Long Game (3)2: Pulling on Strings

[TheMightyLopen]

I was kind of making a post when you mentioned me Aman. But then I got distracted, so I just started over.

Anyways, I don't really have much to say. I imagine the Inquisitor won't say anything too controversial so they don't draw too much attention to themselves, but I think their thread activity depends on the specific player.

On whether or not we should have a lynch, I'm currently undecided. I do feel like games just move a lot slower without a D1 lynch, but we do have a lot of players and it is extremely likely we'll hit a villager if we do have a lynch. If we don't have one though, it kind of feels like we're just prolonging the inevitable. The Inquisitor will probably just kill someone during the Night, and then we'll be at Day 2 and still just the Inquisitor. If we lynch now, it's possible the Inquisitor will convert Night 1, which would at least give us a slightly better chance of getting a Spiked Day 2. I'm not sure that's a totally accurate presentation of our situation, but it's late and I wanted to try and post something. So that's what I'm thinking right now.

So far the only person I've really considered as a possibility for being the Inquisitor is Drake, for his post that basically said "nothing to say, sorry for not saying much, I'll say more tomorrow." Which I read as him posting so as not to be called out for lurking, but not having any idea what to post, and then realizing he could get called out for not saying anything worthwhile, so he added that part about saying more tomorrow to kind of protect himself from those accusations. I guess I should put my vote there then, since I feel like this post makes me look like I'm in favor of a Day 1 lynch. >.> Drake, could you say what you think the Inquisitor might do or whether or not you think a Day 1 lynch is a good idea? And also if you have any suspicions for the Inquisitor.

Praise the Ja.

[Hemalurgic Headshot]

What? Did you hear that?

What?

The Terrisman. He said Tyrian Falls.

Why does that sound familiar?

That's where Joe is! Or was, from what it sounds like. And that's where our counterpart is.

Ah. Should we go have a chat with this Terrisman?

We could, if Quinn would get up and move over there...

Quinn was content where he was. Despite all of the chatter going on, he had a song stuck in his head that he was most fond of.

And why does it have to be that song! Argh!

It is obvious we need a way to link our minds to his. Should I be looking for a spike?

---

I will do discussion-y stuff later, I'm a bit busy at the moment.

[DeTess]

Su’gal… No. Magister Agemtsar woke up, a nasty headache pounding through his skull. His last memories where of fleeing Luthadel after the Lord Ruler’s death.  Now he woke up on a thin mattress, other people slowly returning to consciousness around him. The Magister checked over his clothing. He was still wearing the sturdy travel clothes he’d secured before the retreat from the centre of the empire. He still had his purse, the metal vials and… Agemtsar frowned as he pulled a letter out and read through it.

It was addressed to him, and, unless it had been written in a deliberately obtuse way, was a continuation of  a previous series of letters. ‘Ugh, I hate taking an identity without preparation time. You never know what kind of trouble they managed to land themselves in before their time came.’

The Magister looked around the room again. The people present seemed to be from all walks of life. Some had returned to consciousness, while others were still out. One unconscious form attracted his attention, however. It was a young man, and something about his face looked familiar to the magister.

‘That.. is going to be an issue.” The magister turned around an quickly left the room. ‘getting through this test with limited knowledge of who I’m supposed to be will be hard enough. Now, apparently, I’ve got a dead man’s family to worry about as well. Let’s hope that boy hasn’t heard about his grandfather’s demise yet. Or failing that, let's hope he's gullible enough to swallow the story about how I miraculously survived.'

---------------------------------------------------

I had initially been planning to try and do some heavy-duty all-encompasing analysis from the get-go this game. Then I went camping for the weekend, and when I returned, another 10 people had joined up, and apparently we are up to page 2 already. I'll still try and do some analysis, just don't expect me to cover a majority of the player-list in the early stages of the game.

So, time to get started. Here's a vote-tally:

Omegaster(1): Arraenae

Arraenae(0): Amanuensis

Sart(1): Sart

Little wilson(2): Amanuensis, mark IV

Drake(1): TheMightyLopen

Elenion(1): Jondesu

So, let's start withe the easy one, @OmeGaster. He hasn't posted yet. Since the game isn't even 24 hours old, this is not really surprising. Omegaster, If you are feeling intimidated by the game in any way, or would like to as some advice, you can PM me, or any of the others that have posted in this game already for advice. Just remember to include the GM's (those who send you the message containing your alignment). Don't tell us important info like your role, of course. though I'm pretty sure most of us are happy to help a new player, no matter our alignment, you can't expect us to not make use of suhc info if you share it.

So, that having been said since the game is less than 24 hours old, I see little reason to vote on him yet.

Next, @Arraenae. As I mentioned before, I find a poke-vote while the game is still very young extremely odd. It's completely possible Omegaster was still asleep at the time, and hadn't even realized the game had started yet. I seem to remember you berating Drake for a similar action in LG30, so I think it is odd you are the one to do so now. 

next up, Sart. He voted on himself in Roleplay. Enough said.

Next, @Drake Marshall (I know I skipped Wilson, I'll get to that last). He mostly talked about how he's going to be less active now and more active later. Given that that has been mentioned as a possible inquisitor behavioral pattern, I highly doubt the actual inquisitor would state the intention to do so as clearly as Drake has. Therefore I don't particularly suspect Drake at this point.

So, @Elenion. He has been asking some questions about the exact powers the inquisitor has. Though some of this is explained in the rules for LG2, the rules themselves don't actually explain what other powers apart form conversion he has(reading through the game might reveal that, but that's quite a bit of reading), so I don't find the questions particularly odd. I doubt the actual inquisitor would be asking these questions in-thread, as the potential small gain in credibility is offset by people gaining knowledge of his powers that they might not otherwise get this early.

So, I don't have any particular reason to vote on Elenion either.

So, last but not least, there's @little wilson. Wilson's post has been savagely torn apart... er, I mean, thoroughly analyzed by Amanuensis and Mark, and I find that I don't have too much  to add to that. Though, as Wilson said, an unfortunate lynch could empower the elims, the information that discussion around the lynch and the lynch itself generates is very valuable. Without this information we can't win. If we refuse to lynch someone every turn, then this game is going to take a while, but unless the coin-shots manage to hit the inquisitor, it'll result in a loss for the village. The reason I mention the exaggerated situation of not lynching someone during each cycle is that the reasoning presented could continue to apply, because no discussion and no lynch to cap off that discussion results in a continued lack of information.

However, although I'm definitely suspicious of Wilson right now, I'm somewhat hesitant to vote on her. That would make a third vote, and that could lead to that vote snowballing out of control, which doesn't help discussion when it happens in the first half of the cycle. I'd like to hear what Wilson's response to the allegations is first, and then I'll decide whether to vote on her, though as it stands, she's the best candidate for my vote.

Also, @Magestar (and others who have been in a similar position), could you share some perspective on being a solo-elim, and the tactics you'd expect the current elim to employ?

Edited March 27, 2017 by randuir
Fixed some wording and sub-optimal logic

[Orlok Tsubodai]

@Arraenae, there is indeed but a single Inquisitor. 

@Mark IV, you are correct.

If anyone has further doubts, whilst I'm happy to clarify where necessary, the rules are those of LG2.

 

To be clear, I'd like to request that Stink and I please be included in all game PMs between players.

[Magestar]

37 minutes ago, randuir said:

Also, @Magestar (and others who have been in a similar position), could you share some perspective on being a solo-elim, and the tactics you'd expect the current elim to employ?

Well, as far as Elim strats go, I might not be the best person to ask.  I only get really fired up with strategies when I'm under suspicion, or feel some broad and obtuse complicated plan is needed to continue.   Typically a conversion role will start converting people fairly quickly, and strategies on who is the best person to convert vary as broadly as flowers of the field.  Typically, someone unnoticeable, or in the mid range makes sense, but doing what the village expects is rarely a good idea.  

I basically killed randomly unless I thought someone was onto me, which was fairly easy since I had multiple kills.

This game did sort of sneak up on me, so I'm going to take some time to read over things real quick.

Another unfortunate note;   A number of all day events have recently sprung upon me, so I'm unable to accurately predict my activity.  I apologize, and hope I'll still be able to be somewhat active.

[DeTess]

1 hour ago, randuir said:

So, last but not least, there's Wilson. Wilson's post has been savagely torn apart... er, I mean, thoroughly analyzed by Amanuensis and Mark, and I find that I don't have too much  to add to that. Though, as Wilson said, an unfortunate lynch could empower the elims, the information that discussion around the lynch and the lynch itself generates is very valuable. Without this information we can't win. If we refuse to lynch someone every turn, then this game is going to take a while, but unless the coin-shots manage to hit the inquisitor, it'll result in a loss for the village. The reason I mention the exaggerated situation of not lynching someone during each cycle is that the reasoning presented could continue to apply, because no discussion and no lynch to cap off that discussion results in a continued lack of information.

So, I've horribly mangled my logic here. I could edit it out and update it, but at this point someone's bound to have spotted the original and would notice the switch, so It's probably better to own up and correct myself publicly, than try and sneak this under the radar.

So, what I meant to say is that, yes, an unfortunate lynch could empower the elims. However, if the village wants to have any chance at winning this game, we need information, and discussion and lynches generate that information. I'm not at all convinced the risk of an unfortunate lynch now would be worth the loss of information that not-lynching would entail. 

Edited March 27, 2017 by randuir

[Mark IV]

Praise the Ja!    sorry, I could not resist.    : P

Edited March 27, 2017 by Mark IV

[Amanuensis]

3 hours ago, Mark IV said:

In my Opinion, (And I agree with wilson somewhat here) the Inquisitor would be more quiet earlier on. I'm assuming the inquisitor would most likely be someone who the GM knew would not go inactive, because having the only eliminator in the game also be inactive would not be the best. And, I also agree with the fact that they would likely become more vocal later on, as they accumulate more and more converts (the max would be 5 elims, isn't it?).

Emphasis mine.

Not necessarily. The number of conversions that the Inquisitor has is very reliant on village role distribution. I think 5 conversions in a safe number to guess, but I wouldn't say it's the max. Plus, one thing to consider is that every time a conversion happens, it's revealed in the write up, along with what metal power was gained via the Spike. This fact alone provides the village with extremely useful information while potentially tying the eliminator's hands, which makes it reasonable for the Inquisitor to have more conversions available than usual.

3 hours ago, Mark IV said:

For some reason, this sets off the alarm bells in my head. Because, in my opinion, if you stuck the line "And now that I've mentioned it, I have more freedom to do so", it wouldn't seem out of place as thoughts in someone's head. And, I've heard wilson can be a very good manipulaor when she's elim. Which would be particularly useful if she was the only elim right now. (Note that wilson has not actually said this. I'm just trying to make a point, albeit a weak one). 

Secondly, if the elim thinks they'll be particularly vulnerable if they speak up, then they will not speak up as much in any case. Because, from their point of view, it is either speak up and be a target, or speak less and potentially be vulnerable to someone's analysis later in the game, when they have more converts on their side, and their death will not affect the elims that much. I know this again contradicts with para 2 of this post, but again, I still think para 2 as slightly unlikely.

However, I do agree with wilson that we should watch out for the latently vocal players.

First you say you're almost certain that the inquisitor has uber-thug. So, not only do they survive the first and second lynches, they show up as a thug at first. Then, you go on to say in the third point that it wouldn't be fun if we did indeed lynch the inquisitor. Which is not possible because of the previously mentioned facts.

If you're referring to us getting suspicious that they survived, and that that would kill the fun, you yourself say that they would appear as a thug, which is highly unsuspicious.

So, in essence, you're saying that it is nearly impossible to spot the inquisitor and kill them on the first lynch, but it wouldn't be fun if we lynched them on the first lynch (which is impossible), so we shouldn't vote. 

Lastly, you yourself state that the inquisitor themself would remain passive at the start of the game, and would only speak later on. Why then are you worried about hiitting them in the first place? 

Care to explain this, Wilson?

Eh. I wouldn't read into that sentence too much, Mark. I think along those same lines as a villager all the time. Talking about things like this openly does have the potential to impact the eliminator's playstyle, and given we're talking about trying to predict how the Inquisitor will act, it's a natural conclusion to reach. I'm pretty sure that in LG31, I made a comment about Stick tending to avoid participation in the main lynch when she is an eliminator, followed by me making a similar comment. Here, I even found the post where I did it, so read it if you want proof. It's in the third paragraph after where I @mention Szeth Son-Son Mallano. You acknowledge that the point is weak already, but I just wanted to point out that what she did isn't particularly alignment indicative.

Regarding Wilson's contradiction, I had a similar thought, at first. But like with the day one lynch in general, and like the business with Len and the Inquisitor's "special powers," I thought about the situation a little more thoroughly, and think I understand what she meant as a result. Let's assume that we managed to lynch the Inquisitor today, and they had an extra life. Would they die? No. But what would happen next? I would guess that players might advocate that a Coinshot attack the player to finish the job (Lopen and myself included), as a lynch is essentially pointless if it's not followed through. Because no misting was lynched, the Inquisitor would be unable to convert anyone that night, so regardless of if they have two lives and die that night, or three and survive until the next day, they're going to be confirmed as the Inquisitor, and they're going to die before they get the chance to convert anyone. So yeah, nothing about the scenario is particularly fun, and if I had to guess, this is what Wilson was thinking but just didn't say everything she could have, likely because she was tired and wanted to go to bed.

Considering this, however, there is an inherent clash in logic with her not wanting to give the Inquisitor an opportunity to convert tonight rather than kill. Until a Misting dies and the Inquisitor is able to convert someone to his team, he/she is going to be alone, and at risk of this same scenario occurring, just at a later date. From my point of view, there seems to be dissonance here, which could be telling, but might just be a matter of her not considering it.

Personally I would rather accelerate the time table of the conversions than let it stagnate, as otherwise the village isn't really making any progress. Who the Inquisitor chooses to convert and allowing the two players to interact in thread a lot more informative than us just waiting to see who the Inquisitor kills. Especially this early in the game, there is so little to learn from who the eliminator's decide to target, first. I'm not sure on the exact statistics, but in more cases than not, they either go for a player that is deemed dangerous, or they remove someone low-active or inactive enough to keep us from learning anything significant.

1 hour ago, randuir said:

So, last but not least, there's @little wilson. Wilson's post has been savagely torn apart... er, I mean, thoroughly analyzed by Amanuensis and Mark, and I find that I don't have too much  to add to that. Though, as Wilson said, an unfortunate lynch could empower the elims, the information that discussion around the lynch and the lynch itself generates is very valuable. Without this information we can't win. If we refuse to lynch someone every turn, then this game is going to take a while, but unless the coin-shots manage to hit the inquisitor, it'll result in a loss for the village. The reason I mention the exaggerated situation of not lynching someone during each cycle is that the reasoning presented could continue to apply, because no discussion and no lynch to cap off that discussion results in a continued lack of information.

However, although I'm definitely suspicious of Wilson right now, I'm somewhat hesitant to vote on her. That would make a third vote, and that could lead to that vote snowballing out of control, which doesn't help discussion when it happens in the first half of the cycle. I'd like to hear what Wilson's response to the allegations is first, and then I'll decide whether to vote on her, though as it stands, she's the best candidate for my vote.

24 minutes ago, randuir said:

So, I've horribly mangled my logic here. I could edit it out and update it, but at this point someone's bound to have spotted the original and would notice the switch, so It's probably better to own up and correct myself publicly, than try and sneak this under the radar.

So, what I meant to say is that, yes, an unfortunate lynch could empower the elims. However, if the village wants to have any chance at winning this game, we need information, and discussion and lynches generate that information. I'm not at all convinced the risk of an unfortunate lynch now would be worth the loss of information that not-lynching would entail. 

Since you're the second player to take my vote on Wilson further (even if you don't vote on her), I feel it necessary to say that I don't believe her stance on the lynch is necessarily suspicious. While I have considered the possibility of her being an Inquisitor who wanted to start the game by subverting expectations (suggesting a plan that an Inquisitor would naturally want to avoid), it's also possible she's an honest villager who believes that a lynch today is a bad idea, or that she's a villager who's only pretending to feel this way in order to spark discussion. Even if you or I disagree with her, I don't feel it's as indicative of her alignment as you seem to think it is.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Amanuensis

[DeTess]

24 minutes ago, Amanuensis said:

Since you're the second player to take my vote on Wilson further (even if you don't vote on her), I feel it necessary to say that I don't believe her stance on the lynch is necessarily suspicious. While I have considered the possibility of her being an Inquisitor who wanted to start the game by subverting expectations (suggesting a plan that an Inquisitor would naturally want to avoid), it's also possible she's an honest villager who believes that a lynch today is a bad idea, or that she's a villager who's only pretending to feel this way in order to spark discussion. Even if you or I disagree with her, I don't feel it's as indicative of her alignment as you seem to think it is.

If I had thought Wilson's post was the be-all and end-all of alignment indicative posts, I would have voted on her because I wouldn't have cared that it could snowball into a bandwagon. I see the point you're trying to make, but the one problem with the cycle 1 lynch is that, while it is an important info generator for later cycles, the information you are working with is rather limited, and there (in most cases) won't be definite proof of someone being an elim. In that case, you have to go with the little things that sound off. As I said before, I'd like to hear from Wilson how badly we've misinterpreted and overanalyzed the post before I decide whether to vote on her.

[Mark IV]

1 hour ago, Amanuensis said:

Not necessarily. The number of conversions that the Inquisitor has is very reliant on village role distribution. I think 5 conversions in a safe number to guess, but I wouldn't say it's the max. Plus, one thing to consider is that every time a conversion happens, it's revealed in the write up, along with what metal power was gained via the Spike. This fact alone provides the village with extremely useful information while potentially tying the eliminator's hands. In the rules (explicitly said in the LG2 rules, and implied in the LG32 rules), it says that the inquisitor dies if they give away all spikes. After going through the LG2 Master doc, I found there were only 5 powers (I may be mistaken on that. but, I think it was around 5. Someone please check when you can. I'm too lazy to do that. :P). So, essentially, each time the inquisitor gives away a spike, they lose a power. If they land up with no spikes, they die. Which means the maximum number of eliminators at any point in time should be 5, shouldn't it?

So, why would you say it isn't the max?

Eh. I wouldn't read into that sentence too much, Mark. I think along those same lines as a villager all the time. Talking about things like this openly does have the potential to impact the eliminator's playstyle, and given we're talking about trying to predict how the Inquisitor will act, it's a natural conclusion to reach. I'm pretty sure that in LG31, I made a comment about Stick tending to avoid participation in the main lynch when she is an eliminator, followed by me making a similar comment. Here, I even found the post where I did it, so read it if you want proof. It's in the third paragraph after where I @mention Szeth Son-Son Mallano. You acknowledge that the point is weak already, but I just wanted to point out that what she did isn't particularly alignment indicative.Yeah, I meant to also add that IMO, that felt like tunneling to me as an afterthought. But, when my post got deleted, the cached copy from the server didn't have that edit in it. So, I think I mostly agree with what you say here. 

Regarding Wilson's contradiction, I had a similar thought, at first. But like with the day one lynch in general, and like the business with Len and the Inquisitor's "special powers," I thought about the situation a little more thoroughly, and think I understand what she meant as a result. Let's assume that we managed to lynch the Inquisitor today, and they had an extra life. Would they die? No. But what would happen next? Some players might advocate that a Coinshot attack the player to finish the job, as a lynch is essentially pointless if it's not followed through. Because no misting was lynched, the Inquisitor would be unable to convert anyone, so regardless of if they have two lives and die that night, or three and survive until the next day, they're going to be confirmed as the Inquisitor. So yeah, nothing about the scenario is particularly fun, and if I had to guess, this is what Wilson was thinking when she said what she did, but just didn't say everything she could have, likely because she was tired and wanted to go to bed. The problem with this is that, suppose we instead manage to lynch a thug (but, we don't know that. according to us they could also be the inquisitor), tell me, how many people would be willing to kill the now once-lynched thug? In hindsight, I realise that yes, some people might be okay with that, but I know some will instead advocate scanning the thug. Sure, in this case, we don't lose a villager 

But, now, what if that thug was instead actually the inquisitor? We would have wasted a cycle before killing them, during which they could have converted another villager (or, in the worst case, two villagers).

(ofcourse, all this depends on the coinshots being convinced to kill the thug/inquisitor posing as a thug. )

Considering this, however, there is an inherent clash in logic with her not wanting to give the Inquisitor an opportunity to convert tonight rather than kill. Until a Misting dies and the Inquisitor is able to convert someone to his team, he/she is going to be alone, and at risk of this same scenario occurring, just at a later date. I would personally rather accelerate the time table of the conversions than let it stagnate, as otherwise the village is basically playing find the needle in the haystack. Who the Inquisitor chooses to convert and allowing the two players to interact in thread a lot more informative than us just waiting to see who the Inquisitor kills. Especially this early in the game, there is so little to learn from who the eliminator's decide to target, first. I'm not sure on the exact statistics, but in more cases than not, they either go for a player that is deemed dangerous, or they remove someone low-active or inactive enough to keep us from learning anything significant.

Another thing that got deleted from my post and never made it back. I agree that if we don't do the lynch, we're going to be in a similar situation next cycle, except that It'll be Day 2 in the title except Day 1 (although one could argue that we'll have info from scanners, but what use would that be? They wouldn't be keen on sharing it for fear that the cleared person would be a priority target the next night, as has been mentioned by someone else (aman?) already) 

I just pressed enter here, and it split that paragraph from the rest of his post. A Miracle! Praise the Ja! 

(seriously though, can someone tell me what I did there? That seems to be a very useful feature.)

1 hour ago, Amanuensis said:

Since you're the second player to take my vote on Wilson further (even if you don't vote on her), I feel it necessary to say that I don't believe her stance on the lynch is necessarily suspicious. While I have considered the possibility of her being an Inquisitor who wanted to start the game by subverting expectations (suggesting a plan that an Inquisitor would naturally want to avoid), it's also possible she's an honest villager who believes that a lynch today is a bad idea, or that she's a villager who's only pretending to feel this way in order to spark discussion. Even if you or I disagree with her, I don't feel it's as indicative of her alignment as you seem to think it is.

I've put my responses inside the text box in bold formatting.

Also, I will wait until wilson responds to remove.

 

What do you guys think of the idea? The thug claiming one? 

I'll paste it here for ease:

 

5 hours ago, Mark IV said:

That brings me to the last part of my post- what does everyone think of thugs roleclaiming? Now, hear me out first-

1) If thugs do roleclaim, the inquisitor has to spend two kils on them. It would be far better for them to attack others first.

2) The inquisitor has to decide whether to claim with the thugs. If they do, then sure, they have an alibi for surviving the lynch. However, scanners can then check the roles of the claimed thugs to see who's lying. 

3) If the inquisitor doesn't claim, then they have no alibi for surviving the lynch, thus, they'd be caught red-handed.

 

Praise the Ja! 

[Amanuensis]

54 minutes ago, randuir said:

 

 

 

 

If I had thought Wilson's post was the be-all and end-all of alignment indicative posts, I would have voted on her because I wouldn't have cared that it could snowball into a bandwagon. I see the point you're trying to make, but the one problem with the cycle 1 lynch is that, while it is an important info generator for later cycles, the information you are working with is rather limited, and there (in most cases) won't be definite proof of someone being an elim. In that case, you have to go with the little things that sound off. As I said before, I'd like to hear from Wilson how badly we've misinterpreted and overanalyzed the post before I decide whether to vote on her.

Fair. I just wanted to comment more on the situation because the last thing I want is to unintentionally start a bandwagon on Wilson when I don't have much reason to believe she's the Inquisitor.

27 minutes ago, Mark IV said:

 

 

 

 

In the rules (explicitly said in the LG2 rules, and implied in the LG32 rules), it says that the inquisitor dies if they give away all spikes. After going through the LG2 Master doc, I found there were only 5 powers (I may be mistaken on that. but, I think it was around 5. Someone please check when you can. I'm too lazy to do that. :P). So, essentially, each time the inquisitor gives away a spike, they lose a power. If they land up with no spikes, they die. Which means the maximum number of eliminators at any point in time should be 5, shouldn't it?

So, why would you say it isn't the max?

While this is a rerun of LG2, that doesn't mean the Inquisitor has to have the same number of conversions, just like it doesn't mean the village needs to have the exact same roles.

27 minutes ago, Mark IV said:

 

 

 

The problem with this is that, suppose we instead manage to lynch a thug (but, we don't know that. according to us they could also be the inquisitor), tell me, how many people would be willing to kill the now once-lynched thug? In hindsight, I realise that yes, some people might be okay with that, but I know some will instead advocate scanning the thug. Sure, in this case, we don't lose a villager 

But, now, what if that thug was instead actually the inquisitor? We would have wasted a cycle before killing them, during which they could have converted another villager (or, in the worst case, two villagers).

(ofcourse, all this depends on the coinshots being convinced to kill the thug/inquisitor posing as a thug.)

 

I would advocate that a Coinshot finish the job, and if they didn't, I would vote on the player again as well, unless I had a reason to believe they were innocent or had sufficient evidence of another player being an eliminator. I would say that Lopen would very likely agree with that, too. Regarding scanning, there's no guarantee that there's a Seeker in this game, let alone a village one. Personally I would rather depend on the game mechanics I do know are available (the lynch) before I sit around and wait for a role that might not exist to make a move. By making sure to finish off any Thugs that survive the lynch, we effectively strip the Inquisitor of claiming Thug as a safety net.

27 minutes ago, Mark IV said:

 

 

 

I just pressed enter here, and it split that paragraph from the rest of his post. A Miracle! Praise the Ja! 

(seriously though, can someone tell me what I did there? That seems to be a very useful feature.

 

No idea. It's happened to me a few times before, but I could never figure out why, and it took me deleting the entire post and rewriting it from scratch to keep it from happening (I personally didn't want the quotes to split).

27 minutes ago, Mark IV said:

 

 

 

What do you guys think of the idea? The thug claiming one? 

I'll paste it here for ease:

Quote

 

 

 

That brings me to the last part of my post- what does everyone think of thugs roleclaiming? Now, hear me out first-

1) If thugs do roleclaim, the inquisitor has to spend two kils on them. It would be far better for them to attack others first.

2) The inquisitor has to decide whether to claim with the thugs. If they do, then sure, they have an alibi for surviving the lynch. However, scanners can then check the roles of the claimed thugs to see who's lying. 

3) If the inquisitor doesn't claim, then they have no alibi for surviving the lynch, thus, they'd be caught red-handed

 

I don't think any role should claim, personally. Having an extra life is more valuable if the eliminators don't know about it, as it allows the Thug in question to work extra hard to bait the Inquisitor into attacking them, and thus buy the village more time. Plus, like me saying that vanilla players should not claim because it tells the Inquisitor who to attack if they want to convert others, Thugs claiming simultaneously allows the Inquisitor to narrow down other roles that he/she may want more, such as Lurcher or Coinshot. The only scenario that I would say a Thug should claim is if they are about to be lynched so that the village can think whether or not it's worth following through. Otherwise it hurts the village more than it helps, as Thug is one of the more likely roles an Inquisitor would claim to begin with, and there's likely many players who aren't Thugs that he could hide among if he decided to claim another role.

Editing to say that I'm home and am going to go to bed. After finally getting some sleep, I intend to focus entirely on the LG30 Finale, so don't expect me to be as active as I have been thus far until it's finished, polished and posted. I hope that while I'm asleep / writing, this trend of activity continues. Speaking of activity, if someone doesn't mind, can you please @mention every player who hasn't posted yet, like Hero attempted to do earlier? I would do it myself, but I'm exhausted.

Edited March 27, 2017 by Amanuensis

[DeTess]

4 hours ago, Mark IV said:

That brings me to the last part of my post- what does everyone think of thugs roleclaiming? Now, hear me out first-

1) If thugs do roleclaim, the inquisitor has to spend two kils on them. It would be far better for them to attack others first.

2) The inquisitor has to decide whether to claim with the thugs. If they do, then sure, they have an alibi for surviving the lynch. However, scanners can then check the roles of the claimed thugs to see who's lying.

3) If the inquisitor doesn't claim, then they have no alibi for surviving the lynch, thus, they'd be caught red-handed.

What do you guys think?

Based on points 2 and 3, it would appear to make sense for the thugs to claim. However, the problem is with point 1. The whole trick of the thug is that they have two lives, so they can 'soak up' an attack that would otherwise kill someone. If the elim knows who all the thugs are, he could make a point of avoiding them and focusing on all the other players first without running the risk of a kill not going through because he/she hit a thug. Worse still, he/she could decide to convert all the thugs, which would make lynching elims an incredible hassle, requiring two cycles, or a lynch and a  coinshot attack to take one elim down.

So I don't think having all the thugs claim is going to work in the advantage of the village. The advantage from point 2 and 3 can be gained by having the scanners check anyone who survives a lynch.

edit: somewhat ninja'd by amanuensis

Edited March 27, 2017 by randuir

[Aonar]

Ugh. Since Hero @'d me, I feel like I should contribute thoughts, but ATM my thoughts are mostly "why the storms did I sign up for this." >> 

Give me a day and a death or two and maybe I'll have more than null motivation to analyze properly. For now though, I'll say I'm largely neutral to a D1 lynch, given the circumstances of this game. A bad one could screw us over, and even a good one is going to give us less info than usual. That being said, without one we'll basically be in the same situation tomorrow, just with one less player.

Aside from that, I've got nothing. (If you're looking for an arbitrary D1 lynchee who won't care to much though, I'm a good candidate. )

[little wilson]

I'm not going to quote because my phone is being stupid and I just woke up and don't feel like being a terribly serious post. 

Let me first say that I knew that post would get me some flack. I didn't care and I still don't. I'm not taking this game very seriously because I signed up on a whim and because Orlok asked me to (he also felt that what better way to show that I'm not serious anymore than the rerun of my first game as an eliminator, and I happen to agree with that).

So very quickly, I'll say that the "contradiction" you are seeing isn't a contradiction. It's a misinterpretation brought about by my not completely finishing the thought there. Anyone who survives the lynch will either be killed or promptly scanned. The Inquisitor in LG 2 scanned as a REGULAR VILLAGER. Therefore, they cannot be a Thug. Therefore, how did they survive the lynch? Therefore, the game ends cycle 2-3 because they're lynched again and any and all village coinshots target them. I don't know about you all, but to me, a win isn't worth it in those circumstances. I like it when games are memorable, and that's not memorable. It's boring. The game hasn't even really gotten underway at that point.

[DeTess]

49 minutes ago, Amanuensis said:

Speaking of activity, if someone doesn't mind, can you please @mention every player who hasn't posted yet, like Hero attempted to do earlier? I would do it myself, but I'm exhausted.

Alright, I'm hereby mentioning everyone who hasn't posted yet and who hasn't been mentioned yet. apologies if I mention you if you don't actually belong to one of these groups.

@Araris Valerian, @Dalinar Kholin, @Darkness Ascendant, @DroughtBringer, @Kipper, @Manukos

9 minutes ago, little wilson said:

So very quickly, I'll say that the "contradiction" you are seeing isn't a contradiction. It's a misinterpretation brought about by my not completely finishing the thought there. Anyone who survives the lynch will either be killed or promptly scanned. The Inquisitor in LG 2 scanned as a REGULAR VILLAGER. Therefore, they cannot be a Thug. Therefore, how did they survive the lynch? Therefore, the game ends cycle 2-3 because they're lynched again and any and all village coinshots target them. I don't know about you all, but to me, a win isn't worth it in those circumstances. I like it when games are memorable, and that's not memorable. It's boring. The game hasn't even really gotten underway at that point.

Okay, that makes more sense. I'll be keeping an eye on you, but you no longer really stand out from the pack in terms of suspicion.

Edited March 27, 2017 by randuir

[Mark IV]

2 hours ago, Amanuensis said:

Emphasis mine.

Not necessarily. The number of conversions that the Inquisitor has is very reliant on village role distribution. I think 5 conversions in a safe number to guess, but I wouldn't say it's the max. Plus, one thing to consider is that every time a conversion happens, it's revealed in the write up, along with what metal power was gained via the Spike. This fact alone provides the village with extremely useful information while potentially tying the eliminator's hands.

Eh. I wouldn't read into that sentence too much, Mark. I think along those same lines as a villager all the time. Talking about things like this openly does have the potential to impact the eliminator's playstyle, and given we're talking about trying to predict how the Inquisitor will act, it's a natural conclusion to reach. I'm pretty sure that in LG31, I made a comment about Stick tending to avoid participation in the main lynch when she is an eliminator, followed by me making a similar comment. Here, I even found the post where I did it, so read it if you want proof. It's in the third paragraph after where I @mention Szeth Son-Son Mallano. You acknowledge that the point is weak already, but I just wanted to point out that what she did isn't particularly alignment indicative.

Regarding Wilson's contradiction, I had a similar thought, at first. But like with the day one lynch in general, and like the business with Len and the Inquisitor's "special powers," I thought about the situation a little more thoroughly. Let's assume that we managed to lynch the Inquisitor today, and they survived. Would they die? No. But what would happen next? Some players might advocate that a Coinshot attack the player to finish the job, as a lynch is essentially pointless if it's not followed through. Because no misting was lynched, the Inquisitor would be unable to convert anyone, so regardless of if they have two lives and die that night, or three and survive until the next day, they're going to be confirmed as the Inquisitor. So yeah, nothing about the scenario is particularly fun, and if I had to guess, this is what Wilson was thinking when she said what she did, but just didn't say everything she could have, likely because she was tired and wanted to go to bed.

Considering this, however, there is an inherent clash in logic with her not wanting to give the Inquisitor an opportunity to convert tonight rather than kill. Until a Misting dies and the Inquisitor is able to convert someone to his team, he/she is going to be alone, and at risk of this same scenario occurring, just at a later date. I would personally rather accelerate the time table of the conversions that let it stagnate, as otherwise the village is basically playing find the needle in the haystack. Who the Inquisitor chooses to convert and allowing them to interact in a meaningful way is a lot more informative than us just waiting to see who the Inquisitor kills. Especially this early in the game, there is so little to learn from who the eliminator's decide to target, first. I'm not sure on the exact statistics, but in more cases than not, they either go for a player that is deemed dangerous, or they remove someone low-active or inactive enough to keep us from learning anything.

Since you're the second player to take my vote on Wilson further (even if you don't vote on her), I feel it necessary to say that I don't believe her stance on the lynch is necessarily suspicious. While I have considered the possibility of her being an Inquisitor who wanted to start the game by subverting expectations (suggesting a plan that an Inquisitor would naturally want to avoid), it's also possible she's an honest villager who believes that a lynch today is a bad idea, or that she's a villager who's only pretending to feel this way in order to spark discussion. Even if you or I disagree with her, I don't feel it's as indicative of her alignment as you seem to think it is.

The Ja is satisfied with your reply, Wilson. 

Seriously though, and I'm just going to lay it out there:

My first thought was (note that this is Paranoid!Mark speaking, and things might be blown out of proportion) "she's copying exactly what Aman said. "

But honestly, what Aman said is a reasonable explanation, and I'm willing to believe it. It's not Wilson's fault that Aman said it first, either ways. 

So, yes, that explanation does satisfy me. 

However, I do still advocate lynching on D1 here, because, as I've said, it leaves us no better off (infact, worse off) on D2. And, if you're worried about hitting the inquisitor, I'd say the chances of that are very small.  

So, yeah. That. 

Praise The Ja!

[Yitzi2]

9 hours ago, Arraenae said:

@OrlokTsubodaiAlright. Read over the LG2 rules. So there's one elim now: the Inquisitor. This reminds me a bit of LG31, where Mage was some elim equivalent. The GMs said that they picked him to be a elim because he had the lowest lynch rates as an elim. Obviously, this game is different, but maybe Orlok and Stink would have had similar principles for distribution? There's one elim in this game and one elim in that game (I think, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.) obviously, no two players will play exactly the same, but I feel like the Inquisitor might act similarly to the way Mage did in LG31.

Or maybe that's what he wants us to think...even if he was planning to, it might change now that you've posted it (assuming it's not you).

Or maybe he'll decide that acting that way, now that I've posted this, is the best way to throw off suspicion...

(Which aspects of his play in LG31 are you thinking of in particular, by the way?)

Edited March 27, 2017 by Yitzi2

[manukos]

..sry for not posting yet  time-zones are quite a bother and you gave me quite a bit of info to go through  , i mean, most posts are more than deserving of a potato at the end 

now, on to the matters that were discussed... I agree with wilson that day one lynches are not to our advantage in this occasion  (not that i ever vote on D1 ) 

i don't have much more to add , i think i'll lurk for a bit more

P.S. Contricution crusade, it is a 2 day round no reason to get riled up allready

[Yitzi2]

My thoughts regarding a first-day lynch: What we need isn't so much information, as an information advantage over the inquisitor.  If we lynch someone and everybody finds out who it is, that won't give us an information advantage.  (In most mafia games, the eliminators begin with an information advantage regarding roles, since they know each others' identities, but that doesn't apply here.)

The biggest question, I think (though I have no idea how we might determine this) is what powers the inquisitor has.  Knowing whether he has seeker powers, or PM-related powers, would be very useful...but that might not be feasible.

It seems to me that as long as the town has more seeker abilities than the inquisitor at the moment (a likely proposition), the town benefits from a longer game, since it gives the  seekers more time to build networks of trusted individuals (just remember that the supposed seeker may be the inquisitor, so don't trust him until he's been vetted by another seeker).  So it may be best to not lynch anyone, and for the smokers and coinshots to keep their abilities off, at least until the first conversion (at which point things will begin to move more toward a normal mafia-style game).

(Side note: You may or may not have noticed that I am phrasing things in a way that would be valid for the inquisitor as well.  I have decided that this is the best approach for me, since I am reluctant to say "we" about the non-eliminators when I am the eliminator, and if I only used such phrasing in the games that I'm an eliminator, it would be too much of a giveaway.)

Edited March 27, 2017 by Yitzi2

[Yitzi2]

However: I do think we might want to have an "investigation" vote, making suggestions as to whom the seekers should check first.  After all, if a seeker finds the inquisitor before any misting is killed, they can PM everybody else, and then we'll have narrowed it down to two people (the supposed inquisitor, and the supposed seeker investigating them).  And if two seekers agree, we can be certain (unless making someone else look like the inquisitor is an inquisitor power, but I doubt it; that would probably be a bit too strong).

[ImpossibleBowler]

8 minutes ago, Yitzi2 said:

However: I do think we might want to have an "investigation" vote, making suggestions as to whom the seekers should check first.  After all, if a seeker finds the inquisitor before any misting is killed, they can PM everybody else, and then we'll have narrowed it down to two people (the supposed inquisitor, and the supposed seeker investigating them).  And if two seekers agree, we can be certain (unless making someone else look like the inquisitor is an inquisitor power, but I doubt it; that would probably be a bit too strong).

I agree! (about vote) Praise the Ja!

Edited March 27, 2017 by Ornstein

[Kipper]

Thanks all for mentioning me; I was just busy for the last 16 hours.

A couple things:

@Arraenae, the quality of discussion that a poke vote produces is somewhat neutered if the subject of said discussion is how you're an irrational player and shouldn't have made a poke vote, ya feel? I probably could have explained that in seven paragraphs, but I'm not @Amanuensis, ya feel?

@little wilson most accurately represents my feelings on lynches for this game. I...don't have a standard view on D1 lynches. My opinion changes with the amount of pollen in the air. However, in this game, I believe the potential cost of lynching a Coinshot (or whatever) far outweighs the potential benefit of lynching the Inquisitor.

Also, for all of those who idolize discussion, and say things like "But we gain so much useful DISCUSSION from poke votes and lynches,"......no we don't. Not on Cycle 1. We gain discussion, but not useful discussion. I'd like someone to show me, even hypothetically, one "useful" piece of discussion that you'd gain from a D1 lynch. There's one evil person in the game right now, and the idea that that person will say anything majorly alignment-indicative in the first cycle is ludicrous.

TL;DR Discussion itself is not the be-all, end-all.

 

[DeTess]

21 minutes ago, Yitzi2 said:

However: I do think we might want to have an "investigation" vote, making suggestions as to whom the seekers should check first.  After all, if a seeker finds the inquisitor before any misting is killed, they can PM everybody else, and then we'll have narrowed it down to two people (the supposed inquisitor, and the supposed seeker investigating them).  And if two seekers agree, we can be certain (unless making someone else look like the inquisitor is an inquisitor power, but I doubt it; that would probably be a bit too strong).

The smoker power nearly always protects someone from being scanned by seekers. If we put it to a vote, if the inquisitor or one of their later recruits is a smoker, than they can simply counter that. It's a good idea, but it likely won't work because of that role.

[ImpossibleBowler]

Winkleton looked at the house if front of him. he had spent a week looking for this place and had finally found it. He felt...THUMP...  unconscious. he woke up with his head aching.

[ImpossibleBowler]

13 hours ago, Amanuensis said:

Regarding the story, I hadn't anticipated our characters being kidnapped. It's given me what I think is a great idea for roleplay, but unfortunately my brain isn't being cooperative right now, and I need to take care of the LG30 finale before I tackle this game seriously, anyway. Until I can get RP up, I'll inform everyone that the character I'm playing, Mykal, is not currently present. Elosa Renaud was the person invited by Lord Tekiel and, after refusing to participate in his test, was inevitably taken against her will. She is not happy about the situation, and the stress on her is apparent. In case anyone wants to reference her, you should know that the Renaud family is an offshoot of House Renoux. The Renauds are not well known as their primary responsibilities are managing several plantations on the fringe of the Final Empire, which means that most, or perhaps all other characters, will not recognize her. As for her appearance, she has short, blonde hair (imagine Cersei Lannister's haircut in Season 5 of Game of Thrones) and has amber-colored eyes. For a Noble Lady, she is not very lady like, preferring to wear more practical clothing (like that of a skaa worker, except higher quality and stylized) rather than dresses. She doesn't wear make up, so the wrinkles on her face are noticeable. It's not that she's very old, just that she's had a rough few years since her parents died, so characters may be surprised to learn she's only 32. Tobacco is the main source of income at her late father's plantation, and as you can guess, growing up there inevitably led her to becoming addicted to the stuff, so chances are you will usually find her puffing from a long, thin cigarette in the corner of the room.

As for the game... Arraenae. This subject was talked about quite a bit on the first day of LG31 so I'll try to keep my point short. What do you think poke votes accomplish? Judging by your post, I can infer that you're using it to get a new player involved in the game sooner rather than later. If that's the case, shouldn't @mentioning them be enough? Furthermore, why not @mention the other new players, or all of the players who have yet to post? Is there a specific reason you chose Ome from the twenty+ others who haven't? As for the vote, while it may give the target a little more incentive to respond, don't you think the lack of any substantial reasoning for it makes it unlikely that your target will do more than say hey, I'm here? Wouldn't it be better to ask Ome a question so that we can all get a feel about his perspective on things? For example, why not do this: @OmeGaster, have you played any games of mafia before? If so, tell us about your experiences. If not, do you have any questions? @Ornstein, I saw you express confusion a few times before the game began. Is there anything I can help clarify for you? @Yitzi2, @Iamspartacus, same questions apply to you. This game is your first, which makes you both potentially dangerous if you're the Inquisitor, or later converted, as we have no past interactions to refer to when trying to figure out your alignment. Can you help the village by giving us some insight into your minds?

@Arraenae, what reason do I have to believe you're not the Inquisitor trying to hide in plain sight? Poke votes are, in my opinion, unhelpful. Personally I think the only real benefit of poke votes is that they make a player seem more active and interested in promoting activity than they actually are, which is ideal for eliminators. Do you disagree? If so, why?

EDIT: @Ecthelion III, and anyone else who cares. I've tried to work on the LG30 finale, but I'm sleep deprived and unable to rest because I'm currently working night shift. Just wanted to let you know that I won't be able to finish it tonight like I hoped. Just writing this post took me three hours, which is ridiculous considering how short it is. I have no plans or commitments tomorrow, so after I get home I will go straight to bed, and immediately begin writing after I wake up. I would really like to RP for this game, so I'm hoping that I'll be able to get both the finale and Mykal / Elosa's introductions done before this turn is over.

Since I mentioned you, I might as well ask you something, too. How do you think that the Inquisitor would handle this game? For example, do you think they'd post infrequently, or lurk outright? How likely do you think they have posted already (not statistically, but strategically)?

Although I've directed these questions at Ecth, does anyone else want to weigh in on this? How about you, @Sart? You ninja'd me while I was editing this post so I know you're around. I guess I should also ask you what you hope to accomplish in voting on yourself. Your roleplay implies that you're trying to get people to vote, but can you explain how voting on yourself helps that?

No, i read the rules and there pretty simple. praise the ja!

Edited March 27, 2017 by Ornstein