It just makes sense to build a game that way. To have characters from the story coupled with roles that suit them well. I don't see why characters should be given roles not fit for them at all, but I can see how exceptions may have to be made in themed games where the story doesn't fit the mafia game style very well.
I think Dumper being mafia would make no sense at all, but it wouldn't be "broken". It would just be unintuitive and confusing for the overall game. It has to have flow, or else no one is going to know which characters may be associated with what roles if it's just a free-for-all. Same thing for the commander, but to a lesser extent because not having an ability and being on the exact opposite side (anti-town) of what is expected are quite different.
I don't think I'm too lore bound, I'm just using information from the story to make an educated statement about how I doubt the credibility of FoE's post. I'm trusting that my brother wouldn't make the game completely ridiculous with roles being randomly given to unfitting characters, but there is always the possibility. However, that possibility seems quite unlikely.
❶ If Bad Ash, a town mason, took Solar (alleged mafia) with him... Wouldn't the town and/or his mason partner know Solar's role or alignment? If I were Fred (either as town or not), I would had either revealed the information, informed that I didn't receive any at all or made one up.
I can't recall an instance where a bomb/bodyguard/retributive type role received info about the player they killed when they died. Let alone magically passing that info to a mason partner. Would a mason partner of a cop receive investigation results on the night a cop died? I think not.
Well, that escalated quickly. FoE has certainly read exactly what I received. Which means he is either a Mason as claimed, Scum, or a Cult member. He's right about my role. I am an Eavesdropper (or Listener, as the host has termed it), Town aligned, named Julian "Bean" Delphki (whoever the heck that is). What I get each night is a randomly selected snippet of conversation, with names removed. First night I received what was obviously a snippet of Mafia chat that said something along the lines of "oh stuff it, let's kill *name removed*." Which is pretty useless (aside from making me think CG was killed for meta-game reasons). Second night, well, you already know the second bit, while FoE has hinted at the first bit, which I had held back on revealing prior to this.
I definitely realise now that I didn't consider the Mason and Cult possibilities enough before jumping to the Mafia conclusion. Re-re-re-re-re-re-reading the information again, Moar thinks it would been very beneficial to keep korial alive to continue the discussion he started (all the stuff about him and Drixx being possibly framed), and regrets her vote for him on that basis.
The first part of what I received discusses the possibility of saving (from a lynch presumably) whoever Moar was talking to (BA, if FoE can be believed). There is an expression of doubt that any such attempt will meet with much success, due to pseudo-BA and another nameless person being the only people looking in any way suspicious. She then mentions a third party will be going after a fourth party, but that they (it's ambiguous whether person 3 or person 4 is meant here) won't be scummy enough to attempt to shift the heat to them from pseudo-BA.
Just in case someone picks up on this, I left out the bit about skim-reading the thread on the bus, which was how I identified the speaker as Moar. Not that that matters anymore, now that FoE has confirmed I was right.
FWIW - the claim name does match up with the claimed role.
So if we assume that JM is being truthful, and if we assume that FoE's post is somehow true (talk about an amazing situation to be dumped into as a replacement player), then where do we even begin? Brainhurts.
The first part of what I received discusses the possibility of saving (from a lynch presumably) whoever Moar was talking to (BA, if FoE can be believed). There is an expression of doubt that any such attempt will meet with much success, due to pseudo-BA and another nameless person being the only people looking in any way suspicious.
I'm not sure why Moar would talk about saving BA from a lynch. That doesn't fit with D1 events. Was Moar talking TO the person in danger of lynch or ABOUT the person in danger of lynch? Are any names mentioned?
Originally Posted by Jason Maher
She then mentions a third party will be going after a fourth party, but that they (it's ambiguous whether person 3 or person 4 is meant here) won't be scummy enough to attempt to shift the heat to them from pseudo-BA.
About the third party and fourth party... SI and Sathoris? Someone else? Entities like mafia/scum and not player names? This is probably more for FoE than Jason.