The Young Bard

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,103 Stone Shaman


About The Young Bard

  • Rank
    *insert witticism here*
  • Birthday 12/29/1999

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Sydney, Australia
  • Interests
    Reading, playing computer games, Reading, Hanging out on the Shard, Reading, Composing Music, Reading, Reading, Reading, listening to Music, and Reading. And a bit of reading on the side.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,837 profile views
  1. I understand if you don't want to add names. If there are any roles that the thread doesn't know about, could you at least name what the role is and tell us what you know about what they do? That could still be enormously helpful.
  2. Ha. I knew it was a risk, but as I'd already tried everything obvious, so I was prepared to try it. I... doubt that. Either the player would die - and that would mean the activated doll would pass randomly to the next player, meaning that someone random gets it, and nullifying the efforts of the person who activated it in the first place, or the player survives, and immediately gets lynched again the next round, or becomes invincible if the player is immune to the lynch. I've asked in my PM if me receiving the Doll Cycle 4 and not Cycle 3 was down to some sort of GM error. Otherwise, I'm more inclined to believe that there are multiple dolls.
  3. Hmmmm... Yes. It probably would have. In a way that would have ended with me dead, and my attempts to activate the doll unfinished. I had wondered if the activation of the doll would alter my win con - and if it did, being lynched so I wasn't able to play to that win con probably wouldn't have helped. This is quite possible. I just looked up Flash's votes in Cycles 2 and 3, Cycle 2 they didn't vote, and Cycle 3 they voted to lynch the doll, which also counted as a no vote. Wilson, in Cycle 1, voted for Roadwalker, who wasn't lynched in favour of Eternum, unless I missed her changing her vote. Except Rebecca didn't try to lynch anyone, and they're still alive. I'm thinking Budgie's theory that there's a good doll that does... nothing, or nothing malevolent, and a bad doll, that means you have to kill someone or it will kill you, is plausible. So, if you received the doll on Cycle 5, you have nothing to worry about - it might even do something benevolent like protect you from the lynch. If you got the doll this Cycle... Perhaps not so much. We've had half a dozen people claim a no-role rather than an actual role. Which, lets us know something about the distribution, I suppose, but not so much about whats going on in the game itself. From Cycle 3, DA's post: I took this to mean that they could only do their thing once, before they became a normal villager and weren't able to Teach multiple times. The rest is basically new information to me. Thanks! Huh. Interesting. And, sorry, that must suck... :/ If you do vote, is the vote just not counted, or is there a penalty applied against you? So, all of these roles need something to activate them. Including, apparently, the Teacher role. Which is strange, seeing as I'd hypothesised that the Teacher might be the Activator. Hmmm... The other thing to consider is whether its the same something or different somethings that activate all the roles. I just don't know. Also, I'll go digging around in previous Cycles, but didn't someone claim in PM's that they'd become a Magistrate role, that then got announced to the thread? I'd kind of assumed, perhaps prematurely, that that was down to the Teacher. Unless that's yet another hopping role that got passed after a certain amount of cycles or on death...
  4. Bugger. I suspect the rest of the thread will be less than satisfied with me saying this now, but I had the Doll in Cycles 4 and 5. (No, I don't know why I received the doll on an even Cycle, not an odd one. My personal suspicion is that there may be multiple dolls - one that passes on odd cycles, one that passes on even cycles.) My reaction to having the doll was basically a scattergun approach - try everything, and see what happens. The results? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Not a single thing did anything to activate the doll, or make it do anything at all. I asked around a dozen questions, basically all of which were answered with a PAFO in all but name by El (remind me to post their responses after the game is over. It's an amusing read in the number of ways El can tell the questioner nothing and be so gleeful about it... ). I also submitted actions to - kill a player, scan a player, revive a player, pass the Doll to someone else (Alv, since they asked so nicely ), and activate the doll. I was informed that my submission of all of these actions were successful, but was not informed as to the status of the action itself. However, it's fairly easy to see that experientially, all of these actions failed. In Cycle 5, I knew I had one cycle left to try and activate the doll if that was my goal, so I came up with a crackpot theory that the doll might require some sort of sacrifice from the lynch or something similar for it to activate, based on the vaguely creepypasta/horror vibe I was getting from some of the writeups, hence why I voted on Roadwalker, as an attempt to make them some sort of 'sacrifice' for the doll. And... nothing. The doll passed on this cycle, without, to the best of my knowledge, ever activating or doing anything but sit there. Bugger. The one thing I never got the opportunity to try was for a Teacher to try and target me with their action - that could be a balanced mechanic - you can give a vanilla villager a role, but you also have a risk of targeting the doll holder, in which case the doll is activated, and, presumably, bad things happen for the village. The only flaw in that plan is that my understanding of the teacher role is that they can only submit their action once. I'll be interested to know if anyone became a Teacher in Cycles 3 or 4, when the old Teacher used their ability, which might help to make this theory a bit more valid (I see this as feasible because there appear to be a lot of roles which shift from one player to another in these games - the scapegoat is one, the doll holder is another. Perhaps the Teacher is a third.) If that's the case, I would recommend the Teacher choose someone to provide with a role, but be confident that that player isn't a doll holder. Perhaps I'm biased in saying this, but I believe Rebecca and I might make good candidates, because I agree with - whoever it was, I've forgotten (sorry) - that previous doll holders are unlikely to receive the doll again. I'd also prefer if you'd claim to someone who can pass on the fact that there's a new Teacher to the thread so I could help to confirm my theory, which could be of help to the thread as a whole. Or any other role we don't know about, for that matter. In this, I agree completely with Hero. But... that still doesn't settle how Wilson and Flash died, which is a large part of these whole games. I wonder if the doll being an 'evil doll' as Lopen put it was a bit of a misnomer - the only thing that seemed to point to the doll being evil is it provided me with a vague feeling of unease. (I can't remember the exact term used, but it was something along those lines.) Certainly, nothing pointed in the PM to it being related to the killings (not that there were any killings while it was in my possession, but my point remains), so I assume that there's another role, possibly being passed around either after a set number of cycles or on the death of a player - that is very obviously evil and therefore nobody's willing to claim it. It may have ended up with an inactive or inactives these last couple cycles, hence why there was no kill. But, there are as many holes in this theory that I could pick apart, and create a new theory without those holes. Except, that theory would also have holes in it, and I'd end up in a really long train of thought that gets away from the point, I think. The point being - having had the doll, and trying to use it and utterly failing as an item of evil, I believe it can't possibly be that, and the thing causing the killings is basically separate from that. At least, not in its current state - who knows what it will be like when it activates. (I don't. Trust me. I tried to work it out. ) ...This post is more disorganised than I'd like it to be. But, I'm also exhausted - it's been quite a long and tiring week. If people have questions, tomorrow is the weekend (thankfully), so I should have plenty of time to answer them then. For now, I'm going to bed.
  5. Possibly. Or, possibly, it might be better for them to say safe and not risk being targeted, and claim when they have actual useful information to divulge along with just their role. And that wasn't the only reason I voted either. There have been three games (one of which was a rerun) I remember where information wasn't divulged in the writeup about the role/alignment of a player - MR10, LG26, and MR19 (MR10 rerun). In all three of those games, there has been some sort of scan role (in fact, I believe it was multiple in all of these cases) to reveal the role and alignment of these players. At a certain point, players need a base amount of information to go off in order to progress and maintain interest - something which just isn't possible without a scan role of some kind.
  6. We don't need to. I think we should, for the reasons I outlined in my post.
  7. According to my friend, the best piece every for timpani is Mars, by Gustav Holst. Having played the bassoon part (which doubles the timpani for a fair amount of the piece), I can definitely agree with the sentiment. It is an enormous piece of fun to play.
  8. Hero, you first asked people to start claiming to help information in Cycle 3. They've had more than enough time to do so - the fact that it hasn't happened suggests to me that people either don't intend to, or aren't paying attention in the game. Personally, if I were a scanner role, I probably wouldn't reveal myself unless I felt I had some piece of information I felt would be helpful to the the thread from my scans. And, supposing they were a player that scans dead players (something I think must happen in a game where roles or alignments aren't revealed - it's just too difficult to have anything to go by otherwise), we can't really help them if we're not killing anybody. With the high level of inactivity in this thread, even killing inactives at this stage could provide both incentive for players to be more active, potentially driving discussion and revealing information, as well as potentially allowing more information about roles and the game as a whole to be given to a dead-player scanner. All that in mind, I'm going to vote for Roadwalker. They haven't posted since Cycle 3, and of all the posters in the early cycles, I found the tone of their posts to be strange and suspicious. Plus, they've publicly claimed a vanilla villager, so there's no particular harm in lynching them even if they are a villager. I'm willing to swap to another lynch candidate if there's a particular reason why Roadwalker isn't a good lynch candidate (Hero, I'm particularly looking at you in case I try to lynch a Lover...) That said, here's everyone who hasn't posted in this cycle - I understand if you're busy, but at least let us know if that's the case - I believe Jondesu is the only one who specifically said they would be busy (except for Hael just now), unless I forgot about someone, in which case, I apologise: @Darkness Ascendant, @Straw, @Julio, @Roadwalker, @Megasif, @DroughtBringer, @Sony, @Mark IV, @BrightnessRadiant, @Dani, @RippleGylf, @Ecthelion III, @Rebecca, @Amanuensis (Aman, I know you said you were keeping quiet because you didn't feel you had any new information to provide, but I wonder at this point if the same isn't true of all of us, so perhaps it's still worthwhile picking your brain for any leftover crackpot conspiracy theories you might have and join me in my crazy speculations... ) Sorry that this is later than I intended to post - I was distracted by RL events. Hopefully people will still have plenty of time to respond to this post.
  9. I PM'ed them yesterday, and they said it moved on from them after Cycle 2, unfortunately. My read on them is that they're telling the truth about it. They seemed very forthcoming in the answers they gave. I'm fairly certain my old theory that I alluded to at the end of the last cycle is wrong now - I suspected that the doll might kill people as it leaves their possession, and Rebecca was spared by either a passive or active mechanic in a special case (possibly even the fact that they claimed in thread). Nothing like that appears to have happened this cycle (I can't tell whether the doll person was protected again last cycle, but from what I've seen, the number of roles in this game seems sparse, and I doubt we would have prevented a death twice through what could only be luck at this stage...) Actually, that reminds me - whoever had the doll Cycles 3-4 (assuming the doll sticks to it's two cycle pattern) - please speak up - I don't think there's any point in lynching you anymore, and you could have valuable information. Anyway, it's time to generate some discussion - I feel as if there isn't enough debate in this thread. I'm not sure how long we can wait to gather information, unfortunately. While there wasn't a kill this cycle, we don't know why there wasn't (if anyone has a roleblock role, please speak up - this is probably going to be of vital importance to the game), or how to make sure there won't be a death next cycle. And, so far as I can tell, people haven't been coming forward to claim since Cycle 1. It's getting late for me, and I have all of tomorrow to change my mind on this, but I'm thinking that if we don't discover some sort of extra clue, such as a claim, or some other nugget of information, by this afternoon (AEST time - so about 14-15 hours from now), I might vote on whoever I most suspect has the doll now. Otherwise, we could end up slowly being picked off by whatever mechanism that kills people, or even if that doesn't happen, we'd end up stagnating the game without any progression of information or movement in the game, which I think would make it less fun overall. I suspect Hero and Seonid and maybe a few others will disagree with me on this, but I intend to vote sometime this afternoon if it comes down to it (unless I'm persuaded otherwise by then that we can still have a fun and interesting game and we won't get picked off slowly by not having a lynch if we choose not to have a lynch this cycle.) Now, it's now 2AM for me, so I'm going to head to bed now. I'll have a brief window to read and respond in the morning before I head off to school, but not in any great level of detail. Night, everyone.
  10. Not necessarily. There wasn't a mystery death in Cycle 2. I have a theory why... I would post it now, but I have dinner to eat. I'll type it out properly next cycle.
  11. Excellent. That rollover time is much more convenient for me. Thanks.
  12. I was only counting non-lynch deaths for the clue - a.k.a. the ones we don't know what was causing them. I counted Rubix among that group because I was wondering if there was, for want of a better way of phrasing it - in-game reasons why they were killed, and whether their signup might have been done deliberately in order to demonstrate an early clue or source of information, or even just to add flavour (a la LG28, when Wyrm and Kas did something similar - Kas signed up and got killed off Cycle 0). There were more total deaths, but not part of the group that is relevant to the mystery deaths that we need to try and work out the cause of. Sorry I wasn't more clear on that. Role Madness - I don't have a role, unfortunately. Role madness was my tentative theory when I signed up, but that got disproved when I got my PM. I can't really prove that claim, unfortunately, except by pointing out that I was one of the people that first pointed out that I hadn't gotten my PM yet in thread, and I have a reasonable suspicion that those with roles got their PM's first.
  13. Heh. I'm also an inactive that's just come back. You can read through my notes below if you like, but they're basically just a confusing mess of me saying "I have no idea what's going on" over and over again. Anyway, here you all go - my annotated notes of the entire game so far. *groans* I wrote in OneNote, which has single line spacing, and posted it to the Shard, which has double line spacing. I'm debating whether I want to fix it now, because I have other stuff I want to get onto... Eh, may as well. But that will probably delay me posting this even more. Never mind. OK. I've just come back from inactivity - sorry it took so long. I've been stressing over a big exam coming up, and that's just finished, so I should be reasonably active from now on. I'm really sorry - I hadn't anticipated when I signed up how much this exam would affect me. Right. So, this is my thoughts and impressions as I catch up. (Note: I'd read up through up towards the end of Cycle 2 a little while ago, I just hadn't gotten the chance to collect my thoughts and post until now. I decided to do a reread from the beginning of the thread anyway, because I had time (for once) and the thread wasn't too long.) Cycle 1 Hero's claim - I trust Hero. It would be a big bluff to claim and break the trend so early if they were an Eliminator. Apparently they didn't get their alignment, but I don't know whether fRR would have sent a doc link to the Elim team - if they had, then that probably would have given Hero a clue as to his alignment. So, Hero's my strongest trust at this point of reading through the thread. Hopefully they don't die on me. Re: Is Rubix dead? My inclination leans yes. fRR had a *very* specific number of maximum players - I'm not sure if this is for balance or RP purposes, but either way, I think fRR intended to hold to that. Bit of distrust on Arinian for potential fearmongering and misdirection, though a villager could have honestly said this as well, so it's not a strong read. Slight suspicion of Drought through association with Roadwalker - Road immediately jumps in to defend Drought when a vote accrues on them. Their overall manner seems suspicious to me. For the first time ever, my trust read of Alv is overriding my natural paranoia of him. Although, the fact that Alv is more than capable of leading me to trust him when they are an Eliminator, and have a better reason to try to do so when they're an Eliminator is itself a source of paranoia, so I'd still probably put them just on the village side of neutral. Please don't kill me now, Alv… *quivers* Lopen - I'll trust them for now for trying to promote activity and useful discussion. (*looks around guiltily* - I am really sorry about my activity…) (I also trusted Hero because of their claim, and that hasn't changed because of their contribution crusade.) Megasif - (Page 8 for those trying to keep up with my references - sorry I haven't been better at mentioning this) There is no way that there are 7 or more Eliminators in this game - that would be broken. There would be at most 6, and I think it would be more likely to be 5. Still, the natural inclination I've found when I'm an Eliminator would be to play down the number of Eliminators rather than play up the number, so I'm putting a weak trust on Megasif. Also, this is a blackout game, so I wouldn't put multiple neutral/elim teams being in the game past the realms of possibility. Julio - Uhhh… Moderate suspicion. That post feels off, like they're arbitrarily picking someone to vote on rather than trying to actually find an Eliminator or encourage contribution. Aman - Mark summarised my first thoughts perfectly - "What?" - but… interesting. I think I can follow Aman's thinking here - they're not at risk of the lynch, and because it's a blackout game, there could be some special mechanic surrounding the lynch that he's trying to test. I suspect Aman had more specific thoughts that this, but for now I'll put a slight trust on Aman - I think Eliminator Aman wouldn't draw attention to themselves that way, while village Aman would be more willing to experiment. Then again, I'm notoriously bad at reading Aman, so… who knows. Cycle 2 Wilson dies - I don't know if the meta's changed in the period I was away, but this makes me suspect a newer player team, because the meta was very much against targeting experienced players, especially so early in the game before they got a chance to actually enjoy the game, due to their high death rates. So, slight suspicion on the new-ish players? (I started trying to list them, but I'd come back a few minutes later when I realised I missed someone, and I'm not 100% sure who is actually new, and who has been playing for a little while/since I went on hiatus, so I'm not going to try. I can look up Wilson's spreadsheet later if I want to try and lynch someone in particular.) Although, this could partially be to do with Wilson's ability to read the GM as well, so I'm slightly less certain of this than usual. Lopen - There's a lot here, so I'm splitting it into a couple parts, based on what the information can provide. I don't feel like Lopen would take such a massive risk with the infodump they just gave the thread as an Eliminator, so the analysis part of my brain is telling me village, but my gut is telling me something's off, and that Lopen's an Eliminator, so… I don't know. At the moment, I'll leave Lopen where they are. Wilson's roleclaim - So, they're a scapegoat, and someone else now has this role. I feel like this might be fRR trying to promote activity, although, I don't see how effective that would be in a blackout game. Doll - Ok… This is… interesting. I feel like I'm missing something super obvious about the doll, but I don't know what. So, the doll owners need to do… something… in order to trigger the doll while it's in their possession in order to win? If their win con returns to normal at the end of their possession of the doll, then how is that not broken? Wouldn't people not follow the win con of the doll until they lose it again? Unless they keep some sort of alignment factor from forming. I agree with Lopens conclusion that this is some sort of secondary Elim… thing (group seems like the wrong word), though I'm not absolutely certain. Also, how did Wilson know about the doll? Did someone claim to them? Is Lopen lying about their source? I just don't know. Ecth - trust on Ecthelion for pointing out what I said above. Probably in a much clearer way as well. Good to know the meta hasn't changed on that. Julio - where on Threnody did you get the impression that the Shades were killers? Is this speculation based on anything? Cycle 3 No elim kill - interesting. Was someone roleblocked? Or was someone inactive? Maybe the doll can kill after all? Hero - Ooooohhh… I hadn't seen that quote until now. I don't know whether that was a response to your questions in PM's, or whether it was in the thread and I somehow missed it, but that does pose a fresh view on things, and change how I might analyse the game from now on. Not having an Elim team is more likely in my mind now. And the doll is wrapped up in it somehow, I'm pretty sure, I just don't know how… Hmmm… So, so far, the kill that we don't know how they happened were Rubix's and Wilson's - there may have been an attempted kill Cycle 2 but it clearly failed. Rubix's was GM trolling, pretty sure… With Wilson's… Was it random? I don't think so - Wilson seemed to know the most about the game as a whole, as well as being possibly the most experience player in the game, so I wouldn't put it down to coincidence. Someone (or multiple someones) did something that led to Wilson's death, whether it was deliberate or accidental. But… I have no clue what that could be, other than 'something to do with the doll'. If I didn't know Rebecca had it, and is still alive, I'd say it's possible that the doll kills people as it leaves, seeing as Wilson knew about the doll. Except, maybe through claiming that they had the doll, Rebecca averted their death, and therefore that was why there was no death at the end of Cycle 2? Gah. The only way to find out would be for the person who has the doll to claim, and I doubt that's about to happen. Still, it's worth a shot. Whoever has the doll, I promise that on my part, I will not attempt to lynch you if you claim the fact that you have the doll. You may die at the end of this cycle otherwise. I'd also really like to find out what the holders of the doll know - if they die after owning the doll, it might explain me thinking about the balance of the game before, and mean that the owners of the doll have some information the rest of us don't. I know I'm about to PM Rebecca after I finish this, anyway… Hero pt. 2 - Split up because it's a new point, and my previous paragraph was getting kind of long. My current theory is that the scapegoat is to ensure that the game will end eventually - we've just seen that there doesn't always have to be a kill. This way, with a guaranteed death per cycle, fRR can be assured that the game won't last too long. I can't see how it's directly relevant to the game in its own right. I feel like I should understand something about the number 31? Why 31? We know there are normal villagers - if it were a role madness game, I could justify that fRR only created 31 roles. It could be a balance thing, but that seems like an oddly specific number - why not set the cap to thirty, a more round number? With Rubix, it's 32 players - that's more round, and it's 2 x 16 in a Cosmere game, is that significant? I could see fRR potentially getting Rubix to do a bit of playacting for the sake of the game in the same way Kas did for LG28… But that would still suggest that everyone had a link of some kind to a Shard, or *something*, which they don't. Gah. If, when the game ends, fRR reveals she chose the number 31 arbitrarily deliberately to stymie people like me, I'll be either very amused or very annoyed. Both, probably. Lopen - thanks for pulling the quote about flavour - I was going down a rabbit hole on the significance of dolls on Threnody, etc., but it seems like that's pointless, which is nice and timesaving. Cycle 4 Woo! Finally up to date! Flash took on the Scapegoat role from Aman, and immediately died, I'm guessing? I hadn't thought lynching the doll would work, to be honest. Too easy. EDIT: Nope. Aman's still a Scapegoat, apparently. That's not it. A secret vote is certainly possible, though the flavour doesn't sound like it to me. Hmmm… I'll say I distrust Aman slightly because of this, but not too much. I really don't know what to think. I doubt the Scapegoat is itself related to the mystery, though, just a feature that ensures the game will end in a somewhat timely fashion. Right. So, we're left with a mystery, by the looks of things, which we're expected to solve, according to the quote Hero's pulled out. Possible clues, possible red herrings - I feel like we are supposed to work this out, particularly since fRR's writeups contain mention of stuff like "How is this happening" in the final line - I feel like this is what we're supposed to be focusing on: The Doll - an item - probably evil, that is likely relevant to the killings. I wish I knew more about this - I'm about to PM Rebecca and spam them with questions. The non-lynch Deaths - So far, Rubix died Cycle 0 (for want of a better word - also, I'll see how fRR reacts to my question below), Wilson died Cycle 1, no-one died Cycle 2, and Flash died Cycle 3. What did these players have in common? Was it chosen by an Elim team? Were they former holders of the doll/dolls? (This is my current running theory, though I don't know why Rebecca didn't die.) 31 Players - This is really grating at me. I don't know why. I feel like there's something here that I should understand, but don't. Why 31, of all numbers? Should it be 32, with the addition of Rubix? FRR, was Rubix's signup in any way done with the attempt to provide a clue or add flavour to the game, or was it done against your wishes? Eh, while I'm here, may as well... Is there any significance for the purposes of the game that there had to be exactly 31 players at the start of the game?
  14. @_Stick_, @TheMightyLopen, and @Steeldancer - did any of you receive a GM PM? You don't mention *not* receiving your PM's in your posts. (Alv, DA and Hael seemed to post one line quips rather than actual post, which is why I'm not asking them so much - though if they have something to share on the matter, that would be good.) EDIT: So, apparently, Hero posted just a fraction before me, with reference to exactly what I was trying to work out... never mind. FRR - did you only send PM's to those with roles? Is there anyone who should have received a GM PM that didn't?
  15. I've played a blackout game before in LG24, but even then, I usually knew my own role even if I know no-one elses. If I don't even know my own role and alignment, this could be tricky... I'm assuming fRR just made a mistake here? Either way, I haven't got my PM yet.