DAY 2

A dark figure crept silently over the rooftops, as if up to some nefarious deed...

But it was just Amanda Callahan (Khscarymovie4) practicing her new cheer routine.

"OH EMMM GEEEEE absolutely cannot wait to put this on my Instasnapfacegramchaterbook! The girls are gonna LOVE IT!"

Elsewhere, Tony (jluck) ran across an abandoned hotdog cart on his evening stroll.

"Well, can't let this go to waste!" *munch*

Morning dawned on... eleven jurors. 

"Hey, where's Cathy?" asked Jared Hartman (Kwatchi). "Who am I going to play BotBS with now...?"

Judge Justuss spoke up.

"Unfortunately, Cathy fell ill yesterday and has requested to be dismissed from the jury. Jimmy Hessler (Steamdemon), the construction worker, will be taking her place. So make him feel welcome. Or don't. He'll probably get killed off soon anyways. Other than that, not much to report. Quiet night. So, do your thing, maybe turn someone over to the Chief and I to question today. I've been itching to do some... uh... interrogating. Let's call it that."

Host (1)

 

Neil Justuss, played by mediumsnowman - Judge, Jury and Executioner

NPC's (2)

Chase McCain, NPC - Police Chief

Sleaze Ballagio, NPC - Crime Boss

Jurors (12)

Alan Andrews, played by KotZ - Logger

Amanda Callahan, played by Khscarymovie4 - Cheerleader

Brock Martin, played by Tariq j - Radio Host

Jimmy Hessler, played by Steamdemon - Construction Worker

Clifford Schauer, played by LegoMonorailFan - Mailman

Dez Hunter, played by Forresto - Businessman

Gary Johnson, played by Kintober - Mine Foreman

Harry Oldman, played by fhomess - Retired Vet.

Jared Hartman, played by Kwatchi - Software Developer

Stephanie Diaz, played by Lady K - College Student

Tina Hooper, played by Umbra-Manis - Receptionist

Tony, played by jluck - Chef

Dismissed (1)

Cathy Bridger, played by Drunknok - Fell ill day 1, replaced by Jimmy Hessler (Steamdemon) - Alignment Unknown

Reserves (1)

Actor Builder

Rules:

1. Each player will be given a character to play, who will be aligned with either the TOWN or the MAFIA. To win the game, the TOWN must kill off all the MAFIA members, while the MAFIA needs to outnumber the TOWN and/or any other factions. Third-Party (neutral) characters and/or factions will have their own win conditions as outlined in their roles.

2. Each day you will be able to vote to lynch a player. Voting should be done in the following format; Vote: Character (Player). Similarly, unvoting is to be done in the format; Unvote: Character (Player). No other format will be accepted. A majority vote is required to lynch. You must submit a vote each day.

3. A game day will last approximately 72 hours. You may not vote in the first 24 hours. After the day has concluded, a night stage will commence, which will last a maximum of 48 hours. Night actions must be sent to the host in the first 24 hours of the night stage.

4. The alignment of lynched players, as well as those that died during the night, will be revealed at the beginning of the following day.

5. You may not quote or pretend to quote anything sent to or from you in PM with the game host, or in PM with any other players. This includes all the details of your character and role, as well as any night action results. Role claims and reporting of night action results are acceptable, but in your own words only. Do not attempt to use the structure of your role PM to your advantage.

6. Do not play the game outside the thread. Similarly, do not post out of character inside the thread; you must always play the role given to you. Game tactics and roles may only be discussed in the game thread or via PM with other players. Private discussion is done at your own risk and should be treated as part of the game.

7. If you are dead, you may not post in thread or discuss the game with any of the players. Any information you had becomes void, and may not be passed on.

8. You may not edit your posts, unless you are me. Your host often makes typos and will be compelled to correct them.

9. You must post in every day thread.

10. There probably aren't clues in the pictures or flavor text, but wild speculation is encouraged. It's fun. 

11. If you encounter a problem or have a question, please contact the host via PM.

12. Violation of the above rules will result in a vote penalty of half the required majority against you on your first and second offense, and the death of your character on your third offense. Violation of rule 7 will have a heavier penalty, including suspension, made at the discretion of the Games Moderator.

 

 

Edited January 22, 20187 yr by mediumsnowman

Soooo...it's day one all over again? Shoot.

Well, Day 2 of the trial is here and the good news is we didn't lose any good law abiding town citizens last night.  And.....we still have crime family members amongst us. 

Well, that was an uneventful night. But welcome aboard, Jimmy.

Huh, weird. I know it feels like a repeat of day 1, but I’m pleased with the turn of events. I’m sure there were some night actions and we also have several decent conversations from yesterday to build off of, all without losing any townies. 

Day two and we're nowhere closer to determining whats what and where anyone's allegiances are.

Back to square one...

 

Well, this is a curious situation we find ourselves in.

I suppose we pick up from Day One and continue the line of questioning present there. Cathy has seemingly fallen ill, but I'd like to know what our new juror has to say about all this. What's your opinion, Jimmy?

Well that was a splendid night.  I slept like a log.  Welcome to the jury, Jimmy.  I do hope Cathy feels better soon and that no one else "falls ill".  Good thing I have my bottle... wards off all sorts of ailments.

Hello there, I'm Jimmy Hessler. This is my first time on jury duty. His Honor has brought me up to speed on the situation. Honestly, the thought that somebody among us is a mobster angers me.

Sorry it took so long for me to get here. Construction Site is not near enough.

Quiet night. Wonder why...

Perhaps the scum didn't knockoff anyone because no matter who they put a hit on, it would result in suspicion of one or more scum? 

 

((sip))

Welcome aboard the accusation-train Jimmy! Next stop is you being suspicious for showing up late or something.

At the moment I am, like, trying to decipher what happened last night.  We'll get back to our regular programming of me arguing with Stephie in a bit.

#crookedstephanie ?

((sip))

Interesting, this is kind of why we should have had a day one lynch. 

2 hours ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

Quiet night. Wonder why...

Perhaps the scum didn't knockoff anyone because no matter who they put a hit on, it would result in suspicion of one or more scum? 

Which is what is making me uneasy.

Last night would have been the perfect night to knock one of us off since we'd have little information to pin point any scum today and retaliate.

Any lynch today is still more likely to knock off a townie and a kill last night would've taken care of another of us. This would allow Scum to kill a third of us tonight and we could have been looking at three dead innocents by day three.

So either:

1) The scum took a calculated risk to avoid suspicion and foolishly refused to kill last night.

2) The scum attempted to kill last night and were blocked by a protector. 

6 minutes ago, Tariq j said:

Interesting, this is kind of why we should have had a day one lynch. 

The problem with this school of thought is that more than likely an innocent townie would have been lynched. Sure we know one loyalty but we would also lose a value townie vote.  Sure we can then look at voting; but Day 1 is always a dice roll.

We still do have all the conversations from yesterday, as well as who voted for who, and who switch votes and why to look at for possible clues for today.

 I feel better with no lynch yesterday and no loss of a townie last night. 

3 minutes ago, Forresto said:

Which is what is making me uneasy.

Last night would have been the perfect night to knock one of us off since we'd have little information to pin point any scum today and retaliate.

Any lynch today is still more likely to knock off a townie and a kill last night would've taken care of another of us. This would allow Scum to kill a third of us tonight and we could have been looking at three dead innocents by day three.

So either:

1) The scum took a calculated risk to avoid suspicion and foolishly refused to kill last night.

2) The scum attempted to kill last night and were blocked by a protector. 

I think it is more likely your second point and that the scum kill was blocked last night.  It doesn't make sense for the scum to not kill night one.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Lady K said:

The problem with this school of thought is that more than likely an innocent townie would have been lynched. Sure we know one loyalty but we would also lose a value townie vote.  Sure we can then look at voting; but Day 1 is always a dice roll.

We still do have all the conversations from yesterday, as well as who voted for who, and who switch votes and why to look at for possible clues for today.

 I feel better with no lynch yesterday and no loss of a townie last night. 

I think it is more likely your second point and that the scum kill was blocked last night.  It doesn't make sense for the scum to not kill night one.

Which begs the question who then? 

No one has stepped forward and claimed to be, fair enough, that would make them a target and would be a fairly dumb move.

If someone did claim to be I'd be more inclined to suspect them to be scum masquerading as friendly.

Now since no one has asked, do we think there is a third party killer at work? I imagine the lack of a death last night would rule that out.  

On a separate note, Isn't that a roof that Amanda is on? Without any safety gear no less?

4 minutes ago, Forresto said:

Which begs the question who then? 

No one has stepped forward and claimed to be, fair enough, that would make them a target and would be a fairly dumb move.

If someone did claim to be I'd be more inclined to suspect them to be scum masquerading as friendly.

Now since no one has asked, do we think there is a third party killer at work? I imagine the lack of a death last night would rule that out.  

It is uncommon and not wise to reveal any roles here in the trail day thread; as you stated that person would then become a target.

 I am thankful the town blocker was successful last night; please do not reveal yourself here.  Eventually the town will come together privately.

It is too early to determine a third-party.  I merely brought it up yesterday and then explained my reasoning (more than once) as  remembering a previous encounter in a forest a long time ago; brought on by an off hand comment from another jury member.

Welp, there's no way on earth this works but still might as well try...

If you're scum, come on out with your hands in the air and we promise you're death will be quick and painless!

I doubt we have a third party, but I think we can safely rule out a Serial Killer. A Serial Killer would've killed last night, so with the murder from both the Bellagio and the Serial Killer, we would've gotten something. Whether we have a vigilante is yet to be seen, although I'm leaning towards their not being one.

Now then, onto more pressing matters: let's pick up from yesterday. Oldman and Schauer, if you had to vote for someone right now, who'd it be?

1 hour ago, Steamdemon said:

On a separate note, Isn't that a roof that Amanda is on? Without any safety gear no less?

There's probably a loophole for exactly this kind of occasion.

4 hours ago, LegoMonorailFan said:

Quiet night. Wonder why...

Perhaps the scum didn't knockoff anyone because no matter who they put a hit on, it would result in suspicion of one or more scum? 

Complete nonsense.

2 hours ago, Tariq j said:

Interesting, this is kind of why we should have had a day one lynch. 

Actually, this makes me feel better about having no day one lynch.  We haven't lost anyone at all and now have night action results that the the PR's can start reviewing.

1 hour ago, Forresto said:

Which begs the question who then? 

No one has stepped forward and claimed to be, fair enough, that would make them a target and would be a fairly dumb move.

If someone did claim to be I'd be more inclined to suspect them to be scum masquerading as friendly.

Now since no one has asked, do we think there is a third party killer at work? I imagine the lack of a death last night would rule that out.  

It doesn't beg that question.  Unlike what Stephanie said, we don't know the town blocker was successful last night.  It could be a protector of some kind that saved someone's bacon.

Your last question is pointless.  There were no kills last night.  How on earth can we know if a 3rd party killer exists?  If there was only 1 kill, the most logical assumption is that it was the Ballagio's.  Still no evidence for a 3rd party killer.  What does discussing 3rd parties get us?  Nothing.  It's pure speculation at this point.

15 minutes ago, Kintobor said:

I doubt we have a third party, but I think we can safely rule out a Serial Killer. A Serial Killer would've killed last night, so with the murder from both the Bellagio and the Serial Killer, we would've gotten something. Whether we have a vigilante is yet to be seen, although I'm leaning towards their not being one.

Now then, onto more pressing matters: let's pick up from yesterday. Oldman and Schauer, if you had to vote for someone right now, who'd it be?

There's probably a loophole for exactly this kind of occasion.

I'm still no fan of Dez and Stephanie is giving me the heebie jeebies, too.  Who would you vote for right now?

24 minutes ago, fhomess said:

It doesn't beg that question.  Unlike what Stephanie said, we don't know the town blocker was successful last night.  It could be a protector of some kind that saved someone's bacon.

Your last question is pointless.  There were no kills last night.  How on earth can we know if a 3rd party killer exists?  If there was only 1 kill, the most logical assumption is that it was the Ballagio's.  Still no evidence for a 3rd party killer.  What does discussing 3rd parties get us?  Nothing.  It's pure speculation at this point.

I would like to publicly indicate that no matter how constructive I attempt to be, any time i've asked an entirely legitimate question Oldman has exclaimed otherwise.

and if you read what I wrote...

2 hours ago, Forresto said:

Now since no one has asked, do we think there is a third party killer at work? I imagine the lack of a death last night would rule that out.  

I say as much.

All we have is speculation! 

You have targeted me since day one. I'm watching you sir.

10 minutes ago, Forresto said:

I would like to publicly indicate that no matter how constructive I attempt to be, any time i've asked an entirely legitimate question Oldman has exclaimed otherwise.

and if you read what I wrote...

I say as much.

All we have is speculation! 

You have targeted me since day one. I'm watching you sir.

It does seem that he does nothing but discredit...

1 hour ago, fhomess said:

I'm still no fan of Dez and Stephanie is giving me the heebie jeebies, too.  Who would you vote for right now?

1 hour ago, Forresto said:

I would like to publicly indicate that no matter how constructive I attempt to be, any time i've asked an entirely legitimate question Oldman has exclaimed otherwise.

Not wanting to jump the gun on this, but you two are coming to a head, and it needs to be solved sooner rather than later.

4 hours ago, Forresto said:

Which is what is making me uneasy.

Last night would have been the perfect night to knock one of us off since we'd have little information to pin point any scum today and retaliate.

Any lynch today is still more likely to knock off a townie and a kill last night would've taken care of another of us. This would allow Scum to kill a third of us tonight and we could have been looking at three dead innocents by day three.

So either:

1) The scum took a calculated risk to avoid suspicion and foolishly refused to kill last night.

2) The scum attempted to kill last night and were blocked by a protector. 

There could even be a recruit at play. I mean in a game this small, a block/protector is more likely to get lucky with 12 players rather than say 17. 

1 minute ago, Tariq j said:

There could even be a recruit at play. I mean in a game this small, a block/protector is more likely to get lucky with 12 players rather than say 17. 

Would you mind elaborating for us?