Pandava's I believe. I'm not sure how useful this is given that no one is going to say they are aligned with the Kaurava's.
but it was his role claim, not his char claim, that got him killed.
Newbie scum players struggle with direct lies, so mitigating responsibility or explaining how scum would lie is pretty common.
Pushing on inactives in response to being lightly sussed is very scummy tbh
Is your character aligned with the Pandava's, or the Kaurava's or neither? Might be too obvious of a theme split but I don't see the harm in getting this information.
Haven't seen your read on JoeBob yet. I could see him being anything, honestly.
i think hes town
I was killed for being a pawn, which was my character. (Pawns can promote.) Read the endgame and the PM you sent me during that game.
Maybe that's true from your experience, but from what I've seen, it seems like a random thing to scumread me for. As town, why wouldn't I point out that scum is likely to just lie if we tell everyone what we think the theme split is?
I'd been curious about Earth's reasons for not posting for a while, and I didn't even say he was probably scum. I just said I would like to see him post more.
I'd like to understand this push on Savant better.Savant was not the first person to push on inactives (that would be me). I recognize that he did it shortly after you said you scumread him, but considering that you're the only person to do it so far, I have a hard time believing that he's just trying to distract attention. I also don't agree that his role claim got him killed - he claimed Miller, so that role claim certainly isn't what killed him.I do agree with you that it's kind of odd to point out that scum isn't going to claim they align with the Kaurava's. It's especially strange because that's only a plausible theme split at the moment. That being said, I think that his statement speaks to what we know about scum having knowledge of certain characters and roles being in the game, and might use that perceived theme split to their advantage. It's a bit of WIFOM thinking, and I think he should have been more straightforward in how he phrased it. I know I used to do that all the time and it got me killed fairly often whether I was scum or town.
Haven't seen your read on JoeBob yet. I could see him being anything, honestly.
Haven't seen your read on JoeBob yet. I could see him being anything, honestly.
So it seems like anything that can be defined as "Negative" is anything that interferes with or manipulates the results of a given role. I'll need to think on whether there's some other role that exists in more of a borderline state on that, but I think I get the gist from your list of roles. Thanks for clarifying, and thanks to Pie for addressing the question through you.
Pushing on inactives is fine. That being the only substantiative contribution to the game is not.Also, his role claim did get him killed - he mentioned an additional aspect of his role but refused to clarify it, leading scum to believe he was hiding some uber-powerful late-game power.IMO it's not pointing out the problems with themesplit itself that's the problem, it's the strange tone - almost like he was hedging his bets - as he said it, which strikes me as odd.
