Long Game 16: The Empty Throne Part 2: The Catacombs

[Mark IV]

Sorry, did not see your first post. Considering how early in the turn we discussed your scan, however, I'm going to go ahead and assume that's just an excuse.

I see your point, and unfortunately, your reluctant to believe what is true is understandable.

However, I do not lie about RL reasons. I fell asleep last night and the thought to send in the order never entered my head. I've put this in blue because I've heard people don't lie in blue text.

Nevertheless, I will not abuse the color. So, what follows will be in black.

I was also contacted by two people other than yourself. The first one I turned down, but the second, I was a bit hesitant to do so with. I will disclose their names only if they wish me to, or if they come out personally in the thread.

Proof enough?

Also, no reply to the rest of my post?

EDIT: Oh wait. HS is dead. He was the second person who contacted me.

EDIT 2: Yay! I'm an ardent. Unfortunately, that means I have no property anymore.

Edited January 24, 2016 by Mark IV

[Araris Valerian]

Wow, phatt... I guess you were right cycle one about Shallan haha.

 

My thoughts on this whole thing are still somewhat half-formed, but I'll see what I can come up with. I would like to put it out there that I think the easiest solution to this all is a Mirror/Performer. I am a little confused by how much information has been made public this game, and also by how some things are consistent but others aren't. So both Meta and Kipper are claimed Beggars, and they claim innocent. In both cases a snitch note picks them as Beggars, but evil. So if there is an evil beggar, it seems quite easy to explain that both players being scanned got redirected to the same Evil Beggar by a Mirror/Performer. With the eliminators being able to coordinate their items it is likely that they were able to assemble something by now, so this doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to me.

 

But, basically, there is a good reason not to do a follow the cop type of thing in this game, because of blindness and liars and mirrors and any hidden roles we haven't accounted for. That being said, anything gained from info roles is still useful. Lets see:

 

Assumption 1: Shallan is a non Blind Snitch that targetted Kipper and sent the note to Phatt.

This is fairly reasonable, since people talked about scanning Kipper last cycle

 

Assumption 2: That note read Beggar.

This also seems somewhat likely since Kipper admitted he is a beggar

 

Assumption(s) 3: Kipper is a Beggar, Kipper is a Beggar with CL, or we have interference by Mirror/Street Performer

This doesn't really say much new except that it discounts hidden roles.

 

I don't know quite how the redirection roles work, but I assume that they override blindness in this post.

 

I really don't know what to think of Kipper. I am leaning a bit toward his guilt right now based off how he reacted to Meta's "reveal" last cycle, but I also want to watch discussion a bit more. I will note that I am not going to search this cycle, so my vote is going to count.

 

I'm actually going to vote for Ada for now. I don't like how you disregarded what Mark said about missing the turnover. I did something very similar (missing the turnover), and find it in pretty bad taste to lie about inactivity and IRL sorts of things, partly because I give those sorts of excuses every other game or so. And I'll be back tomorrow to give some more input on the situation.

Edited January 24, 2016 by Araris Valerian

[twelfthrootoftwo]

Let me get this straight. You don't think it's strange when someone who has previously been strongly defending themselves just "gives up" and says "vote me, I'm a Traitor?" That doesn't seem strange to you at all?

Nope. Let's draw a picture:

• There is a reveal about Player A (an Eliminator) in thread
• The reveal seems to indicate Player A is an Eliminator, but could be the result of multiple effects
• Discussion ensues. Player A heavily defends themselves.
• Thread decides that knowing Player A's alignment is valuable, whatever the results, and goes for a lynch
• Player A has no reason to give that they shouldn't die

Player A has two options: repeat their old defences, which have been taken into account in the decision to lynch, possibly keeping thread discussion running. Or reveal, end the discussion, and (not so much for Meta and the like, but it still applies for others) defuse the tension that's built up over the cycle and act as a reminder that we're all playing a game for fun.

 

I can think of at least one example of this happening before, in a rather similar situation. (Kynedath, you might be surprised ) Now, there was something strange about the 'reveal' this time, but it was that there was no fun in it, not that it happened at all. Kipper

[Kipper]

However, as it was stated earlier, that is very unlikely, which is why Meta was lynched. The allegedly blind snitch would have had to have not only failed his blind check, but also the evil beggar would have had to be picked randomly out of eighteen people.

On the other hand, if you were evil, then the note could have been correct, and have read "Loyal Beggar". For this to be true, you would have to be evil, and the allegedly blind snitch would have had to succeed in his blind check.

So you think that if I was an evil Beggar, I would intentionally out a Note that said "someone else is a Beggar?" That makes absolutely no sense. Why the heck would I not change the role? You still haven't explained that to me. You're calling me an Eliminator, yet you have no plausible reasons as to why I would have done what I did, except for "Oh, you just did it so you could make this argument now."

Outcome 1: Kipper is evil

He would have lied about the snitch note, so it does not depend on the blindness of the snitch.

The snitch note that says he is evil is correct. There must have been no Mirror or Street Performer, which would be extremely unlikely given that the user would have had to target Kipper and happened to randomly redirect the action to the evil beggar. It is possible that a traitor did this, but since they had no idea Kipper would be scanned, it would have been almost entirely random.

False. If I were Evil, what with the connections I have (Ada, yourself), it would be almost certain that I was Scanned tonight, given my involvement in the Meta Fiasco. But that's largely irrelevant.

Outcome 2: Kipper is town

He received a note saying Meta was an evil beggar. The snitch must have failed his blind check, and randomly selected an evil beggar as his target. (1/2 x 1/36)

The snitch note that said he was evil is false. Since the snitch isn't blind, there must have been a redirect to the evil beggar, and since nobody knew that Kipper was going to be scanned, that is so unlikely as to be able to be completely disregarded.

The first part is correct. Also the Snitch Note is correct. But here's the thing. You're willing to accept in this scenario the probability of my Note being wrong. But then you are completely unwilling to accept the probability of a mistake happening with your Note. Why?

"It would make absolutely zero sense for an Eliminator to do what you are saying I did."

Please explain why.

As I've said over and over, if I were a Traitor Beggar, it would make no sense for me to

A. Get someone lynched based off of a Note that said they were a Beggar.

B. Kill the only other person who claimed Beggar publicly, to put more suspicion on me.

A. They've been scanned by a confirmed good snitch.

B. I believe Ada scanned me last night. At least he was supposed to.

C. The odds are so low that this happened that I'm disregarding it. You didn't claim that you have a Mirror or are a Street Performer, and so someone else would have had to do it.

A. No, you're assuming that the Snitch is good, based on a third-hand Note from someone you apparently suspect as an Eliminator (me), after we've seen that Notes can be flawed. If I'm willing to "lie" about Meta's Note, why wouldn't I lie about a Note that was on an Evil Snitch? Have you even considered that if I'm an Eliminator, I could have lied about that Note too? What motivation would I have to out an evil teammate to Adavantos? Seriously, you haven't even considered this possibility. You're basing your whole argument on a Note from a Snitch that you trust implicitly because me, the person you suspect to be an Eliminator, said that they were good. That seems illogical in the extreme. Does anyone else see that? Your entire argument for me being an Eliminator is predicated on the word of a Snitch that could in fact be evil. It's fine, though, you can just "disregard the odds," because you can arbitrarily say that they are too low. Note: This is not intended to say "I'm an Eliminator;" just to point out that your argument against is relying on a Snitch that was claimed to be good by me.

B. Alright. You do realize that if Meta was really a Living Legend, Ada would have been roleblocked?

C. Right, so you just "disregard odds" whenever you feel like it. And yes, if the Eliminators wanted to Frame me, it wouldn't be hard to do that, based on my visibility in thread, and others.

A few people in a doc, perhaps? That is why you joined almost right away, so that you could be in the trusted group and gain control of devices.

I didn't join. You put me in a "Trust Group" PM by yourself. Completely by yourself, in fact, then you added more uncleared people later. I did not say anything about it or ask to join, and personally, it seems suspicious that you made a "Trust Group" PM before you could possibly trust any of the members. Same thing for the "Conglomerate" PM. You had no reason to trust any of the people in it, yet you still added them.

Finally, you keep on saying that it doesn't make sense for an Eliminator to do what you did. I don't care about whether it makes sense, I care about whether it is more likely that a Villager or an Eliminator did what you did. It is much more likely that the preceding things would have happened if you are an Eliminator. QED.

Obviously you don't care, and even after multiple posts from me, you still refuse to understand that if I were a Beggar, I would not have intentionally killed off other Beggars after claiming to Ada.

Well, since Kipper already knows this, I'll come out and say that I'm the Snitch who scanned Kipper. I'm not blind.

Why the heck would you out yourself as a Snitch? o.O

The way that I see it, there are three different play styles in SE, newcomers, experts and fumblers/flailers. I can fit most people into one of these categories, myself being a fumbler. Meta was clearly a veteran and an expert. To the (limited) extent of my knowledge, an expert eliminator would not just give in to accusations without fighting with everything that they had in their arsenal. True, Meta did argue his innocence, but that resignation in the tone of his posts wasn't what I think is characteristic from a veteran eliminator. Even more so when he gave up and "admitted" to being an eliminator. Kipper right now, he is fighting. He wants to live almost too much. I don't think that I am going to vote for him in this post, since I want to analyze his posts more and I have to go and do stuff, but I probably will later unless I find something fishy about this.

Exactly my thoughts. Except for "wants to live almost too much." What? Look through my history. Not only is it impossible to want to live "too much," but I've always done this. Whenever I'm up for a lynch, or suspected of something, I fight back. For example, you can go to my profile, open the Awards spoiler, go the the Tunnel, and see how hard I fought there. I don't like to die, especially by a lynch. If someone Assassinates me; that's relatively okay, but lynches are not for me.

Nope. Let's draw a picture:

• There is a reveal about Player A (an Eliminator) in thread
• The reveal seems to indicate Player A is an Eliminator, but could be the result of multiple effects
• Discussion ensues. Player A heavily defends themselves.
• Thread decides that knowing Player A's alignment is valuable, whatever the results, and goes for a lynch
• Player A has no reason to give that they shouldn't die

Player A has two options: repeat their old defences, which have been taken into account in the decision to lynch, possibly keeping thread discussion running. Or reveal, end the discussion, and (not so much for Meta and the like, but it still applies for others) defuse the tension that's built up over the cycle and act as a reminder that we're all playing a game for fun.

I can think of at least one example of this happening before, in a rather similar situation. (Kynedath, you might be surprised ) Now, there was something strange about the 'reveal' this time, but it was that there was no fun in it, not that it happened at all. Kipper

Yes. Good points, and that's probably one of the reasons why the "reveal" seemed so off to me. I would have expected him to be more flamboyant about it if he was genuinely an Eliminator.

TL;DR

Basically phatt's entire case against me is predicated on the word of a Snitch he presumes to be good.

Why does he presume this Snitch to be good? Because I said so. So he's wanting to lynch me, presuming the infallibility of the Snitch, when if I were evil, and if the Snitch is evil and trying to bus me, I could have just lied about the Snitch's alignment.

Also, he's completely dismissing the possibility of me being a Compulsive Liar, as well as basically any odds or probabilities that don't fit his narrative.

Edited for grammar and also to say that Mailliw (below) ninja'd me due to mod-queue.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Kipper

[Mailliw73]

I'm actually going to vote for Ada for now. I don't like how you disregarded what Mark said about missing the turnover. I did something very similar (missing the turnover), and find it in pretty bad taste to lie about inactivity and IRL sorts of things, partly because I give those sorts of excuses every other game or so. And I'll be back tomorrow to give some more input on the situation.

Ada. I'm also not of the opinion that you're good yet. Something has felt off to me about you the past couple days. 

 

All through the night turn, I was convinced Kipper was evil. Then I went back over the previous day, and started to think he wasn't. Then I got to the bit following Meta's 'reveal', and changed my mind again. Now this? I don't know what to think. But one thing I am fairly certain of is that Phatt's Snitch does exist, due to the argument over side roles in Snitch notes last cycle.

 

Kipper (and Kynedath to a lesser extent): please explain what was strange about Meta's 'reveal'?

The fact that he argued it, and then vaguely claimed, and then full on claimed. It felt false to me in the same way that both Stink and Wyrm being evil Tineyes in the AG felt off to me. Meta was willing to take that first Spartan death and it was quite the way to go. I hope a beggar may have found HS's killer, after they were forced not to use anyone who voted for Meta. 

[phattemer]

Kipper, please explain how a snitch being possibly evil makes their notes false. Pro tip: it doesn't.

I can't reply to the rest of your points right now, but I will.

[Kipper]

Kipper, please explain how a snitch being possibly evil makes their notes false. Pro tip: it doesn't.

I can't reply to the rest of your points right now, but I will.

I didn't say that. I was attempting to imply that if the Snitch is evil, and the Eliminators have a redirect ability, it wouldn't be hard to Frame me.

Edit: Has everybody just given up on this Day?

Edited January 25, 2016 by Kipper

[twelfthrootoftwo]

After some thought, I can't quite make sense of Kipper claiming Beggar to Ada on the first night and then killing HS. I also can't see trying a play such as lying to get Meta lynched without a way to disrupt the Snitch scans. For the moment, I'll run with the idea that Kipper's note got Meta's role correct by accident. Kipper. If that's the case, Mark is likely an Eliminator, for explicitly telling Kipper to reveal the note's contents.

[Kynedath]

Alright, I guess I have to make a decision now.

 

After looking over most of their posts, I think that you are both suspicious.

 

Kipper, I feel as though you are one of the most suspicious players here. You made the initial announcement that Meta was an "evil" beggar, making it fairly likely that you were trying to get him mislynched. It would be very beneficial for the eliminators to kill an info role and a veteran player like Meta, making the incentive high. But I am not convinced that an eliminator would stick their head out like that (besides Ada in MR10). I don't want you to go unchecked, so I will be keeping my eye on you if I can, and you are most absolutely still suspicious.

 

The thing is, I feel like Ada is a slight bit more suspicious. He has been attacking both of the alleged traitors, which I think is one of the best ways to get people mislynched. Make people suspicious of one of their own and they will most likely attack them. It would be great for the eliminators to kill one of us because they gave some false information. That would shift suspicion off of you fairly easily. Have a fall guy create the initial mislynch and then turn to kill him. There are a few ways that Kipper might have been misscanned, so I am less suspicious of Shallan than you, and that also means that it could be the exact same thing that happened as with Meta.

 

At this point . . . I think that I have to say . . . Ada

[Amanuensis]

Adavantos.

When the Mortician scans my corpse, I hope they'll figure out who the Traitor is who attacked me. It is very likely he is voting for me now with hopes of covering it up. I just hope when you see the list you'll figure out who the body guard is who protected me. Once you see the whole list it should be obvious (and no it's not Kipper or Stink). Just make sure to keep it a secret, because if you don't they will likely die soon after. I'd give you a hint but I don't want to compromise their identity. Thank you and good luck village.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Adavantos

[Kipper]

Alright, I guess I have to make a decision now.

 

After looking over most of their posts, I think that you are both suspicious.

 

Kipper, I feel as though you are one of the most suspicious players here. You made the initial announcement that Meta was an "evil" beggar, making it fairly likely that you were trying to get him mislynched. It would be very beneficial for the eliminators to kill an info role and a veteran player like Meta, making the incentive high. But I am not convinced that an eliminator would stick their head out like that (besides Ada in MR10). I don't want you to go unchecked, so I will be keeping my eye on you if I can, and you are most absolutely still suspicious.

Yes of course the incentive to get Meta killed is high. That's rather obvious. Doesn't mean I have to be an Eliminator. But I've been over and over me outting the Note; don't think there's much else to say.

 

The thing is, I feel like Ada is a slight bit more suspicious. He has been attacking both of the alleged traitors, which I think is one of the best ways to get people mislynched. Make people suspicious of one of their own and they will most likely attack them. It would be great for the eliminators to kill one of us because they gave some false information. That would shift suspicion off of you fairly easily. Have a fall guy create the initial mislynch and then turn to kill him. There are a few ways that Kipper might have been misscanned, so I am less suspicious of Shallan than you, and that also means that it could be the exact same thing that happened as with Meta.

 

At this point . . . I think that I have to say . . . Ada

This analysis is iffy to be solely based on the post where Ada said something like, "I didn't know that a Bodyguard was going to protect me, so I'm glad they did." Why would he be worried about getting protection if he was an Eliminator? That doesn't make sense, especially given him outing it to the thread.

Anyway, I strongly believe that phattemer is a much better lynch right now.

 

Edit for grammar

Edited January 25, 2016 by Kipper

[phattemer]

...you guys are aware that I got a note yesterday confirming Ada as a village snitch, right?

Any Assassins, please focus on people who have voted for Ada.

[Clanky]

Sorry for missing the last while I was out of town for the weekend and had a big lab report due today. I should be good for a while now though. 

After some thought, I can't quite make sense of Kipper claiming Beggar to Ada on the first night and then killing HS. I also can't see trying a play such as lying to get Meta lynched without a way to disrupt the Snitch scans. For the moment, I'll run with the idea that Kipper's note got Meta's role correct by accident. Kipper. If that's the case, Mark is likely an Eliminator, for explicitly telling Kipper to reveal the note's contents.

I'm not really sure that I understand the logic here. Is it that Mark is an eliminator and they had a plan to redirect the scan? So Mark isn't actually blind then he is just saying that so we don't learn that the traitors have a way of easily redirecting scans? This then makes kipper good since you don't think that they would work together on a plan like that if they were eliminators? Or because you think they used the same ploy on Kipper? Cause it wasn't mark who scanned kipper (unless Shallan is also a traitor). 

[Araris Valerian]

Adavantos. First of all, I did not see that you made such a claim, phatt. I'm interested why you haven't brought that up earlier, since before your previous post Mailliw and I had voted for Ada. I was also hoping that possibly someone else would have a good reason to vote for Ada. I was out of time at the moment and his reaction to Mark's posts seemed like a decent reason for me to go place a vote. I should be back toward the end of the cycle to place my final vote.

[phattemer]

You must have missed when I said it yesterday.

 

So you think that if I was an evil Beggar, I would intentionally out a Note that said "someone else is a Beggar?" That makes absolutely no sense. Why the heck would I not change the role? You still haven't explained that to me. You're calling me an Eliminator, yet you have no plausible reasons as to why I would have done what I did, except for "Oh, you just did it so you could make this argument now."

False. If I were Evil, what with the connections I have (Ada, yourself), it would be almost certain that I was Scanned tonight, given my involvement in the Meta Fiasco. But that's largely irrelevant.

The first part is correct. Also the Snitch Note is correct. But here's the thing. You're willing to accept in this scenario the probability of my Note being wrong. But then you are completely unwilling to accept the probability of a mistake happening with your Note. Why?

As I've said over and over, if I were a Traitor Beggar, it would make no sense for me to
A. Get someone lynched based off of a Note that said they were a Beggar.
B. Kill the only other person who claimed Beggar publicly, to put more suspicion on me.

A. No, you're assuming that the Snitch is good, based on a third-hand Note from someone you apparently suspect as an Eliminator (me), after we've seen that Notes can be flawed. If I'm willing to "lie" about Meta's Note, why wouldn't I lie about a Note that was on an Evil Snitch? Have you even considered that if I'm an Eliminator, I could have lied about that Note too? What motivation would I have to out an evil teammate to Adavantos? Seriously, you haven't even considered this possibility. You're basing your whole argument on a Note from a Snitch that you trust implicitly because me, the person you suspect to be an Eliminator, said that they were good. That seems illogical in the extreme. Does anyone else see that? Your entire argument for me being an Eliminator is predicated on the word of a Snitch that could in fact be evil. It's fine, though, you can just "disregard the odds," because you can arbitrarily say that they are too low. Note: This is not intended to say "I'm an Eliminator;" just to point out that your argument against is relying on a Snitch that was claimed to be good by me.
B. Alright. You do realize that if Meta was really a Living Legend, Ada would have been roleblocked?
C. Right, so you just "disregard odds" whenever you feel like it. And yes, if the Eliminators wanted to Frame me, it wouldn't be hard to do that, based on my visibility in thread, and others.

I didn't join. You put me in a "Trust Group" PM by yourself. Completely by yourself, in fact, then you added more uncleared people later. I did not say anything about it or ask to join, and personally, it seems suspicious that you made a "Trust Group" PM before you could possibly trust any of the members. Same thing for the "Conglomerate" PM. You had no reason to trust any of the people in it, yet you still added them.

Obviously you don't care, and even after multiple posts from me, you still refuse to understand that if I were a Beggar, I would not have intentionally killed off other Beggars after claiming to Ada.
Why the heck would you out yourself as a Snitch? o.O

Exactly my thoughts. Except for "wants to live almost too much." What? Look through my history. Not only is it impossible to want to live "too much," but I've always done this. Whenever I'm up for a lynch, or suspected of something, I fight back. For example, you can go to my profile, open the Awards spoiler, go the the Tunnel, and see how hard I fought there. I don't like to die, especially by a lynch. If someone Assassinates me; that's relatively okay, but lynches are not for me.
Yes. Good points, and that's probably one of the reasons why the "reveal" seemed so off to me. I would have expected him to be more flamboyant about it if he was genuinely an Eliminator.


TL;DR
Basically phatt's entire case against me is predicated on the word of a Snitch he presumes to be good.
Why does he presume this Snitch to be good? Because I said so. So he's wanting to lynch me, presuming the infallibility of the Snitch, when if I were evil, and if the Snitch is evil and trying to bus me, I could have just lied about the Snitch's alignment.
Also, he's completely dismissing the possibility of me being a Compulsive Liar, as well as basically any odds or probabilities that don't fit his narrative.

Edited for grammar and also to say that Mailliw (below) ninja'd me due to mod-queue.

Just a few responses:

Meta was a Legend. I would know because I spent the night weeping over him and was unable to perform any actions.

I can't go into why the snitch is good. Sorry. Feel free to use that as a counter-argument.

The odds that I'm disregarding is that a redirect happened to hit the Eliminator Beggar. It's also extremely unlikely that Mark both failed his blind check (1/2) and hit the evil beggar by accident (1/18) (combined 1/36, and if that is what happened, I am fine with being wrong), which is why I think that the note showed Meta's correct role and you lied about it.

In re to the killling-off-other-beggars argument. You couldn't have done anything else the first day, because the snitch (Mark) would know that you weren't going after the same person. I don't know why you wanted to do that lynch, but Meta was your only choice. I believe your second point is that the Eliminator killed Hellscythe, who was a beggar. I think he was public at that point, so it wasn't random. I think that the Eliminators did that to set up an IKYK that you wouldn't get other beggars killed off. Alternatively, they just had to ignore the risk of your death and get rid of a information role, and they thought the snitches would be protected.

(Also, we broke Alv's phone. Sorry Alv.)

(And hello Rabbit Hole. Hope to see you in the next game)

[Mark IV]

After some thought, I can't quite make sense of Kipper claiming Beggar to Ada on the first night and then killing HS. I also can't see trying a play such as lying to get Meta lynched without a way to disrupt the Snitch scans. For the moment, I'll run with the idea that Kipper's note got Meta's role correct by accident. Kipper. If that's the case, Mark is likely an Eliminator, for explicitly telling Kipper to reveal the note's contents.

Okay....

Let's say I was an eliminator for a second. In that case, wouldn't I have sent it to one of my own team, rather than risking any mistakes. But, your logic say that Kipper is not evil. Hence, why would I send the scan to him?

Also, I told Kipper to out the result because how else would I be sure he got it, and he could have kept it hidden and said someone else got it. So, an early confirmation ruled out those theories. So, I'm not as suspicious of Kipper.

This may be the last time I get on before turnover.

[Araris Valerian]

I'm gonna finalize my vote on Kipper, mostly because I find his reaction to Meta's reveal to be more incriminating than anything any other player has done. I am not sure what the tally will come out to, but I think that we did a bad job of getting locked into a single mindset and not discussing much outside the results of our info roles. While they are important, the amount of misdirection that can happen this game means that we also need to look at how discussion is occurring, and I think that I and others did a poor job of that this cycle.

[Kipper]

I'm gonna finalize my vote on Kipper, mostly because I find his reaction to Meta's reveal to be more incriminating than anything any other player has done. I am not sure what the tally will come out to, but I think that we did a bad job of getting locked into a single mindset and not discussing much outside the results of our info roles. While they are important, the amount of misdirection that can happen this game means that we also need to look at how discussion is occurring, and I think that I and others did a poor job of that this cycle.

A. He defended himself well, and rightly pointed out that there could have been interference.

B. I was going to Search, so my vote wouldn't have counted anyway.

To be honest, it's more than a little surprising that none of the more experienced players except for Mailliw thought anything was weird about that reveal.

Anyway, I'll be retracting phattemer and voting for Adavantos, because

A. He wants to die.

B. I don't want to die.

C. Hopefully Rookies have taken his advice and chosen him as their Mentor, so we won't have a huge loss.

D. I don't want to die. You people forced this on me.

[Alvron]

And that's time.  Write up coming shortly.  Want to make sure I get everything correct this time.

[Alvron]

Night Three: Blind mans bluff

Michael Durbin (Adavantos) was lynched.  He was a Blind Snitch and Mentor.
Avis' (Hellscythe) body has gone missing.

Night Three has begun and PMs are open again.

Vote Tally:
Michael Durbin (Adavantos) (4) : Milton/Altermind (Maill), Drake Pierce (Kynedath), Michael Durbin (Adavantos), Krippe the Krippling (Kipper)
Krippe the Krippling (Kipper) (2) : Allen (Araris Valerian), Citona Vinid (Shallan), Exisa (phattemer)
Marr (Mark VI) (0) : Theresa (twelfthrootoftwo)

Edited June 2, 2017 by Alvron

[phattemer]

*cough cough* told you so *cough cough*

Any village assassins out there, I'd appreciate it if you'd target Kipper or those who voted for Adavantos, like I said earlier.

[Kipper]

Well hopefully Rookies targeted him.

Village Assassins, I would appreciate it if you targeted phattemer. He's my main suspicion right now, due to the sheer illogic of his claims and dismissal of my logical arguments. I'm starting to suspect that Shallan is a Compulsive Liar Snitch as well, and trying to Frame me as a Evil Beggar with phattemer. Why else would she out herself publicly in thread? That makes absolutely no sense to reveal in that way.

[Burnt Spaghetti]

Ok I'm back in areas with service so I'll catch up on thread, reply to pm's and then I may post again in thread with thoughts. I'm also happy to answer any questions people may have about how I may have reacted to anything if I had been there at that time or anything, idk.

Either way, I'm back.

[STINK]

Why can't you people do all your voting before I go to sleep.

Also, I'm stuck on my mobile for (hopefully) a day or two as I'm building a new PC.

Edited January 26, 2016 by IrulelikeSTINK

[Alvron]

Day Four: Kill or be killed

Clanky sat at his worktable, sharpening one of his daggers.  The steady scrape of the whetstone on metal calmed him.

The Shadow, Kali, Metrick, Avis, Michael.  Each name followed by the sound of blade meeting stone.  It had become a mantra to Clanky.  One that grew each time one of his comrades died and Clanky was going to make the Traitors pay for each death.  Well, maybe not Metrick.  he thought to himself.  That slontze, ruining my favorite pair of boots. While he had found another pair of boots it wasn’t long until he had found that they had a hole in the sole.

Once he finished sharpening the last blade, Clanky strapped on the sheaths and slid in the daggers.

The Shadow, Kali, Metrick, Avis, Michael.  The names repeated in his head as he moved towards the rest clustered around discussing the day's events.  Instead of them talking about the deaths they were discussing a book.  A book of all things.

Seeing one of the books on top a stool, Clanky picked it up and read the title.  Bands of Mourning.  Sounds interesting. he mused as he flipped through the pages.  I’m sure a couple of chapters won’t hurt.

After what seemed a short time later, Clanky closed the book and was started to see the sun just starting to peek over the horizon.

“Hope you enjoyed the book.” A voice whispered in his ear as a wire was pulled across his throat.

As the blood poured from his throat, he ran through his list one last time.  The Shadow, Kali, Metrick, Avis, Michael, Clanky.


Clanky (Clanky) had died.  He was a Braggart Assassin with a Targeting Array and a Targeting Array.
Michael Durbin's (Adavantos) body has disappeared

You have 48 hours to decide who to lynch.

Player List:

 

 

Mailliw73 - Milton Towren aka Altermind

Deathclutch - Hashirama

Elbereth - Ereth

Hellscythe - Avis Strong ???

Adavantos - Michael Durbin ???

Kynedath - Drake Pierce

Araris Valerian - Allen

Kipper - Krippe the Krippling

IrulelikeSTINK - Rance Idsmill

Shallan - Citona Vinid

Burnt Spaghetti - Blaize Ghetti

Mark VI - Marr

OrlokTsubodai - Locke

phattemer - Exisa

Elkanah - Neal

Clanky - Clanky Braggart Assassin

TheMightyLopen - Finn

twelfthrootoftwo - Theresa

Metacognition - Metrick Beggar and Living Legend

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Alvron