Elminster

It offers protection for me as well. Makes mafia pick if they want to kill me and open up lunatic to talking. 

That's why I was super sus about his initial post as the mod implied it's only stuff on that list. But I seem to be some sort of modified vanilla as well. My nk would let him be able to play. 

My role ties in with him. 

If mafia kills me I will have the choice to target a player and "crack" them. 

This is worded as a code breaker. 

Lunatic is town locked 

I'm legitimately confused as to what you are even talking about anymore

Name ?

Well considering it was a blatantly obvious post involving some game mechanic and no one mentioned it, I wanted to see how long it took someone to bring it up and why it was being skimmed over. 

???

My two town reads at the moment are parrot and lunatic 

1) I can't see mafia having a role that prohibits speech when they are already in the minority

2) I don't see parrot claiming immediately without the risk of someone saying they are the same thing unless he actually was that role. Also my interaction with the moderation person helps this read as well. 

This is unless he knew this was not in the game 

But my two stronger reads at the moment are lunatic and parrot 

Yes we play at my youth group in person. Not near as much with the pandemic but some in the past. 

I like vote to kill or vote to kick.  It's a common practice we use whenever we play. Even though we still slip sometimes. 

But it's the thought that counts. 

It refers to lynching and I would prefer to abstain from referring to that 

I would prefer not to type vtl

It's disrespectful. I'll type vtk though 

Remove kill lunatic 

Judging from the list the mod tagged and the title of the game.

Its possible unique rolls exist in this that may mess with roles/results. It's why I was questioning parrot as well. Given the title of the game you think someone would question that immediate claim. I pulled back on this after the exchange with the moderator 

With what the other guy posted I would wager he has some sort of restriction on him. 

Testing something 

Vote to kill lunatic 

I was waiting for someone to bring that up before I mentioned it to see if people were intentionally ignoring it. 

Thank you

For whatever reason it stops at 57 for me 

I read that as the moderator trying to clarify how a role works in response to what parrot claimed. 

But I don't see mason on that list (assuming he pulled the roles in this game from there)

Actually I'm confused. 

Mason is not listed on that list the mod posted?

If mason is listed would not that not confirm parrot?

I'm not quite sure how to read this and I feel guilty for it but now I certainly town read parrot. 

Also what is a mason?

He plays so sub optimally that it's optimal to play sub optimally. Isn't that exploitable If people always assume that to be the case?

We had basic roles. Cop, tracker, nothing to over the top. But it was done in person at a church youth group. 

I'm not entirely sure what is suboptimal. I'm just repeating what has been said

From what you and croc said, ideally you would not claim dp1 unless you are pressured or have a reason to claim. Grey claimed without either. If there is a way that most people play or are expected to play, doing the exact opposite would be suboptimal would it not?

Is there a reason mafia would ignore his playstyle to the detriment of town?

Mo?

Is mason the exception?

How do you determine when it's beneficial?

Is the other one not happening?

I like this theme. If this ends up occuring at a later date, please leave me signed up for when it happens. 

When this starts. Where will we get the information about it?

Thank You!

If possible I would like to try this. I have played in party settings before and want to attempt it in this setting. 

If someone is confused to the point of non repentance, how else would you define it? Not attempting to play semantics with the word, just curious. 

Also not trying to demonize you. I do think orthodoxy can be borderline cult like , but I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing because I respect the level of devoutness. 

It's not "fanatically" intolerant. It's that the orthodox church would view him as someone who is destined for hell because he's confused and would say he has a choice in the matter of homosexuality. He on the other hand would say he was born that way. Would view him as hopeless is a better way to say it 

When you set up a framework for that , it certainly can be toxic (at least in my experience). I think everything I said is pretty accurate

Orthodoxy requires submission to it

Orthodox people are the crazies of religious christians. It doesn't leave text open to interpretation other than what the church interprets it as. It's very textualist. And I promise you , they absolutely view you as an abomination in the sense of you are just confused and sinning willingly and are on your way to hell 

What most people call "Orthodox" isn't really Orthodox. 

Again using mopac as an example. He will engage with you but he likely thinks you are a piece of filth. It's kind of crazy how deranged the views get. 

What mopac is saying is generally correct as far as orthodox beliefs. Where we would differ is that I don't believe it to be the one "true religion"

But insofar as what they actually think, he's been very accurate

That is so fundamentally wrong that I don't even know where to start. It would take an entire seperate thread and topic to break that down 

But that is just fundamentally wrong 

Yes which Christ died for. What you are saying is you are incapable of not acting without sin. They absolutely do not believe that unless you start talking about calvinist

1) to be saved you have to repent of sin

2) homosexuality is a sin 

3) if you have no "choice" in engaging in homosexuality then you can't be saved.

That is not an orthodox belief. Even baptists disagree with that lol.

Then to repeat they aren't orthodox. You can shift goal posts all you want but orthodox christians will acknowledge that homosexuality is a choice by the sheer definition of what it means to be orthodox 

Homosexuality is a sin

If you are living in sin without a choice then God made you that way 

They will refuse to acknowledge that. As far as you get is a calvinist framework where God intends for certain people to go to hell. So if he did create you that way, then it was being well aware that you would be sent to hell. 

Then they aren't really Orthodox. No orthodox christian will look at homosexuality as anything other than a sin. If they do, they aren't orthodox by definition.