Mid-Range Game 10: Divided Loyalties

[Paranoid King he/him]

I've got finals this week, but I'll be finished with them by the beginning of turn 3. I won't be all that active during turns 1 and 2, but I will respond to some posts made so far.

 

"Slalassalas, I hear that you are a great swordsman and that you have defeated many Horneaters. That doesn't impress me. Fighting is not something to be proud of. Now perhaps if you were to best me at a mudbeer drinking contest then you would have my respect."

Woah, woah, woah. I never said I defeated them at swordplay, did I? I never even said I defeated any horneaters. I just stated that I defeated challengers, "all over the horneater peaks." I just challenged outsiders who didn't think they could beat a horneater.

 

(Bandwagon on stink and hellscythe)

Remember, guys, even though they may be suspicious, this is the first day. The purpose of the first day is to make as many people sweat as possible, so you can get their gut reaction. I don't know about you, but the only people I see sweating are those two. Let's spread around the joy, people!

I'll start: Feligon, you're probably evil! As such, we will lynch you!

[STINK he/him]

I can't defend myself well on a phone.

[Amanuensis he/him]

Adavantos making a list of what happened does seem very useful but I'm wondering why he only put in his input after he came under fire for the posting of his summary. Did he not have any opinions on the proceedings of the first fifty posts? I can understand that it takes time to type all of that information but after the time he spent summarizing the posts, a few comments would have been like nothing. His lack of opinion is slightly suspicious to me but at this time, I'm really not worried about it, though I do agree with Kipper, spoilers would be nice and Adavatos, you missed at least one vote if not more. Kipper voted for Sart.

I really don't want to lie about the reason why I didn't express my opinions prior to Sart and Bort calling me out, but I'm afraid I'll have to keep some details to myself. I will say this, however; my sitting back was a combination of many things, not limited to but including: a relatively hectic night at work (Note: it really doesn't take much effort to do these post summary's, so long as I keep up with it. If I have access to a computer and an email notification pops up saying someone posted, I grab the post's link real quick and jot down what I can, revisiting it later), me wanting to wait until I gathered enough substantial information so that I don't end up posting a dozen post summaries a turn, me wanting to observe how certain players reacted without my calling them out in case they might give up more information, and me trying to avoid another situation like LG15 where I gained a ton of trust D1 resulting in a very disadvantaged Eliminator team. Whereas last game I went for a more quantity over quality approach with most posts, this time I'm attempting the opposite. That, and I was curious to see who would be the ones to challenge me, as I actually gain a great deal of information from players when they implicate, ignore or defend me.

 

Also, you're right about me missing Kipper's vote. Allow me to fix that.

 

(1) Paranoid King: Clanky (1),

(0) Clanky: Arraenae (1),

(3) Stink: Hellscythe (1), Orlok (1), Twei (1)

(2) Hellscythe: Elbereth (1), phattmer (1), Mailliw (1), Tony (1),

(1) Orlok: Arraenae (1),

(1) Adavantos: Sart (1),

(1) Sart: Kipper (1),

(1) Feligon: Paranoid King (1),

(1) Mailliw: Adavantos (1),

 

EDIT: In the spirit of "spreading the joy," as PK put it, I suppose I will place the first vote on Mailliw, who I am personally most suspicious of at the time being for the reasons mentioned in my previous post. Really what I want to know, Mail, is an explanation for your original vote on Hellscythe (beyond you "liking your PMs") and more importantly your subsequent retraction. Also, what did you hope to gain from the fake Thaidakar reveal?

Edited December 15, 2015 by Adavantos

[little wilson she/her]

@GM's, in the rules it says the KR will be equally distributed between factions and stuff, but I was wondering if we could have a bit of a clarification on this. Does that mean that one faction will have each of the four Radiants and the other side will have the same except the Bondsmith will be replaced by one of the other 3? By which we can assume that there are at least 2 of each type of Radiant except Bondsmith?

 

Yes. I know the rules are vague on this, so I could let this go with Kas' troll, but I always intended for one faction to have all four Orders and the other faction to have an extra of one of the other three. If that wasn't always the plan, I'd leave you all wondering, but it was, so I think you should know.

 

 

Does the Elsecaller have to change both role and alignment?

 

No. They can choose one or the other if they want.

 

 

 

Can the Artifabrian take effects happening to the dead? 

 

No.

 

 

Also, a note about the MR7/elimination game within a faction game comments. MR7 was a faction game. While there was a hidden faction, they were not eliminators. This is clear by the fact that they had no team kill ability, which is inherent in eliminators. This game is not a pure faction game. Yes, there are factions and they (probably) cannot win together, but this game most definitely hinges around the Diagrammists. If the factions go for the faction war, even if one of them completely wipes out the other faction, they cannot win so long as there are Diagrammists still alive. This is an elimination game. You're perfectly welcome to team up and go pure elimination mode on the Diagrammists. It won't break the game. Just know that one of your teams will probably lose if that happens. Since it's also a faction game. But hey, one of them will win, too, so....it's all good, right?

[Clanky he/him]

I've got finals this week, but I'll be finished with them by the beginning of turn 3. I won't be all that active during turns 1 and 2, but I will respond to some posts made so far.

 

Woah, woah, woah. I never said I defeated them at swordplay, did I? I never even said I defeated any horneaters. I just stated that I defeated challengers, "all over the horneater peaks." I just challenged outsiders who didn't think they could beat a horneater.

 

 

"So does that mean that you accept my challenge for the mudbeer duel? I feel that it would be a greater challenge then any of your silly duels where you hit people with sticks"

 

Slalassalas

 

 

Yes. I know the rules are vague on this, so I could let this go with Kas' troll, but I always intended for one faction to have all four Orders and the other faction to have an extra of one of the other three. If that wasn't always the plan, I'd leave you all wondering, but it was, so I think you should know.

 

 

Does the Elsecaller have to change both role and alignment?

 

No. They can choose one or the other if they want.

 

 

 

So they can choose any role they want to give to the dead player?

 

 

 

lso, a note about the MR7/elimination game within a faction game comments. MR7 was a faction game. While there was a hidden faction, they were not eliminators. This is clear by the fact that they had no team kill ability, which is inherent in eliminators. This game is not a pure faction game. Yes, there are factions and they (probably) cannot win together, but this game most definitely hinges around the Diagrammists. If the factions go for the faction war, even if one of them completely wipes out the other faction, they cannot win so long as there are Diagrammists still alive. This is an elimination game. You're perfectly welcome to team up and go pure elimination mode on the Diagrammists. It won't break the game. Just know that one of your teams will probably lose if that happens. Since it's also a faction game. But hey, one of them will win, too, so....it's all good, right? 

 

Aside from the most important part of this post which I bolded for easy viewing I will say that I will be treating this game more as a typical factionless game. You can still win the primary (more important) win condition even if your team loses. That said if I find two people equally suspicious you might see me gravitate towards the non faction member of mine first.

[little wilson she/her]

You can still win the primary (more important) win condition even if your team loses.

 

Not exactly. In most games with secondary win cons, the secondary is listed that it's an additional win. Like bonus points. You need both win conditions in order to win this game. The only reason the faction-win con is secondary is because I didn't want people to think that this was more of a faction game than it was an elimination game. It's driven by the elimination aspect of it. Not the faction. That's the difference. But the faction game is a very relevant part of the win conditions and if you're on the side with less Radiants at the end of the game, you do lose.

[Amanuensis he/him]

Not exactly. In most games with secondary win cons, the secondary is listed that it's an additional win. Like bonus points. You need both win conditions in order to win this game. The only reason the faction-win con is secondary is because I didn't want people to think that this was more of a faction game than it was an elimination game. It's driven by the elimination aspect of it. Not the faction. That's the difference. But the faction game is a very relevant part of the win conditions and if you're on the side with less Radiants at the end of the game, you do lose.

 

This is precisely the clarification I needed. I had planned on focusing on the primary rather than the secondary regardless, but with this word of GM I think you should all realize now that it's best if we relentlessly pursue the Diagrammists until they're all killed before we turn on each other. That being said, I do want to win this game, so whether you're a Son of Honor or a Ghostblood I advise you keep it between you and your confirmed kin. I haven't bothered making a tree of who belongs to what faction based of the responses to Mail's false reveal yet, but I'm willing to bet that a few players have and that one side is at a severe advantage in that regard. That being said, I can somewhat agree with Clanky putting players he is both suspicious of and on the opposite faction as a priority, however fundamentally I think it's more important that we pursue the most solid leads rather than the one that's convenient for our side. Lastly, this is only a request and entirely up to you, but to my faction leader, I would like to have a private word with you sometime in the future if you deem it not too much of a risk contacting me.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Adavantos

[STINK he/him]

Really the only thing that might've changed with the announcement of the secondary actually mattering, is that the Radiants should really just never reveal, but otherwise it is a normal elimination game.

[Amanuensis he/him]

@Wilson/Kasimir: Because I just realized the links in my post summaries will be rendered null when you combine these cycles with the sign up thread, may I request that until the game is over you two simply lock these and keep them floating around on their own? That way each player can continue to navigate the MR with ease.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Adavantos

[Seonid he/him]

Aaaand I just finished my Arabic final and my brain is too shot to start on my final paper just yet, so I'll get started on the being useful earlier than I thought.

 

To my cursory read-through of the thread, there jump out at me 5 important events so far: Stink's public roleclaim, Hellscythe's vote on Stink, Venture Mistborn's public roleclaim (including the pronounced lack of reaction to it), Mailliw's information phishing, and the discussion about how to use the Veristatelian Scholars.

 

Both of the roleclaims have me thrown for a loop. The Eliminators have unhindered conversation in a doc - no rules about what cycles they can use it, or anything similar. The Village has the thread and very limited PMs. And we have two(!) players claiming to be a runner on the very first cycle of the game. We have no ways of guaranteeing protection, and we wouldn't offer guaranteed protection without confirming the role in any case. And with two claimants, coordinating protection would be difficult anyways without revealing protection roles in thread, and that's a recipe for village suicide.

 

So I don't get either roleclaim. The Eliminators have every reason to want PMs down. If they have unfettered communication and we have only the thread, we are at a severe disadvantage. No gathering trust groups, no private roleclaims, no discussing the results of VS or assassin scans. None of that happens without PMs. And anonymity is the best protection. Roleclaiming makes yourself a target for the eliminator kill, and almost guarantee that you will die sooner rather than later. A roleclaim just doesn't make sense.

 

At least, if it were true.

 

If it were false, on the other hand, you have drawn protection to yourself for a time. You rule yourself out as a target for the Cooks (because the Village had better not want to kill its own runners). Maybe you're gambling that it can last long enough...

 

Long enough for what?

 

If you're a Radiant, that type of claim might make sense. Kind of. Rule yourself out as a target for the Cook kill. Count on loads of protection against the Eliminator kill. Establish yourself as a supposedly neutral player in the faction war - at least one that the other faction isn't interested in killing. Disguise your importance behind importance of a different sort. That could be useful, perhaps especially for the Bondsmith. The Bondsmith can mimic a runner, after all.

 

Of course, this all makes sense for an Eliminator to claim as well. And it's a perfect setup for a Wounded Gazelle. Claim to be important. Get protection. Survive an attack. And if a WGG hadn't been tried (with a reasonable approximation of success) in LG15 - see Burnt Spaghetti - I'd say it had a reasonable chance of working here. I know my suspicions are up right now, and I'm not going to clear anyone who survives an Eliminator attack.

 

Having worked out these thoughts, Hellscythe's vote makes much more sense. Why would we want to lynch one of our runners? Because it's not likely that they'd have claimed like this if they were a real runner.

 

On the other hand, I could have missed something - reasoning that makes this make more sense, a pattern of trolling into which this would fit, etc. And that makes me hesitant to join the bandwagon on Stink. Because he is a known troll, and this might just fit his playstyle. And I don't want to lynch him if he really is a runner.

 

Venture Mistborn, on the other hand, has had almost no reaction to his roleclaim. It's been swallowed up be the reaction to Stink and the following bandwagon. I think he needs a little bit more scrutiny - some pressure. Why on earth did you publicly roleclaim like that, Venture?

 

I'm going to pass over Mailliw's information phishing in silence for now. It's Mailliw. This is what he does. Nobody who's played a game with him before should be surprised at this. I think I'm going to rule him out as either Bondsmith or Runner, though, because if he had PMs, I suspect he'd have run this project there instead of in-thread.

 

And now we come to the last bit - and possibly the most important. The discussion on how to use the Veristatelian Scholars. Most important because, unlike most games, we get exactly zero information out of a lynch. Nothing at all. Not without a scholar scan, and those can't even be trusted 100%. I like the plan of having one faction scan the lynch and the other scan the Eliminator kill. I'd like to propose an addendum - if one of those kills doesn't happen, the faction that was supposed to scan it should scan the Cook kill instead. If there are 3 kills, I have no suggestions on what to do.

 

My final thoughts are on lynching. Normally, I'm all for a first day lynch, or at least the idea of one. Without lynch pressure, we don't learn anything from discussion, and lynches normally give us a great deal of information (at least role and alignment). This game might be tempting to hold back on a day 1 lynch - just because we don't learn anything. Unfortunately, we can't afford this. We don't learn anything on a lynch, but our Scholars are absolutely useless without a pool of dead bodies to scan. So no matter how tempting it would be to play this differently, I think it is important to actually lynch this cycle, so that our scholars can start getting to work.

 

With that said, though, bandwagons are next to useless in any case, because they shut down discussion for almost a cycle. We need lynch discussion more now than we have in any game I've ever played in. So whatever you do, do it to try and get people talking!

[Kipper he/him]

 

...

Kipper: Off topic comment about Mace Windu being in the game. Quotes Adavantos’ post summaries post, asking for him to spoiler it due to its length. Taunts him in blue text about the use of blue text, claiming that since people seldom use it he didn’t think it necessary before running on about how much of a smart*** he is by being a smart***. Responds to Clanky’s last post, saying that both the information and knowing who gives out information is useful to the Diagrammists, as typically more important roles are more reluctant with giving out information. Off-topic comment directed at Alvron. Quotes Creccio’s question about how to find the Diagrammists and declares him a confirmed Diagrammist. Quotes Sart’s post where he votes against me, saying that he thinks voting for a player using bias as a reason is odd. Asks for him to point out examples of said bias as he does not see it. References that historically Adavantos has made posts just like this, and asks what he hopes to learn from my reaction. Asks for Sart to give an example of subject to discuss that is free of bias. Points out that in this post he doesn’t really contribute much either. Ends the post with a vote for Sart and a post script claiming he’s eager to see this post summary.

 

Ada, I really want you to value me for who I am as a person, rather than the things that I say.

 

 

 

 

As for Elbereth and Kipper coming to my defense, I am slightly suspicious of this. Last time I was an eliminator (QF10, not the short lived LG15a) I would intentionally come to a player who I know is innocent’s defense so that in the event that they are killed suspicion is drawn away from me and onto the player’s who voted for them (which often never contained one of my teammates) and so that if I ended up killed it would implicate that player as evil, wasting the town’s time trying to kill them while simultaneously making up for my loss. I am wary of Kipper in particular (and this isn’t just because I naturally can’t bring myself to trust him since LG14  ) because in every game we have been in together (apart from my first, MR8, or when we were evil together in LG15a) he has done the exact opposite of this; casting suspicion onto me early on instead. By process of elimination that brings me to the conclusion that either we are evil together (which I know is not true), that he knows I’m good because he is evil and is trying to get on my good side or accomplish one of the aforementioned tactics, or that he really is trying to play different than usual, which also can be construed as suspicious.

 

I think that we should have a distinction here between two different things, defense of you and attack of a third party. I did not defend you at all. I said, and I quote, "It's not untypical..." That is not a defense. I'm certainly not defending you right now. I think that these post summations are pretty useless, to be honest. They seem to be a good way to skate under the radar while providing bulk content to sift through (Note: I haven't decided completely how I feel about post summaries). What I was doing was attacking Sart's logic in voting for you.

In conclusion: I will never defend you, Adavantos. You killed my father.

 

 

@Wilson/Kasimir: Because I just realized the links in my post summaries will be rendered null when you combine these cycles with the sign up thread, may I request that until the game is over you two simply lock these and keep them floating around on their own? That way each player can continue to navigate the MR with ease.

 

I've asked this before, and got a resounding NO.

 

Edit: Is there an easy way to split quotes? I can't figure out how to get them to work well on desktop.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Kipper

[little wilson she/her]

@Wilson/Kasimir: Because I just realized the links in my post summaries will be rendered null when you combine these cycles with the sign up thread, may I request that until the game is over you two simply lock these and keep them floating around on their own? That way each player can continue to navigate the MR with ease.

 

No. If this was the only game going, that wouldn't be a problem, but it's not. LG15 is going right now, and once that's over, there will be the AG. Possibly another game starting before this game is over. The reason we merge threads is to keep the forum from getting cluttered, and adding 5-10 extra threads for the sole purpose of being able to navigate within one game better, when you can easily change the links in the sig once the thread is merged? Sorry, but no. The forum navigation is more important.

[Kipper he/him]

Is there an easy way to split quotes? I can't seem to get them to work well on desktop.

[STINK he/him]

Alright, time to weigh in with a long post Mostly responding to Seonid as I thought it was a good summary. 

 

Why did I public roleclaim? There are a few reasons:

 

1. Ignore all my actions in previous games, this is SeriousSTINK and not SillySTINK.

2. Arguably the most important thing is your role and faction. I no longer have that as private information. (Makes the game more fun)

3. My statement still stands, that all information I know will go public, unless asked to keep it private.

4. There were reactions to my reveal at the time, use that. 

5. Most people say that talking is what the eliminators don't want, and while that may be true. They also don't want public information.

 

My role wouldn't have mattered in my decision at all, but I happened to be a Runner, and I already know who I will make a PM with. 

 

Talking about Protection, this has turned into what everyone knows and loves. An 'I Know You Know', which for all new players is when someone might say or act in a way that implies ' The Eliminators will attack me' but with the Eliminators seeing that, they decide to go for someone else. Basically it's just lots of bluffing.

 

If I was a Radiant, then I would be quite contradictory, eh?

 

I won't talk about WGGs, as anything I say about them will either make people tunnel on me more or do nothing, so there really is no point.

 

My reaction to Venture at this point is to just wait, and that we should deal with suspicions one by one, where everyone can bring up information about that person and we can slowly form an opinion about that person, as we are (mostly) doing now, with STINK.

 

(As I was writing this 3 people replied to Seonid) 

[little wilson she/her]

Is there an easy way to split quotes? I can't seem to get them to work well on desktop.

 

Not that I'm aware of. I usually just cut the part that I don't want in one quote box and then create a new quote box and paste the cut bit in there. The new quote box won't have the perma-link to the original quote, but the first quote will. If you really want the perma-link, you could also just c/p the full quote multiple times and delete the parts that you don't want from each quote box.

[Amanuensis he/him]

I think that we should have a distinction here between two different things, defense of you and attack of a third party. I did not defend you at all. I said, and I quote, "It's not untypical..." That is not a defense. I'm certainly not defending you right now. I think that these post summations are pretty useless, to be honest. They seem to be a good way to skate under the radar while providing bulk content to sift through (Note: I haven't decided completely how I feel about post summaries). What I was doing was attacking Sart's logic in voting for you.

 

I can see that; just wanted to get that out of the way myself, so that just in case you turn out to be evil and you're trying to implicate me I can use calling you out as a defense. Thanks. In regards to my post summaries, I think it is extremely useful in the long term because a few turns down the line when we have a confirmed Diagrammist to analyze all players can easily sift through their posts for leads on other players, or in the case that someone is coming off suspicious they can gather evidence against them without spending all the time it takes to explore every page. This is especially important to me because if I die I'll have left a tool behind that can continue to aid my teammates. I also hope that someone will pick up the habit in my stead, so by doing this I provide a format for others to base it off of.

 

1. Ignore all my actions in previous games, this is SeriousSTINK and not SillySTINK.

2. Arguably the most important thing is your role and faction. I no longer have that as private information. (Makes the game more fun)

3. My statement still stands, that all information I know will go public, unless asked to keep it private.

4. There were reactions to my reveal at the time, use that. 

5. Most people say that talking is what the eliminators don't want, and while that may be true. They also don't want public information.

 

1. I can vouch that Stink claimed he would be playing this game seriously long before it's beginning, so his style change is not in relation to his alignment.

2. Role and Faction are the most important things about this game, and because I believe you will die very soon because of your reveal I do not think it has made the game more fun, especially for you.

3. I still think this is a terrible idea; will explain why shortly.

4. I will admit the reactions could be useful, but I believe there are more efficient ways to get people talking then screwing over your team (assuming you're not evil and telling the truth).

5. This is what I disagree with the most. Why would eliminators not want public information? That's exactly what I would want if I were evil. Whether or not they believe a Runner is worth attacking, they have an advantage. Personally I don't think in this game Runners are priority for the Diagrammists due to the severe limits on them. The issue now is they know you're not a Scholar and can ignore you to find whoever is. I like the odds of 4:30 better than 4:29 when it comes to them randomly choosing a target to kill (assuming there are 4 Scholars and 6 Diagrammists).

 

In regards to Venture, I'm just clueless, honestly. Every game I'm in with him he throws me off with his nonchalant behavior. Usually I just ignore him for that reason.

 

 

Since no one has posted one of these yet, this is the countdown until turnover. @Wilson/Kasimir, would you be so kindly to include these in future write ups? If not I'll try to post one immediately after, unless Kipper would like to claim them again.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Adavantos

[STINK he/him]

There is at least 7 Diagrammists, and I would personally say there would be 8 of them, but that is all. 

 

I am not screwing over my team.

If I die, then I guess the Eliminators want to control the PMs better.

 

I think we should talk about Venture more, but later as we still have over 21 hours to discuss who else is suspicious of who.

[Seonid he/him]

Nothing more to say yet, really, other than a few housekeeping items.

 

Alvron, care to fill me in as to why Sheon Idris ended up on a kill list?

 

Also, since the player list description of Sheon seems confused as to why he's here. The former king of Arelon worldhopped to Roshar, almost got murdered by the Diagrammists, turned out to be Hoid, almost got murdered by the Shardic coalition, and ran away to the ends of the Cosmere to hide, and then came back to get revenge on the Diagram. See? Simple.

[Araris Valerian he/him]

Well, wow. There is a lot of stuff going on, and maybe I should have posted earlier. The thing that stands out to me the most is Mailliw. Again, I am a bit low on time, but his fake position claim made me feel pretty uncomfortable.

 

Also, Ada, blue text is specifically reserved for OOG (out of game) discussion. My post about a lack of focus was relevant to the game, and thus I put it in black text. I think that IRL circumstances are something that it is not cool to be dishonest about in these sorts of games, and I will always be perfectly honest about IRL excuses.

[Arrae]

Here is what I have so far:

 

STINK claims to be a sons of honor runner regular. So far, he has the most votes but has done nothing to subdue his assailants or defend his actions. His responses would lead me to believe that he was being smug, but that would lead to no clear advantage. Alternatively, he could be trying to appeal to the surgeons and edgedancers as well as gain our trust by showing how useful he could potentially be.

 

Hellscythe attacked STINK for his reveal, taking a ton of mistrust from the rest of the players. Some later realized that what Hellscythe was doing was only natural but others still don't believe that Hellscythe was doing anything for the factions. What triggers alarms for me is that Hellscythe accused STINK without validating their reasons why. A half-hearted remark about the possibility of STINK being a diagrammist is all that we got. Later, Hellscythe used statistical information recently discovered to justify her attack. I am thinking that Hellscythe either has information that we don't (not too likely seeing as it's the first cycle) or else they have some ulterior motive like trying to direct suspicion to themselves.

 

Mailliw posted a supposed list of the faction members that some of the players, I'm not quite sure how many, found false. He later confessed that he was not the Thaidakar and he was just looking for information. He now knows the factions of many of the players from their responses. This seems like something anyone would do, given the experience to pull it off, therefore, I can;t really pull that much from his motives.

 

Arraenae's vote on Orlok was mostly based on the post he made regarding STINK and his alleged advice to new players. Because Orlok mistrusted STINK, Arraenae takes it as Orlok trying to sabotage the new players and the rest of the players with them. Orlok distrusts (and therefore voted for) STINK because he thinks that the advice given by STINK sounds like what a diagrammist would say to the new players. My take on this is that Both of them could be covering their  Diagrammist ties with posts that are good in the beginning when they know that it won't make a difference that cycle.

 

Adavantos making a list of what happened does seem very useful but I'm wondering why he only put in his input after he came under fire for the posting of his summary. Did he not have any opinions on the proceedings of the first fifty posts? I can understand that it takes time to type all of that information but after the time he spent summarizing the posts, a few comments would have been like nothing. His lack of opinion is slightly suspicious to me but at this time, I'm really not worried about it, though I do agree with Kipper, spoilers would be nice and Adavatos, you missed at least one vote if not more. Kipper voted for Sart.

 

Sart voted for Adavantos because he knew that he has had experience playing this game, and he thought that the summarization posts were going to be inaccurate and biased. None of the reasons he listed were realistic at that point. Adavantos had done nothing blatantly dangerous and his summaries were accurate representations of the posts at that time. This makes me think that Sart was trying to bring attention to Adavantos for false reasons to get him to say something damning in front of everyone. Since Adavantos is an experienced player, I think that Sart either wants to take him out for malicious reasons or he has reason to believe that Adavantos is a Diagrammist.

 

Venture Mistborn has also claimed to be a runner, but this time a captain. Nobody has really reacted at all, never mind incredibly strongly, so I'm going to take this claim with a grain of salt. I don't see why he would claim it this far into the game when there is already a runner out there near the very start of the game. If he waited that long, then I don't know why he didn't keep it a secret for longer to keep an edge against others. Venture, if you have an answer, then please feel free to tell me.

 

With all of this information, I still feel none of it convinces me. at this point I think I'll stay neutral.

 

It's always better to slap around a few votes to see what people say in defense than to not vote for anybody. If people say something to convince you, you can always retract your vote. Besides, people say interesting things when they have lynch pressure on them.

 

Your post proves that you've looked over things and analyzed them, so I think it's suspicious that you haven't voted for anyone yet. You call out several people (including me) but you don't want to vote for any of them?

 

I'm retracting my vote on Orlok and putting it on Kynedath.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Arraenae

[Kynedath]

It's always better to slap around a few votes to see what people say in defense than to not vote for anybody. If people say something to convince you, you can always retract your vote. Besides, people say interesting things when they have lynch pressure on them.

 

Your post proves that you've looked over things and analyzed them, so I think it's suspicious that you haven't voted for anyone yet. You call out several people (including me) but you don't want to vote for any of them?

 

I'm retracting my vote on Orlok and putting it on Kynedath.

I see your point, and I agree that under normal circumstances that this would probably be unusual. However since this is my first game, I really don't want to piss anybody off. I am trying real hard to be as careful as I can and gather as much information as I can before I make any rash decisions.

[STINK he/him]

Don't worry about annoying anyone, we all know it's an internet game and that if you get a vote, there is always the chance to defend yourself. 

 

If everyone worried about that, then I wouldn't have a few votes on myself

Edited December 14, 2015 by IrulelikeSTINK

[Arrae]

Don't worry too much about offending people here. This is, after all, a game about lying and deceit, and a little vote on somebody isn't the worst thing that people can do to each other here. 

[Kynedath]

Gah . . . The pressure! I'll hold off until next Cycle. I still feel like I need more info on all of you before I make a judgement.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Kynedath

[DeathClutch19 he/him]

Sorry i haven't posted yet as finals week is bearing down on me and I've been busy studying.

 

Now i would like to vote on Adavantos, your reasons for voting on Mailliw are I feel very suspect. The reason he voted

for Hellscythe is pretty simple to see and while the retraction was random it does not seem that suspicious to me. And his claim of Thaidakar was clearly to get information on the factions, also I agree that this move would not be advised by his teammates if he was indeed evil.

I feel like there is more behind your vote.