Mafia 90. The Tale of Oldforest.

Aries. Well, what can I say? I'm disappointed. You didn't "quit the game," you threw a tantrum and rage-quit. You let the team down. The only good thing I can say about the game is the "musical interludes," but I expected more.

1) When the GM breaks the rules they themselves created, turn after turn, and justifies it with "it just happened." Moreover, the bias is always in favor of the town (making a reciprocal concession to the mafia is NOT ALLOWED because it's UNFAIR!). So, you can safely record the number of surviving town members in the BOOK OF RECORDS, right next to the page where the phenomenal victory of the United Russia party in all elections of the second millennium is noted.

The only thing that really upset me was Aries's second emotional outburst.

Let them publish the mafia chat.

I really liked the town's game; the victory was absolutely deserved. Good daytime discussions, effective executions. I really liked the town's game; the victory was absolutely deserved. Good daytime discussions, effective executions.

I'm going to be sick: "Wise townspeople" hang a blocked player on the first night (it's just luck that the forest spirit blocked a mafia member, but they could have blocked a town member instead, and the hero's poll gives them 2 town roles - 4 mafia roles). But "they can't hang him" in case we kill a strong role! But on the third day, it's okay! Even though the ratio of mafia to town members has changed by a factor of two! And they spend a long time debating whether or not to hang Heaven.

During the discussion, the GM was told about banning identical polls, but...

The GM believes that the questions "are you mafia?" and "are you mafia named Ogonёk?" are "different." For all players, a "successful" night phase = a completed night phase if they managed to block, transfer, kill, heal, or learn... For our GM, it has different meanings.

Finally, the rules clearly stated the rule for casting votes for execution, but Shaman ignored them... Most of the mistakes could have been successfully corrected without changing the "newspaper acceleration" rule – it was possible to reflect the role, not the nickname; votes can always be recounted and changed (this was the case in games where dead players' roles are not revealed). BUT the GM considered himself right and, in response to criticism, began to threaten.

Therefore, let him answer:

Moderated: INSULT in the message

Answers: yes or no – only one lie is allowed.

First of all, a big thank you to the GM for their efforts. I know that some people tried their best to make you stop the game, and towards the end, they even resorted to insults, but in reality, for the first time, the game was conducted, in my opinion, magnificently. In general, well done, keep it up!

And regarding your

Moderated: INSULT in the message

attitude towards who can be insulted and who cannot, I would be happy to talk face to face when I get out of the hospital