Jump to content

Quick Fix Game 22: Ghosts in the Night


Wyrmhero

Recommended Posts

Storms, the boy hadn’t been lying. Battadin stiffened in the alley as the massive form of the Caster appeared in the doorway Bart had ducked into moments before.

"Lo!" The Caster’s voice thunders through the night. "Who goes there?"

Battadin considered remaining hidden, but he wasn’t certain the Caster’s eyes couldn’t pierce the darkness he was using as a cloak. Instead, he stepped  into the light, hands clasped in front of his Ardents robe. “Merely a seeker of truth and knowledge.” He looked around, knowing that there were other ghostbloods hidden on rooftops and in side-streets. They knew better than to form an angry mob, as doing so would attract to much attention from other watchers. The threat of a dozen ghostbloods staking out a house was real enough, of course.

Battadin lifted his voice again. “Now that light has been shed on this matter, I think we can swing our interest elsewhere.” For now. He added silently. Though the boy had been proven truthfull about his association with the Caster, that didn’t mean he should not be watched, of course

Edited by randuir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think partnerclaiming would be a good idea. I see no reason for it. Besides, if the elims decide that they want to kill a Day player for being too on-point, they would have to know their Night partner to kill them. Keeping Day/Night pairs secret seems like a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I have read through the thread, I doubt I'll be able to post again - today is St. Patrick's Day (Happy St. Patrick's Day, all!), and as an Irish dancer I have already had three performances today and have at least two more to go if not more (I can't currently remember). So, in a but busy. :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. I'm really quite time pressured writing this, having just spent the last 3.5 hours actually looking through the thread. Forgive any typos, and understand that my questions are rushed.

@Drake Marshall, early in D1 you talk about wanting everyone to post to generate information and discussion, and then say you may vote for the contribution crusade. Do you not see a vote for the crusade as minimising information we draw from the lynch? This seems inconsistent to me.

@TheMightyLopen, I got a good read on your first post (although I might be biased, given my antipathy to the crusade) on everything but your question about eliminators having a kill, which I've marked as potentially trying to make it seem like you're ignorant - thoughts?

@Drake Marshall, I approve of your desire to avoid the game getting off to a slow start.

@Arinian, you list off a set of suspicions your partner has, but then don't vote on any of them. What are your reasons for disagreeing with your partner?

@Bartimaeus, I'd still like to see a justification for your day one vote on Elenion.

@Arinian, acknowledging that there's a difference between voting on and lynching a player (my above question stands despite your view), I'm minded to say I disagree on your advocacy of no lynch on D1. The lynch is a great driver of information gathering, and without it we're left with little for N1 players to actually discuss.

@Elenion, commendable as it is, why the sudden change of heart on bandwagoning? You haven't historically waited for evidence before voting. Why now?

@Hemalurgic_Headshot, you say you don't think Bard is an eliminator, go on to suggest that he might well be a blatantly obvious one, and then that he's subtle enough to advocate voting to encourage bandwagoning. Which is it?

@Jondesu, it's a bit of a stretch to say that you can't imagine a reason for claiming Aman as a partner, isn't it? It kept Aman and Bart alive, for one. 

@Drake Marshall, you say Bart's claim is too obvious for an eliminator, but vote on him regardless. Why? Assuming he's telling the truth, as you seem to, what would your justification be for voting on a village Aman?

@Elenion, you warn against bandwagoning (again, a good change of heart, if unexpected), but then claim your vote was entirely retaliatory - again, on Aman, and don't remove it. Do you actually believe your earlier claim about votes needing to be evidence based, then?

Running out of time...

@_Stick_, your claim to tie the votes because two villagers will die anyway at night only really holds water if the lynch targets were all village - why so confident?

@Jondesu, why is Bart claiming an Aman partner an effective way to gain trust? If he were lying, Aman would have refuted it less than ten hours later. Holding your vote here seems like an excuse to bandwagon on Aman.

@Magestar, again, the suggestion that Bart is pulling a gambit false-claiming Aman as his partner seems contrived. Aman would have no reason not to refute it very shortly after. 

@Drake Marshall, would you explain your vote on Lopen further? It seems contrived.

@Jondesu, your retraction seems genuine to me.

@Drake Marshall, you say your vote is staying where it is because you have little evidence elsewhere? Is lynching Aman (who we don't know at this stage wouldn't be driving discussion) on these grounds really sensible?

@STINK, why not start a discussion yourself?

@Arraenae, similarly, if you're so happy to talk, why aren't you starting a discussion beyond waiting.

@Figberts, what's the value in repeating the same request for Aman to speak that's been made by both Rae and Ecthelion?

@randuir, glad you called out Drake. Do you think Headshot's statistics are useful, of just something to hide behind? Why do you think Rae would lie about her conversation with Aman when he could so easily contradict her?

@Manukos, why do you agree with Randuir on Drake?

@Amanuensis, beautiful RP, good to have Bart's claim confirmed.

This is rushed, and there is more I'd ask if I had the time. Apologies, all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Day 2: The True Self

“So...” Khas said, after a short pause. “Mestow died then.”

“Strictly speaking, it was 'Neiha' who died,” Wurum pointed out.

“But they're the same person,” Khas said. “And Mestow was the original identity. So Mestow died.”

“Ah, but if they're the same, why are you making the distinction that Mestow died? Surely it doesn't matter which of them died if they're the same person.”

“But you're the one who first made that distinction,” Khas replied, frowning a tad. “So if you said that, then why bother differentiating and correcting me? Either you believe that one of them is the true self, the real identity of Mestow-slash-Neiha, or you don't. You can't believe both simultaneously.”

“Maybe I just like correcting you,” Wurum shrugged, leaning back in his chair. “Or maybe I truly do feel like the two personalities are both the same and separate. I don't know, you're the philosopher, not me.”

“Philosophy and psychology are two different things, as I'm sure you're well aware.”

“Then I can't answer you,” Wurum spread his arms out in a shrug. “Regardless of how you look at it, there was a death. Are you satisfied now that someone has died? Is your bloodlust saited?”

“Well... When you put it like that...”

“Yes,” Wurum nodded. “You would do well to remember that I am telling you events as they happened. This story contains real people and real events. Mestow, or Neiha if you prefer, died for your entertainment. Perhaps a little more respect is due, no?”

Khas sighed. “Fine, you've made your point. I was overly callous and disappointed, and will not complain again.”

“Good,” Wurum said.

“As long as you promise the next day is more interesting,” Khas added.

“Well, you'll have to just wait and see, won't you?” Wurum asked. “In the meantime, I will continue the story as I will tell it...”


Day 2 has begun! It will end on Sunday at 9PM GMT. Day players may now post in the thread again.
Night players must stop posting and sending PMs to other Night players.

Mestow/Neiha Solam (Drake Marshall/Arraenae) was a
Loyal Ghostblood!


Notemos Town Hall Clock

 

gra_1489957200.png


Player List

 

Day

  1. Hemalurgic_Headshot (Harvey)
  2. Magestar (Enoemos)
  3. Elenion (Brandir Sebarial)
  4. DroughtBringer (Groot)
  5. Sart (Sart)
  6. TheMightyLopen (Revali)
  7. _Stick_ (Stick)
  8. Bartimaeus (Bart)
  9. Jondesu (Thorot)
  10. Arinian (Arvian)
  11. Drake Marshall (Mestow)

Night

  1. Straw (Dave Davenport)
  2. STINK (Odd Man)
  3. Manukos (Whiler)
  4. Ecthelion III (Amnar the Watcher)
  5. Arraenae (Neiha Solam)
  6. Elbereth (Senja)
  7. Amanuensis (The Soulcaster)
  8. OrlokTsubodai (Locke Tekiel)
  9. Figberts (Hak)
  10. phattemer (Seixa)
  11. Randuir (Battadin)

Dead (day/night)

  1. Mestow/Neiha Solam - Ghostblood
Edited by Alvron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last night, Rae brought up a point I'd missed, near the end. I didn't realize the Elims would only be able to target Night players, though once I looked over the rules again it's in there.  That's good to keep in mind as people debating revealing their partners: revealing might protect you from the lynch, potentially, but could allow the Elims to target a Day player when they otherwise would be stuck guessing. That might also be why she was targeted, but it's a somewhat minor point that I doubt would be been the full reason. If they were hoping more of us would reveal and make their work easier, though, I can see it.

@OrlokTsubodai, I do get your confusion about why I was suspicious about Bart's claim, but I've seen a very good tactic used by Elims with a role before. They claim, then prove that role, and then use that to gain trust. It's worked several times recently for scanning roles, and here, I could see it used in a "lite" form. Reveal who your partner is, they confirm it's true, and bam, you've given out true information, but it doesn't actually confirm your alignment. People are more likely to trust you because you told the truth about something, though.

Plus, this is the way I am when I'm part of the uninformed majority. I don't always grasp the implications of things right away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brandir Sebarial was walking before sunrise, telescope in hand, when he heard a scream.  He put the telescope to his eye and spun.  In the eyepiece he saw... fire!  Oh how it burned his opened eye, not that that eye could really be more damaged that it already was.  But anyway, a house was on fire. Brandir mentally checked his father's schedule. Arson attack on Roion's granaries wasn't due until after next Highstorm. Burning of important documents was scheduled for tomorrow. That meant...  wait, was that Neiha's house?!

Brandir took off down the street towards the blazing abode.  The first ray of sun appeared over the hills, striking Neiha's house just as the building fell, sending sparks streaking down the street. One caught Brandir in the shoulder, where it burned a small hole in his jacket.  That would need to be mended later, after Brandir talked to his uncle. He wouldn't be happy that Brandir had lost another chance at marriage.

(Brandir's unemotional reactions are intended)

 

@OrlokTsubodai As I said last game, there is good bandwagoning and bad bandwagoning. Lots of voting on Bart would have created a bad bandwagon, based on following others' opinions instead of your own and killing discussion as it grew. I put my vote on Bart to make a point that I thought his voting on me was suspicious and unjustified, but I didn't want it to snowball like it began to, because that's how you get bad bandwagons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sart looked over at Thorot (Jondesu). The argument that they shouldn't reveal their partners was simply false. The main argument was that it would protect day players from the eliminator kill. That was simply untrue. Since they would be communicating during the night thread, they would most likely be echoing their other halves. Thus, their night halves would be targeted,  Having identities hidden was much more beneficial to the eliminators. It essentially doubled their strength, as their was no reason for them to have logic consistent with their day selves. In addition, it made it easier to analyze the remarks of night players. For most players, it would be pointless to analyze the night players, because they couldn't do anything about them. They were ineligible for voting unless their day-partners were revealed.

Sart had decided to reveal his partner's identity, but he needed permission first. He was the muscle, not the brains of their partnership. After all, who could match his immaculate body? (Note: Sart may or may not be a balding, middle-aged man with a bear gut) He wondered who Jondesu had on his side. It would be nice for analysis at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sart, I find that logic…baffling to say the least.  It also defeats the purpose of having the split partners who can gather and distribute information in different ways.  Revealing your other identity does nothing to help the village, since it wouldn't help us identify the Elims, either.  I'm not voting on you yet because I think you're being genuine, but I also strongly feel you're wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I'm with Jon.  Revealing your partner would be unwise because then, if you become a trusted player, the elims would know who to kill at night to silence you.  With unknown partnerships, day players could strategize and gain trust without the elims being able to target then effectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would you become a trusted player during the day? The scanner only targets night players, and I'm skeptical of everyone. Sure, there is the potential for lynching an eliminator, but any night player who voiced suspicion would be targeted. Since pairs are communicating, the night players who voiced suspicion of the eliminator will most likely be partnered with the day players who voted for the eliminator. It sounds good on paper, but it doesn't work in practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Lynching an elim is the best way, especially because in this game busing is not likely due to the extremely low number of elims in the game. It's not impossible for a bus to happen, but it's incredibly risky.

I don't know about you, but I'm taking precautions to make sure that I'm not easily traced to my night player. I think all players should do the same, to protect themselves from being targeted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, @Elenion, I don't anticipate anyone learning my partners identity based on what we each say in the thread. We're going to be cautious about that, unless I'm somehow convinced otherwise (and they are as well).

I do want to avoid us getting sidetracked by this discussion, since it's good, but it's not generating a lot of helpful information.

@Drake Marshall, Elenion (already tagged), @Bartimaeus, and @TheMightyLopen, you all left votes on people while the rest of the votes were retracted or never placed. Do you stand by those accusations, and can you provide us with reasons for them (even if you're mostly reiterating)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My reasons are in my first post this cycle. I thought Bart's accusations against me were suspicious and unfounded, and so I threw a vote on him to illustrate that. I didn't want a bandwagon to form and kill discussion with following the crowd, so that's why I attempted to slow the wagon before it could get out of hand, however, that backfired and all other votes left Bart while I was just trying to dissuade the avalanche of incoming ones. I stand by my point that Bart did something very suspicious, especially because his post sounds just like Aman was an elim naming me as an obstacle to his plans. And since there have been no votes yet this cycle, Bart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Jondesu said:

Agreed, @Elenion, I don't anticipate anyone learning my partners identity based on what we each say in the thread. We're going to be cautious about that, unless I'm somehow convinced otherwise (and they are as well).

I do want to avoid us getting sidetracked by this discussion, since it's good, but it's not generating a lot of helpful information.

@Drake Marshall, Elenion (already tagged), @Bartimaeus, and @TheMightyLopen, you all left votes on people while the rest of the votes were retracted or never placed. Do you stand by those accusations, and can you provide us with reasons for them (even if you're mostly reiterating)?

I think it could become helpful to know everyone's partners, since we could get a better view of each pair, which means we could look at 2 players posts for an alignment instead of just one. I don't know how much good it would do now though, since there hasn't been a lot of time for both sides to post.

My reasoning for voting on HH was that he said it was highly unlikely Len or Bart were elims then went on to cast suspicion on Bart. His explanation actually did lessen my suspicion of him a little, I just wasn't around to respond to it. I went to sleep really soon after posting my last post, and while I did see his defense before I went to bed, I was too tired to respond and then I slept until rollover, so I haven't had a chance to respond until now. Anyways, what I found suspicious was that he(in my interpretation) said he thought both Len and Bart were villagers, but went back on that by saying something Bart did was suspicious. His explanation does make some sense though, in that he was saying Len and Bart were unlikely to be eliminators strictly from a percentage viewpoint. I tend to just treat everyone as if they're a possible elim rather than saying "this person is more likely village because there's more villagers than eliminators" because that mindset doesn't really get you anywhere.  And to respond to El about how HH not being logical doesn't necessarily make him evil, I understand that, because villagers are illogical all the time, but there's still the fact that his argument(logical or not) was defending both Len and Bart. I've seen eliminators defend both players in an argument like that before, so it was more about suspecting his intent behind his argument than his logic. Also, what makes you say he's more likely village(and please don't say "because statistics" :P)?

2 hours ago, Elenion said:

My reasons are in my first post this cycle. I thought Bart's accusations against me were suspicious and unfounded, and so I threw a vote on him to illustrate that. I didn't want a bandwagon to form and kill discussion with following the crowd, so that's why I attempted to slow the wagon before it could get out of hand, however, that backfired and all other votes left Bart while I was just trying to dissuade the avalanche of incoming ones. I stand by my point that Bart did something very suspicious, especially because his post sounds just like Aman was an elim naming me as an obstacle to his plans. And since there have been no votes yet this cycle, Bart.

I don't think Bart would have said what he did because Aman said you were a hindrance to their evil plans. That...would be a really strange thing to do. Eliminators don't usually voice their true intent in the thread. >.>

Also, Sart voted on Jondesu. Just saying. :P

To respond to Drake's vote on me last Cycle(RIP), I hadn't realized HH had a vote on him initially(until I did my vote tally), because I didn't know "Harvey" was him, but it did give me more reason to vote on him, because once 2 votes are on a player, it's easier to get opinions on them from others. If my vote was going to be the killing vote, I probably would have removed it though, since I had already stated that a no lynch might be best. And this is a side note, and I know you can't respond since you're dead, but if you've got a question for me, please don't vote on me when you ask it(for future reference, I just really dislike D1 votes on me since I've been accidentally/unluckily lynched because of poke votes like that >.<).

The only things I remember being about Drake/Rae were that Rand and Manukos were suspicious of Drake(Manukos by agreement with Rand's analysis), and that Manukos said "Rae is a Ghostblood" but he only said that because of her member title. Manukos' post was only a few hours before rollover, so I feel like he wouldn't have said that if he was an eliminator and knew they were killing her. Maybe they hadn't decided yet or something, but I'm leaning village on him for now. Not sure about Rand. His reasons for suspecting Drake were pretty good I think, so even though he was wrong, I'm not sure it means all that much. But you probably shouldn't listen to me when it comes to him. He fooled me pretty good last game... <_<

And to respond to Orlok's question of "was your question about the elims having a kill or not you feigning ignorance?" Obviously it wasn't worded quite that way, but it was implied. :P Anyways, I felt the question was relevant to the discussion and I had yet to ask it in my PM. A lot of times I'll ask rules questions in my PM rather than the thread, because I don't want to give the elims any idea's for strategy or it's specifically for my role, but since this question didn't have any sort of implication like that, I thought it would be best to ask it in the thread, so everyone would know straight from the GM.

Next order of business, my vote. My suspects as of right now are: HH(reasons stated), El(by association with HH and I get nervous when someone says they have a village read on me without giving any explanation), Len(just a small amount, I can't really decide about him, a couple things he's said have made me a little suspicious, but I've had troubles reading him in the past), Drought(mostly would like to see more from him, and since he'll be gone for the most part this Turn, I'm content to give him more time).

I'm voting on Sart. I'll admit it's mostly because I'm suspicious of El, but I will say that I disagree with him about revealing partners. It is possible to be careful about wording if you do post some stuff for your partner, and it does offer protection from the elim kill. He's also voting on Jon, who I'm leaning village on. I considered voting for HH again, but I know I'm prone to tunneling(Arinian as my latest victim, sorry about that btw) so I'd like to hear more from him and try to keep more of an open mind.

My village reads right now are: Manukos(thing about Rae), Jondesu(him saying he hadn't realized elims could only target Night players seems like a genuine thing - it seems too obvious a thing to miss to think up to gain trust, if you get what I mean. I know he voted on Bart after he claimed Aman was his partner, but if Bart/Aman...are villagers(is a villager? :P), that seems like a really gutsy thing to do for an elim), kind of Bart/Aman, just based on gut(Aman's post didn't really make me lean either way, but it was good RP!) and because Len is going after Bart like he is.

Everyone else is kind of "meh." Either not enough content, or I just can't tell. >.>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as revealing my partner goes, I would typically think it's a bad idea, if only because I don't want to die. :P  As long as no one knows who my night partner is, I can't be intentionally targeted.  If you want to reveal, I guess that's fine, but from a self preservation perspective it doesn't make a lot of sense, unless you're trying to convince someone to protect you.

I might do another huge analysis today, if I have time, but I think I'll at least wait until the first page is filled up.  Not a lot of noteworthy things seem to have happened. 

I'm not sure it was wise for Sart to reveal his partner...  But if his partner really is El, then it's not unlikely she's going to get targeted anyway.  Same with people like Aman and Orlok.

I'm not going to vote just yet, but I'm somewhat suspicious of Len.  I'm not sure about voting on Bart or Sart?  I'll have to see.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, there hasn't been a lot of discussion, or anything, this Day. Because of the failed lynch D1, we simply have a repeat today. So we can lynch someone who may or may not be Village or Elim, or do nothing and have a guaranteed Village death during the Night. I'm leaning towards the hopeful lynch. 

So there are three votes currently: one on Bart, one on Jondesu, and one on Sart. There is a 1/4 chance that one of them is an Elim, statistically speaking. I'm speaking quite a lot in statistics lately, haven't I? I don't want this lynch to be a waste like the last one, so I'm going to go out on a limb blindly and vote Sart. He claimed El as partner, but as we haven't heard from everyone in the Day, we can't be sure whether he is telling the truth until Night (unless we kill him). Sart voted on Jondesu because his logic was "false." Sart claims that Elims could puzzle out who each partnership was by comparing strategies, perhaps because that was what he was doing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hemalurgic_Headshot said:

Sart voted on Jondesu because his logic was "false." Sart claims that Elims could puzzle out who each partnership was by comparing strategies, perhaps because that was what he was doing?

It should be noted as well that I'm planning on trying to find those partnerships by analyzing people's posts, though I don't assume that they'll actually have similar viewpoints expressed in the thread (not only are they independent people who think and write differently, but many partners may intentionally obscure their relationships), so I don't expect it to be easy.  It benefits us more not to have those all revealed, in my opinion, though it's not as much of a risk for Day players with prominent and dangerous Night partners, like Aman or El, as was mentioned.

You called your vote on Sart "going out on a limb blindly", though, and then provided some logic behind it?  Why did you call it that, if you had actual logic behind it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because... primarily I think my logic/analysis is weak, so I set up a fallback if people questioned it. Then I thought upon suspicious evidence of Sart that I wanted to add, so I did. It was a step-by-step thought and writing process, in which I did not go back and change the previous steps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I clearly haven't demonstrated my position clearly enough. Let's go over the Pros and Cons of not revealing your partner.

Pros:

  • You can't be targeted by the eliminators. I understand that is a nice benefit. However, it is selfish. The eliminators are going to kill someone at night. If there are two eliminators, there is a one in eight chance you will be killed, barring any protection. The eliminators will target active night players, and, if the teams are doing their jobs, those will be people with active day players. Thus, it isn't true protection. It just makes you feel safer, without actually contributing anything.

Cons:

  • It delays the lynch. Look at what happened on Day 1. Bart was going to be lynched, then claimed Aman as a day partner. If someone's night partner is trusted, the town is going to wait until that claim is verified. This leads to less lynches, which is a problem in a game with this few teams.
  • It's selfish. If we have our night partner tell different things than our day partners, we don't stick to the same script, which causes confusion. It just muddies the water for analysis. We want more information as the village, not less.
  • It detracts from analysis. Simply put, we cannot analyze night player if we do not know their partners. Let's say I found a night player suspicious. What could I possibly do to them? I don't know their day partner, so I can't vote for them. I could target them with an action, but if I don't have one, or if I'm a healer, that wouldn't do any good. That really sucks.
  • It makes scanning useless. Even if we scan someone as evil, there's nothing we can do about it. That's insane. We know someone is bad, but can't vote for them at all. We would have to hope that we have a vigilante on our side. That's not a gamble I'm willing to make with this low of numbers. That is just bad.

Some people are voting for me because of my vote on Jondesu. I didn't like his posts yesterday. I didn't agree with his logic for not revealing partners, and his vote on Bart seemed a bit optimistic. I noticed that randuir and Orlok both expressed suspicion of you. Since I agreed with their analysis, I put a vote on you. I'm not sure that you are an eliminator, but I'm keeping my vote where it is, at least until you give a better explanation for your vote on Bart, and your retraction of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...