Long Game 70: Reforging Arelon

[Gears]

7 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

1. If I understand the underlying argument, you voted Lotus to not hit Iadon or the Exec sec more than because an elim might have the adjudicator role? That is a different argument from what you said, but now that I read it for the 27th or 28th time... It's not that adjudicators are not useful, it's that they are less useful than other roles. 

Pretty much, yes. I would rather lynch an adjudicator than a random with a risk of losing the most important role the village has or increasing the Market prices, and it does help that I don't understand why village!Lotus would claim [if this is just a new playstyle not working out, I apologise]. A village adjudicator acts with the same imperfect knowledge as the rest of us. Any person they trust enough to protect from the lynch would be a person too trusted to be lynched in the first place. 

15 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

2. I mean, I gave you Xinoehp didn't I?  I thought you were the spy!!! Vindication! Ah going to your computer is why you didn't have reasons in your vote post. I absolve you of that one.

While you did, I didn't feel comfortable with piling onto what amounted to a number of poke votes. Besides, Venture retracted. I thank you for your absolution.

18 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

3. I think you said it better when you said you didn't think Lotus was an elim, but you  didn't not think that either. 

That's... what I mean. Am I just really bad at phrasing things? Do I let my paranoia slip into the tone of my posts? A curse upon my traitorous hands.

19 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

4. Not to cause chaos? spoilsport . There is a pattern there huh? By all means play how you like. 

While being the harbinger of chaos is enjoyable, I do think that it hampers my ability to analyse the game. Alternatively, I could be playing the long game and merely appearing to not want chaos while I plot to cause mass hysteria.

21 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

I'm with you on this one. Except your vote. which you agree is weird. But you don't change it back . . . .

I have a tunnelling problem. At the time, no one else supported me in a Lotus lynch, which made me suspect that I was chasing phantom rabbits in the ocean. Now that hunters have joined me on this expedition, I feel more confident in my convictions and reasoning. 

[+Ed Venture]

17 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

How'd that poke vote feel?

ahh now that's not fair. I've caused my share of chaos and it was great! 

Interesting. I appreciate the clear lines you draw here. You are actively aligning with Lotus and against Gears. such tasty information.

Fair call. Gears knows the risks of claiming elim, so you are welcome to try to lynch him for it.

Wasn’t the worst thing in the world. Got Xino talking. And if he didn’t, it would be a vote on an unhelpful party.

Its a touch harsh, but I’m standing by it. This is becoming quite a meta-game. But I have one last thing to say on this topic of chaos. A quote from A Joe in a Bush: “The more you get caught lying, the less people trust you. If you want people to trust you, the only way to do it is to not lie. Period....I’d rather be trusted than win a single game....I play the meta-game. Not the individual game.” I don’t like this tactic of causing chaos by claiming to Elim. It reduces trust, and removes village advantages.

More me against the lynch, and against Gears. Don’t feel too supportive of anyone as of now.

*nods* My vote isn’t changing.

18 minutes ago, Elkanah said:

But see, I think PMs can be as useful a tool as a singular lynch. Especially if we get them early on in the game. 

Claiming elim is the new poke voting? I disagree. If I claim elim I may get a little information based on who is looking for excuses to lynch someone. However, that information is slow moving and frequently no better than circumstancial. It also requires an almost intimate knowledge of each other's playstyles. Some people (as evidenced) don't like the playstyle and will vote Gears out for even considering the playstyle. Of course It worked in a recent game where we caught Vapor for jumping on Gears, so it definitely can be a useful source of information, but it is definitely of the wide-net variety. Whereas when I poke someone, I demand a timely answer that could fluster or trip them up in their words. It's very much fishing with a spear, but the information I find tends to be more focused and I don't have to do as much cleaning to get to the meat.

Afraid I have nothing to add about PMs. They’ve never been my favorite tool. Maybe I’ll work on that next game.

*nods, again* I’m writing this down. Maybe next, next game. But I am not supporting it this game.

———

Last post for today I think. We’ll see.

[Ashbringer]

(I thought I posted this already... oops.)

I’m trying to figure out where I fit in all of this, because technically I helped start this.

Lynching Lotus would prevent the majority lynch rule, and I’m... hesitant to believe that she wouldn’t read and ask about her own role before claiming it. Claiming doesn’t make a ton of sense here. All of which point towards Gears’ idea being a good one.

On the other hand, I highly doubt Lotus is an Elim and I very highly doubt she’s the Monk. I really don’t like Illwei voting on Lotus for an action of Gears’, and while Gears’ retraction and unretraction feels... understandable to some degree, it doesn’t feel incredibly Village. It feels more like he’s trying to survive no matter the attention he gets, but instead of being resolute he backtracks and unbacktracks.

So... I’m not sure. I’ll probably vote towards the majority of the cycle for the PMs (like I’ll use them...), but I’m torn on this one. I’m reading Gears the most suspicious, but Lotus isn’t that far behind and Illwei’s vote swap is also bugging me. So I’ll keep out of this one.

(For some reason I decided it would be smart to type this all up on mobile while I have a computer right in front of me, so I’ll edit this to respond to Elk and Gears’ massive post chain.)

Edit: responding to things.

2 hours ago, Illwei said:

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Absolutely no sense. no sense. none.

Gears
Lotus

I agree with the others that this doesn't make sense. While I personally agree that Gears and Lotus are hard to choose between... voting on Lotus for something suspicious Gears did... I don't get it.

2 hours ago, Gears said:

Kingpins get a discount on contracts. Adjudicators make it difficult to lynch people, forcing them to resort to purchasing assassins. An adjudicator makes an elim immune to the lynch. Is it such a stretch of logic that it would replace an elim?

Now that there is significant support for a Lotus lynch, I will once again throw my support behind that avenue of attack. While this may seem like flip-flopping on my part [and it is, don't get me wrong], a Lotus lynch is far superior to an unconfirmable gambit that might work. 

This post also bugs me... although it's in character for Gears to do role analysis, just because Village!Kingpins are a good counter to Elim!Adjudicators doesn't mean that the roles are specifically balanced to accommodate it. Elim!Protectors are a good counter to Village!Killers; does that mean that a village Coinshot implies any Lurchers are suspicious? And then you go from Kingpin analysis to Adjudicators replacing a full Elim? 

(I already talked about the flip-flop... non-committal makes me nervous.)

I kinda get where you're coming from on Village!Adjudicators not being the worst role to D1 lynch, but it's still odd to me.

52 minutes ago, Mist said:

 

On 9/26/2020 at 2:38 AM, TJ Shade said:

Re-reading the rules as I had initially just rushed through them. We need to be very careful about an elim!Adjudicator and hence be careful about mentioning suspicion beforehand. It would be recommended not to mention any suspicion that would make it obvious to an elim Adjudicator that their fellow elim might be the target of majority of the players to lynch. We'd waste an important cycle that way. If you are afraid that you'll die, mention your suspicions at the last moment of the Night cycle. 

Speaking of Adjudicator, I've got a question. What will happen if an Adjudicator saves a player from the lynch? Will there be no elimination that cycle, or will the player with second highest votes will be eliminated?

Not sharing suspicions also hurts the village to an extent.

I'll qualify this suggestion and advise only sharing suspicions during day turns. There shouldn't be anything massively suspicion-causing in the day-night rollover besides vote manip, which is fairly easy to analyze, and that prevents the Elims from taking out anyone based on their suspicions before they have a chance to gather evidence along with blocking the Elim!Adjudicator. The night-day rollover gives more information anyway.

Besides complimenting Elkanah on a 3,000 word post, that's all I have for now.

Aaaaaaand Elkanah ninja'd my edit. Er... Up here!

Edited September 27, 2020 by Ashbringer
Responding's easier via computer

[Elkanah]

2 hours ago, Lotus said:

*shrug * I just thought it was a odd move. Go for it if it works for you.

Ha saame

2 hours ago, TJ Shade said:

Gahhhh I'm on a time constraint and shard ate my post. So I'll be extremely brief here.

 

This is basically repeating what Matrim and Elkanah has told. It's not just saying that "I agree", but it's repeating what they said in the same verbatim. Seems to like wanting to appear helpful. Elim read. 

 

Elkanah - Just one weird point. The fact that he mentioned every villager should buy insignias and it would be recommended to do so. Possible reason as a cover if elim!Elkanah or his teammates are burgled and found to be in possession on an insignia or a ploy to waste the villagers money? Other than this weird point, Elk's been largely LG69-ish. Could you explain exactly what you were thinking when you suggested it, Elk? Null leaning village subject to the reply to my question. 

Edited down to the stuff I wanted to talk about.

Shard eating posts is the worst. I almost had to write my last one twice. Could you imagine?!

Well yes, but actually no. I am not looking to kill the spy and Kings Way is. He is using my argument but coming to a different conclusion. In my opinion, the spy is still a mislynch, so if we found out who they were lynching is right out. A lynched spy is a wasted lynch and worse because the spy takes two elim hits. we can deal with their vote really easily and they don't even know who the elims are so they're just as likely to hit an elim as a villager if they purchase a murder.

1 hour ago, Gears said:

Kingpins get a discount on contracts. Adjudicators make it difficult to lynch people, forcing them to resort to purchasing assassins. An adjudicator makes an elim immune to the lynch. Is it such a stretch of logic that it would replace an elim?

Now that there is significant support for a Lotus lynch, I will once again throw my support behind that avenue of attack. While this may seem like flip-flopping on my part [and it is, don't get me wrong], a Lotus lynch is far superior to an unconfirmable gambit that might work. 

It doesn't hurt that it's self preservation either amiright?

11 minutes ago, Gears said:

Pretty much, yes. I would rather lynch an adjudicator than a random with a risk of losing the most important role the village has or increasing the Market prices, and it does help that I don't understand why village!Lotus would claim [if this is just a new playstyle not working out, I apologise]. A village adjudicator acts with the same imperfect knowledge as the rest of us. Any person they trust enough to protect from the lynch would be a person too trusted to be lynched in the first place. 

While you did, I didn't feel comfortable with piling onto what amounted to a number of poke votes. Besides, Venture retracted. I thank you for your absolution.

That's... what I mean. Am I just really bad at phrasing things? Do I let my paranoia slip into the tone of my posts? A curse upon my traitorous hands.

While being the harbinger of chaos is enjoyable, I do think that it hampers my ability to analyse the game. Alternatively, I could be playing the long game and merely appearing to not want chaos while I plot to cause mass hysteria.

I have a tunnelling problem. At the time, no one else supported me in a Lotus lynch, which made me suspect that I was chasing phantom rabbits in the ocean. Now that hunters have joined me on this expedition, I feel more confident in my convictions and reasoning. 

Sorry, it was a little condescending to say I could absolve you of something. I meant that it made sense and I no longer found it suspicious that you didn't have very much reasoning in your first post voting for Lotus. That and I feel smart when using uncommon words. Absolve was certainly inappropriate there.

It is interesting that you find chaos hampers your ability to analyze the game. I am really really bad at analysis. So I try to catch people off guard. I shake the tree for low-hanging fruit and it has improved my ability to help the village. Not without sacrifice. I once protected a known elim at lylo because I thought it was funny. (I didn't know it was lylo if that helps at all). but I wax metaful. My point is, chaos has been my best source of information recently. Maybe I should take a page out of Lotus and Venture's books and try something new. 

On that last quote, it was aimed at Illwei and not you, but I appreciate your candor about your thought process on removing and then re placing your vote on Lotus. That was a reasonable reaction.

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

Not Game Related:

Spoiler

 

18 minutes ago, Butt Ad Venture said:

Its a touch harsh, but I’m standing by it. This is becoming quite a meta-game. But I have one last thing to say on this topic of chaos. A quote from A Joe in a Bush: “The more you get caught lying, the less people trust you. If you want people to trust you, the only way to do it is to not lie. Period....I’d rather be trusted than win a single game....I play the meta-game. Not the individual game.” I don’t like this tactic of causing chaos by claiming to Elim. It reduces trust, and removes village advantages.

That makes sense. Stick once told me something similar. We had very different opinions on an elim team together about this subject. 

I agree that I wouldn't claim elim. As I say, it is a very different way of fishing from my preference, but it takes the sting out a bit when someone knows they shouldn't have trusted me. I guess my playstyle is a bit selfish as well. I put myself out there so thoroughly that by the end of cycle 1 everyone has an opinion of me. That way if I die, the elims give up too much information. Plus, by being unpredictable and a little reckless they think I might be mislynched. So the fastest way for me to get trusted is to have people rake me over the coals on day one. Then I get to be trusted not because I'm telling the truth, but because they already know I couldn't be an elim.

This is an interesting conversation. I'd love to discuss it more. I'm sorry I'm taking up so much space in this game for it though. You've already said this was your last word and here I am dragging it out again. Sorry. Here I'll spoiler it so it's easy to skip.

 

 

[Ashbringer]

This is me quoting myself because Elkanah ninja'd my edit...

24 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

Edit: responding to things.

3 hours ago, Illwei said:

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Absolutely no sense. no sense. none.

Gears
Lotus

I agree with the others that this doesn't make sense. While I personally agree that Gears and Lotus are hard to choose between... voting on Lotus for something suspicious Gears did... I don't get it.

2 hours ago, Gears said:

Kingpins get a discount on contracts. Adjudicators make it difficult to lynch people, forcing them to resort to purchasing assassins. An adjudicator makes an elim immune to the lynch. Is it such a stretch of logic that it would replace an elim?

Now that there is significant support for a Lotus lynch, I will once again throw my support behind that avenue of attack. While this may seem like flip-flopping on my part [and it is, don't get me wrong], a Lotus lynch is far superior to an unconfirmable gambit that might work. 

This post also bugs me... although it's in character for Gears to do role analysis, just because Village!Kingpins are a good counter to Elim!Adjudicators doesn't mean that the roles are specifically balanced to accommodate it. Elim!Protectors are a good counter to Village!Killers; does that mean that a village Coinshot implies any Lurchers are suspicious? And then you go from Kingpin analysis to Adjudicators replacing a full Elim? 

(I already talked about the flip-flop... non-committal makes me nervous.)

I kinda get where you're coming from on Village!Adjudicators not being the worst role to D1 lynch, but it's still odd to me.

1 hour ago, Mist said:

 

On 9/26/2020 at 2:38 AM, TJ Shade said:

Re-reading the rules as I had initially just rushed through them. We need to be very careful about an elim!Adjudicator and hence be careful about mentioning suspicion beforehand. It would be recommended not to mention any suspicion that would make it obvious to an elim Adjudicator that their fellow elim might be the target of majority of the players to lynch. We'd waste an important cycle that way. If you are afraid that you'll die, mention your suspicions at the last moment of the Night cycle. 

Speaking of Adjudicator, I've got a question. What will happen if an Adjudicator saves a player from the lynch? Will there be no elimination that cycle, or will the player with second highest votes will be eliminated?

Not sharing suspicions also hurts the village to an extent.

I'll qualify this suggestion and advise only sharing suspicions during day turns. There shouldn't be anything massively suspicion-causing in the day-night rollover besides vote manip, which is fairly easy to analyze, and that prevents the Elims from taking out anyone based on their suspicions before they have a chance to gather evidence along with blocking the Elim!Adjudicator. The night-day rollover gives more information anyway.

Besides complimenting Elkanah on a 3,000 word post, that's all I have for now.

Aaaaaaand Elkanah ninja'd my edit. Er... Up here!

 

 

[---]

1 hour ago, Elkanah said:

5) Lotus is the monk and is trying something convoluted that I haven't realized yet?

I was thinking that that would make as much sense as Lotus claiming Adjudicator and being Village. I don't see Lotus making a new choice without a team to either back her up or to fall back on.

1 hour ago, Elkanah said:

I'm with you on this one. Except your vote. which you agree is weird. But you don't change it back . . . .

I mean, my vote definitely does appear weird, doesn't it?

29 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

I really don’t like Illwei voting on Lotus for an action of Gears’

Do you mean for reasoning from Gears? I'm confused about what this means, but yeah. Gears made some points but for now I'm going to ignore them.

EDIT: ah. I understand. no, that was not why I switched to Lotus.

1 hour ago, Elkanah said:

2) I'd say Lazy is taking it a bit far. He may not have had a better lynch target and decided to wait a minute until he did. I would be more amenable to lynching Lotus if that did make voting next cycle harder. I'd like open PMs and the adjudicator death trigger is a good way of getting there. I'll explain that in more detail in a minute

Lazy wasn't the word I was looking for really. I was looking for: Keeping his vote on Lotus there would give him reason to be all by his lonesome in the vote because no one else would really want to vote lotus at that point. Him taking his vote off of Lotus later makes that point meaningless.
But it's not an Adjudicator death trigger, It's just a general Majority vote trigger, no?

So Gears is kind of my top suspicion, but I don't want to vote on him. If necessary for PMs I will change, but I'm not sure otherwise.

Lotus

Edited September 27, 2020 by Illwei

[Mist]

Is our vote count at the moment sufficient to gain us PMs? I'm not sure, so I'll try to make sure. Gears

Kay, last 45 minutes! Time to decide who we're lynching, changing completely our votes!

Edit: Flame on! 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Mist

[ShrubSeph]

I didn't read every previous post in depth, just kind of skimmed them, so if someone already made these points, sorry

I think Gears is worried that if we don't kill Lotus, then the elims will, and then It will be harder to vote them out. This makes sense, but the elims would probably wait until one of them was under heavy fire to kill Lotus and get the Adjudicator death penalty/reward. I don't think anyone is in a positions where majority vote tomorrow would help them, so I'm not worried much about Lotus. 

I am going to vote Gears, because I think it's suspicious how they immediately decided to kill Lotus. That seems like a elim strategy, to focus attention on a someone else before you or another Elim is accused. 

[Kynedath]

Quick rule change, King Iadon cannot target himself with his ability.

[Elkanah]

@Kynedath, do you have a current vote count?

[Mist]

8 minutes ago, Kings_way said:

I didn't read every previous post in depth, just kind of skimmed them, so if someone already made these points, sorry

I think Gears is worried that if we don't kill Lotus, then the elims will, and then It will be harder to vote them out. This makes sense, but the elims would probably wait until one of them was under heavy fire to kill Lotus and get the Adjudicator death penalty/reward. I don't think anyone is in a positions where majority vote tomorrow would help them, so I'm not worried much about Lotus. 

I am going to vote Gears, because I think it's suspicious how they immediately decided to kill Lotus. That seems like a elim strategy, to focus attention on a someone else before you or another Elim is accused. 

I think the penalty remains the whole game. However, getting 50% of people to vote isn't difficult. King Iadon can switch that role so it doesn't get NKed and the penalty doesn't come into play, and if that doesn't happen, the penalty isn't too onerous. 

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

8 hours ago, Elkanah said:

So it sounds like you would be okay with a Lotus lynch? You left that option out and I wonder if that was on purpose. You doubt Lotus is an elim, but lynching them is far less inconvenient than trying to swap her role and you make it sound like it might be less inconvenient than getting a fifty percent lynch next cycle. I just don't know why you didn't go that far. Clearly I'm not bothered if we get a lynch next cycle or not, but if you think it's overly inconvenient, why not vote for Lotus this cycle?

To be clear, the only bad results of Iadon switching Lotus's role with a random player and the elims proceeding to kill Lotus is if the switched player is the executive secretary, another village adjudicator, or the spy. If Iadon tries to switch Lotus and she dies a village adjudicator, Iadon knows there's a pretty good chance the other person he targeted is evil. He might not want to say so because his role is valuable, but he could get a PM out by D3. Also, the majority vote rule for killing an adjudicator lasts the entire game, not just the next cycle.

Vote count real quick, vote soon.

Gears(6): Xino, Venture, Matrim, Vapor, Mist, King
Lotus(2): TJ, Gears
Xino(1): Elkanah
 

 

 

[Ashbringer]

7 minutes ago, Mist said:

I think the penalty remains the whole game. However, getting 50% of people to vote isn't difficult. King Iadon can switch that role so it doesn't get NKed and the penalty doesn't come into play, and if that doesn't happen, the penalty isn't too onerous. 

1) 50% of people need to vote on the same person. Not 50% total. 

6 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

To be clear, the only bad results of Iadon switching Lotus's role with a random player and the elims proceeding to kill Lotus is if the switched player is the executive secretary, another village adjudicator, or the spy. If Iadon tries to switch Lotus and she dies a village adjudicator, Iadon knows there's a pretty good chance the other person he targeted is evil. He might not want to say so because his role is valuable, but he could get a PM out by D3. Also, the majority vote rule for killing an adjudicator lasts the entire game, not just the next cycle.

2) I think Iadon can swap the Adjudicator role to Elims. It's just he can't give the Elims a Village-only role (The Secretary or, as of before 10 minutes ago, Iadon himself).

And that would not be good.

... I wonder... what happens if Iadon hits an Actor? Could he swap his own role that way on accident? Or does he ignore the actor entirely?

 

Anyway. The majority has so ruled, Gears. @Gears, if you're on, your time is almost up.

Edit: ... Gears is asleep now, isn’t he.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Ashbringer

[Mist]

Quote

• • If an Adjudicator is killed by an attack then the lynch must have 50% or greater of players voting for a lynch to occur 

Quote

• • • 50% or more of all living players must vote on a single player for the lynch to occur

@Kynedath, which is it? Both are listed in the doc.

[Gears]

I have nothing to reveal that you will not learn upon my death. Do not trust Elkanah just because they are talkative. I will be surprised if Lotus survives the night. I hope that you receive useful insight upon my demise. Sidenote: After some thought, I have come to the realisation that claiming elim constantly may not be the best thing to do. In the future, I shall be considering different strategies, maybe even not claiming elim for once. I seek the general populace's thoughts on the strategy. What you like, what you dislike, whether you would lynch me on principle, whether it actually provides any benefit at all. [Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will view them with indulgence]

Farewell, my enemies. May your joys be fleeting and your sorrows be immeasurable. 

[Ookla-son-son-Ventyl]

Wow, I was busy today, definitely not just sleeping all day, and so much has happened. But after skimming through here and trying to read as much as possible I’ve come to the conclusion that voting Lotus is what I want. If they are an Adjudicator, we keep the majority vote rule out of their hands, which I think is a good thing. Because, if we don’t vote them out now, elims kill them and then they’ll be able to avoid the lynch easier in the coming cycles. Which, I don’t think we want. I’m also not saying that we shouldn’t kill Gears, I mean he claimed elim, so why wouldn’t we? But, I don’t think any sane elim would let him do this, but then again that gets into IKYK. They could know that we’d think that and go with it, but it’s unlikely.

So plan of action:

1) Lynch Lotus this cycle, keep possible Adjudicator penalty away from elims, and maybe, just maybe kill an elim. Though I don’t think Lotus is one.

2) Survive the night, of course.

3) Lynch Gears and get someone how has already claimed elim out of the way.

If people are wondering why I’m not supporting the Gears lynch now, it’s because I’d rather get rid of the possibility of us having to do the majority vote for every lynch later on. PMs are good yes, but I don’t think they are worth Elims escaping the lynch.

Ninja’d by Mist...

[Kynedath]

3 minutes ago, Mist said:

@Kynedath, which is it? Both are listed in the doc.

The first one one. 50% or greater of all living players must vote during the lynch for the lynch to occur. It does not have to be on the same player.

Thank you for catching that, I'll update the rules.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

12 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

1) 50% of people need to vote on the same person. Not 50% total.

2) I think Iadon can swap the Adjudicator role to Elims. It's just he can't give the Elims a Village-only role (The Secretary or, as of before 10 minutes ago, Iadon himself).

And that would not be good.

I think it's 50% of voters, so a 3-2-1 would succeed even with thirteen players tomorrow.

Ah, right. I made the same mistake in my last post.

I doubt elim!Gears would have gone for a village adjudicator so heavily, and I don't like that Gears is dying early again, but it looks like it's been decided. In case majority vote for PMs means more than 50% of living players votes for the same person, I'll put the eighth vote on Gears.

[+Lotus]

Minute tell rollover! See y’all on the other side!

[Kynedath]

Cycle is closed! Night 1 will be posted soon.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Kynedath

[Kynedath]

Night 1

Kadio fumed as the merchants closed around him. They suspected him for the letters he had dropped in the market square, his persecution of the judge, and his general defensiveness. All adequate reasons to be fair, but this was not how he wanted to die. He wanted to ravage the world as the disease had ravaged his body. He wanted to watch the merchants fall before him, diseases meaning nothing when revolution was nigh. He wanted so much more than this. This measly, insignificant death, simply a stepping stone on the path to greater things. Meaningless compared to what could have been. What should have been. 

"You filthy merchants," he snarled. He was the greatest of hypocrites, in the end.

---

Kadio was hung in a brand new gallows, everything went smoothly, the carpenter was pleased with his work.

---

Gears has died! They were a Loyal Merchant and a Trademaster!

• Gears (8): Xino, Venture, Matrim’s Dice, Vapor, Mist, Kings Way, Ashbringer, Devotary
• Lotus (3) TJ Shade, Gears, Ventyl
• Xino (1) Elkanah

@Gears Thanks for the RP!

 

There was a majority vote! A Conference has been invoked. The "create PM" action can now be taken during night turns. Assembly can now be triggered.

A Trademaster has died, the prices in the Item Market have been raised by 10%.

 

Item Market:

Spoiler

Item	Price
Noble Insignia	24
Trade rights	24
Embargo	39
Personal Messenger	17

Contract Market:

Spoiler

Contract	Price
Muder	100
Surveillance	65
Bodyguard	55
Identity theft	79

The night turn will end in ~24 hours, on Monday the 28th at 2000 MDT (0200 GMT)

 

Player list:

Spoiler

1. @xinoehp512 - Enjoys counting
2. Gears - Kadio, the ultra-capitalist Loyal Merchant Trademaster
3. @Mist - Tara Night, is their heart as dark as their last name?
4. @Ashbringer - Faleast, . . . bone collector?
5. @Matrim's Dice - Phialico, rhymes with calico
6. @Elkanah - Lenkai, the anithesis of the player
7. @Illwei - Akiia, big fan of onions and probably ogres (layers joke)
8. @Kings_way - Oreo, double aon = double cool
9. @Lord_Silberfarben - a man of two words
10. @Lotus - Sunwalker, quote: "horribly unlucky"
11. @Vapor - Taeon, hates most things (lik most 30-something year olds)
12. @Ventyl - Lafay Etteax, keeps dying and coming back to life!
13. @Butt Ad Venture - Lawrence Lokennake, Kleptomaniac? or Charlatan?
14. @TJ Shade - everyday working-man
15. @Devotary of Spontaneity - Serenken, establishment clause for the win!

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Kynedath

[Ookla-son-son-Ventyl]

Kynedath, uh, you spelled my character’s name wrong in the player list... it’s Lafay, not Layay. Though Layay is somewhat funnier... 

[Kynedath]

3 minutes ago, Ventyl said:

Kynedath, uh, you spelled my character’s name wrong in the player list... it’s Lafay, not Layay. Though Layay is somewhat funnier... 

Fixed! Thanks for catching that.

[Mat]

Sigh. The tag 'what did you expect to happen' seems appropriate here.

Gears... why. This strat has had a 100% you dying rate, and you continue it with a role that directly harms the village upon death?

Well. No point in complaining now that you're dead. But do consider a different strategy, please.

---

Anyway, if we don't trust the distribution enough to talk about suspicions during the night turns... what do we do?

[---]

1 minute ago, Matrim's Dice said:

Anyway, if we don't trust the distribution enough to talk about suspicions during the night turns... what do we do?

Talk about the distribution during the day turn?

RP?

Everyone do deep analysis of the people who voted and compile a 30 page report and PowerPoint to be shared tomorrow during the day cycle?