation from Jarek), though I do not think it especially alignment-indicative on its face.
This is good on-the-ground self-reflection which I find villagery.
I find this rather genuine.
I also find this thought genuine-seeming. A Leafia who legitimately wolfreads Jarek intensely would have this exact thought.
I like this thought, but I do not think it is necessarily true: the neutral could be considered an additional “role” which is in the game. I believe the fact that the role “joined the game” in the signup thread implies that it was a pre-game effect rather than an in-game one.
My thoughts exactly.
I find this unprompted thought to be villagery.
I find this aggression to be slightly villagery.
This opener appears to be what should more naturally come as an “inside thought” for wolves: “we can anti-claim the neutral” is something that a wolf would first think to say in wolfchat, not in the thread. However, it is too easy to fake for me to feel especially good about.
I find this post agreeable enough.
I also agree that there had to be some intentionality to this decision. I do not think such anti-claim would be disastrous to the village, as it is almost certainly “free” for the wolves and avoiding triggering it means giving up our execution for the day, but there must be a tradeoff.