Long Game 22: Corenne al'Daishar

[Seonid he/him]

According to Gamma, the player is told whether they were detained. So either straw was roleblocked or Elodin was detained.

EDIT: ninjaed. I suppose straw could be lying, though I find it rather unlikely due to the lynch circumstances

Edited June 6, 2016 by Seonid

[Conquestor he/him]

Well, what could have happened as well, is that a Whitecloak targeted someone, but the Ta'veren changed the Whitecloak's detain. Unlikely, but could happen, such as lynching the biggest eliminator on the first day.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Conquestor

[Straw he/him]

@Seodin The second option is far more likely because everyone was suspicious of Elodin.

[Bugsy he/him]

But he was also the candidate for the wolfbrother kill. Detaining him would have protected him, which I somewhat doubt an experienced villager would do

[Straw he/him]

This is one of those issues that could go either way. Let's stop it before the Eliminators can use it to make us suspicious of each other.

EDIT: I seem to have disrupted the flow of conversation.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Straw

[jaimeleecee she/her]

Okay I am finally caught up! Sorry to have been off for so long, last night I had to drive 5 hours, but my windsheild wipers stopped working during a down pour and I had to sit on the side of the road in a no service area for an hour waiting for the rain to pass... that was fun >.> anyhoo...

 

Talk about some serious karma... The only thing that could be our saving grace (if I am remembering correctly) is that Warders and Channelers might not be on the same side, as they don't know each others affiliation just who each other are.  Could we have gotten lucky enough to have killed the good guy warder of a darkfriend channeler?? I am unsure where my trust lies still.. I have a lot of analysis to do still, as yesterday was pretty much shot for me I still need to spend time going over the last of D1 and pretty much all of N1.

 

Edit: Winter=Ninja she beat me to the channeler might be evil theory and I didn't notice until just now.. trying to work and catch up here at the same time   

Edited June 6, 2016 by jaimeleecee

[Haelbarde he/him]

@Straw: You are allowed to claim what people, or the GM , have said in PM - you just can't write out exactly what they said - it has to be in your own words.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Haelbarde

[Seonid he/him]

Well, what could have happened as well, is that a Whitecloak targeted someone, but the Ta'veren changed the Whitecloak's detain. Unlikely, but could happen, such as lynching the biggest eliminator on the first day.

Just a note - this is impossible. The ta'veren only works on night actions. The Whitecloak picks their target during the day.

[Straw he/him]

My message says my scan of Elodin was "unsuccessful"

[Master Elodin]

My message says my scan of Elodin was "unsuccessful"

There are 4 ways that could happen, Straw. I was detained.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Master Elodin

[Elbereth she/her]

That's a great excuse for not having any info, but I think you might be a villager. I want to see what Phatt has to say about what has happened so far. Hey, you guys remember what you said about Fain pretending to be inactive? I think Phatt might actually be the best choice for the lynch, because if he is Fain, then we would have lynched the two worst anti-villagers there are. If he isn't, then we would have lynched an inactive, which isn't worse than a eliminator, but better than an active villager.

Even though I voted for Phatt, I definitely disagree. If he doesn't post by the end of tonight, he'll almost certainly be killed by a Wolfbrother. Lynching him now would be pointless, and since he's completely inactive it wouldn't net us any information. Lynching an inactive is not better than lynching an active villager, if there's been enough discussion about that villager.

So, it looks like there are several possibilities with Strawman.

1. He's lying about being blocked.

2. Someone roleblocked him. This would presumably be an eliminator, but as someone pointed out, why not just kill him? (They could be trying to get us to kill him ourselves, but that seems less likely to me.)

3. Elodin was detained. This is certainly possible and even probable. Is it something that "an experienced villager" would do? Maybe not. But if they weren't looking at any other powers but their own, Elodin was a perfect target for the Whitecloak. That's also interesting, because one of the possibilities for why there was no Darkfriend kill was that the killer was detained... I won't vote on him yet because I want to-

Well, that just made my post somewhat obsolete. Still won't vote quite yet, but that does make you more suspicious, Elodin.

Wait, four ways, Elodin, what's the fourth way?

Most likely. If he were blocked it would only be by an Elim channeler, who would much more likely to just kill him and keep their powers a secret and not waste one entirely. Anyone else want to counter claim Straw? If so, he's most likely lying

What do you mean by counter claim him? There's no reason there can't be more than one scanner. And if there were, why would that scanner want to claim? Really, in what way is that a good idea?

[jaimeleecee she/her]

There are 4 ways that could happen, Straw. I was detained.

 

Being that there is no way to prove that, and even if it could be tue, there is no saying that it wasn't a protective detain, knowing that there were suspicions cast on you from your actions during D1..

 

This might be a total noob question.. but do the darkfriends all have to agree on someone to make a kill? like if one of them was detained would they not be able to kill because of that or does it not matter if the others are still able to perform an action?

 

I'm still working on re-reading previous posts but I feel comfortable saying that I am the most suspicious of Elodin for several reasons and Rubiks, I think mostly because of the attempt at a Sheep bandwagon which felt like an effort to redirect.  I'm just speculating of course but I wanted to put my thoughts out there for now.

 

On the other hand, I am feeling more trusting of Wilson and Meta at this point as well.. but most of you are still in the neutral zone for me.  I'm sure I will have more opinions later when I have more time to read and think!

[Master Elodin]

Even though I voted for Phatt, I definitely disagree. If he doesn't post by the end of tonight, he'll almost certainly be killed by a Wolfbrother. Lynching him now would be pointless, and since he's completely inactive it wouldn't net us any information. Lynching an inactive is not better than lynching an active villager, if there's been enough discussion about that villager. So, it looks like there are several possibilities with Strawman.

1. He's lying about being blocked.

2. Someone roleblocked him. This would presumably be an eliminator, but as someone pointed out, why not just kill him? (They could be trying to get us to kill him ourselves, but that seems less likely to me.)

3. Elodin was detained. This is certainly possible and even probable. Is it something that "an experienced villager" would do? Maybe not. But if they weren't looking at any other powers but their own, Elodin was a perfect target for the Whitecloak. That's also interesting, because one of the possibilities for why there was no Darkfriend kill was that the killer was detained... I won't vote on him yet because I want to-

Well, that just made my post somewhat obsolete. Still won't vote quite yet, but that does make you more suspicious, Elodin.

Wait, four ways, Elodin, what's the fourth way?

What do you mean by counter claim him? There's no reason there can't be more than one scanner. And if there were, why would that scanner want to claim? Really, in what way is that a good idea?

Actually five.

1. Straw was RB'd.

2. Straw lied.

3. I was detained. <--- It's this one.

4. Mask of Mirrors on me.

5. I dreamwalked. (if applicable)

Why does it make me suspicious? Because of the missing eliminator kill?

EDIT: Jaimeleecee, Occam's Razor. You all think I'm an eliminator. Detaining blocks action from eliminators. Actions from eliminators are bad actions.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Master Elodin

[Elbereth she/her]

This might be a total noob question.. but do the darkfriends all have to agree on someone to make a kill? like if one of them was detained would they not be able to kill because of that or does it not matter if the others are still able to perform an action?

One Darkfriend would perform the kill. They all agree on it (in theory), but only one sends it in. So if someone else was detained the kill would still go through. It's only if the person who sent in the kill was detained/RBed/whatever that it wouldn't happen.

Actually five.

1. Straw was RB'd.

2. Straw lied.

3. I was detained. <--- It's this one.

4. Mask of Mirrors on me.

5. I dreamwalked. (if applicable)

Why does it make me suspicious? Because of the missing eliminator kill?

EDIT: Jaimeleecee, Occam's Razor.

Hmm, that's true, although 1 is very unlikely and 2 isn't much better. And yes, because of the missing eliminator kill. There are other explanations, I'm aware, but that is one of them, and thus it makes you more suspicious. Edited June 6, 2016 by Elbereth (Lomion)

[jaimeleecee she/her]

One Darkfriend would perform the kill. They all agree on it (in theory), but only one sends it in. So if someone else was detained the kill would still go through. It's only if the person who sent in the kill was detained/RBed/whatever that it wouldn't happen.

Thank you, that's exactly what I was trying to understand..

 

EDIT: Jaimeleecee, Occam's Razor.

huh.. not really sure what you mean by this? I mean I know what it means but I don't know how you mean it in regards to my last post.

 

Edit: mistakes and double quotes

Edited June 6, 2016 by jaimeleecee

[Master Elodin]

One Darkfriend would perform the kill. They all agree on it (in theory), but only one sends it in. So if someone else was detained the kill would still go through. It's only if the person who sent in the kill was detained/RBed/whatever that it wouldn't happen. Hmm, that's true, although 1 is very unlikely and 2 isn't much better. And yes, because of the missing eliminator kill. There are other explanations, I'm aware, but that is one of them, and thus it makes you more suspicious.

Why would I admit to being detained then, since it's the obvious conclusion? I agree that it looks bad though.

Being that there is no way to prove that, and even if it could be tue, there is no saying that it wasn't a protective detain, knowing that there were suspicions cast on you from your actions during D1..

This might be a total noob question.. but do the darkfriends all have to agree on someone to make a kill? like if one of them was detained would they not be able to kill because of that or does it not matter if the others are still able to perform an action?

I'm still working on re-reading previous posts but I feel comfortable saying that I am the most suspicious of Elodin for several reasons and Rubiks, I think mostly because of the attempt at a Sheep bandwagon which felt like an effort to redirect. I'm just speculating of course but I wanted to put my thoughts out there for now.

On the other hand, I am feeling more trusting of Wilson and Meta at this point as well.. but most of you are still in the neutral zone for me. I'm sure I will have more opinions later when I have more time to read and think!

Why would the eliminators protect me instead of detaining Straw? This makes no sense.

EDIT: I'd love to stay and prove my innocence, but I have to go to school.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Master Elodin

[Elbereth she/her]

Why would I admit to being detained then, since it's the obvious conclusion? I agree that it looks bad though.

Well, maybe so you could use that argument? And because if you denied it, the Whitecloak might very well come forward and counterclaim, and then you'd almost certainly be lynched.

Why would the eliminators protect me instead of detaining Straw? This makes no sense.

You're assuming the Whitecloak in this scenario would be an eliminator (and the fact that that was your assumption hints to me that your mindset is more of an eliminator one, though that's a rather weak point). A villager who trusted you could have done the same thing. However, I do think it's unlikely either way.

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Why is it unlikely for Straw to have been roleblocked? If he's a villager and the evil team has the ability to roleblock him, they'd take it. I'm not sure why this is any less likely than Elodin being detained.

[Master Elodin]

Well, maybe so you could use that argument? And because if you denied it, the Whitecloak might very well come forward and counterclaim, and then you'd almost certainly be lynched. You're assuming the Whitecloak in this scenario would be an eliminator (and the fact that that was your assumption hints to me that your mindset is more of an eliminator one, though that's a rather weak point). A villager who trusted you could have done the same thing. However, I do think it's unlikely either way.

I was directly quoting Jaimeleecee's post when I was talking about a Whitecloak eliminator. As for the first post, I don't want to get into this spiral of bluffs and double bluffs being assumed.

[Elbereth she/her]

Why is it unlikely for Straw to have been roleblocked? If he's a villager and the evil team has the ability to roleblock him, they'd take it. I'm not sure why this is any less likely than Elodin being detained.

Because the only roleblock in the game (other than the Whitecloak, which I'm not referring to as RBing but detaining) is the Spirit weave, and if they have a channeler wouldn't it make more sense just to kill Straw instead of roleblocking him?

Being that there is no way to prove that, and even if it could be tue, there is no saying that it wasn't a protective detain, knowing that there were suspicions cast on you from your actions during D1..

This is what you were referring to, Elodin. As I read it, it's not necessarily talking about a good or evil Whitecloak, just one that wanted to protect you. I can see how you would get an evil Whitecloak out of it, though, so I'm not pressing that point too hard.

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Because the only roleblock in the game (other than the Whitecloak, which I'm not referring to as RBing but detaining) is the Spirit weave, and if they have a channeler wouldn't it make more sense just to kill Straw instead of roleblocking him?

This is what you were referring to, Elodin. As I read it, it's not necessarily talking about a good or evil Whitecloak, just one that wanted to protect you. I can see how you would get an evil Whitecloak out of it, though, so I'm not pressing that point too hard.

Ah got it. I should really go over the roles again.

[little wilson she/her]

Why would the eliminators protect me instead of detaining Straw? This makes no sense.

 

Because detaining Straw only blocks his viewing. Detaining you keeps you alive.

 

 

I think I know why the Darkfriends didn't attack anyone last night. One, the Forsaken was dead, obviously. Two, they probably only have 3 other players and all of them were tied up with other actions. Right now, I'm thinking both Elodin and Gunshy are Darkfriends. Elodin took heat so their Whitecloak Darkfriend (who is not Gunshy) targeted Elodin to protect him from any kills and to make sure he couldn't be viewed. This meant that both the Whitecloak and Elodin couldn't make any actions. And Gunshy's computer died so he wasn't online.

 

Why do I think Gunshy is evil? This post and this post. The first post says that the discussion so far in the day has been a "huge mess" of assumptions and allegations, which I think is a pretty major over-exaggeration. Yes, there was a bit of aggression coming out and there were some assumptions and some allegations but nothing even close to a huge mess. More like a very minor mess. Then, he says that he's not going to vote until Cycle 2, to get more information into posts, but voting is one of the ways information gets into posts, and I'm always wary of people who say "I want information but I'm not willing to give information for that information," or anything even similar to that. Which is exactly what he's doing. Third, he comments that Nyali's points about the D1 lynch is a good one. That point about how the village only has the lynch to find and kill eliminators, baring vig roles....How is that a good point? I'd think that was a point that anyone could come up with on their own. I know I did, which is why I called Sart out in the first place. He also says that there's evidence supporting Sart being an eliminator. No, there wasn't really. There was evidence that he might be an eliminator, but what he'd done is something a villager could do too. The biggest mark against Sart was the fact that there was such a concerted effort to turn the lynch away from him, but that hadn't happened when Gunshy made this post. So what evidence was there against Sart....?

 

The second post I think is the more damning of the two, though. Orlok never said that Meta and I set people on edge. He said that our opinions are already respected so we don't need the mayor position, and he thinks it would be better to go to someone less outspoken so they have a chance to be heard as well. But Gunshy says that he agrees with Orlok that players who set others on edge with just their rep shouldn't be given more power. Gunshy is a new player. He's never played with me or Meta. He has no idea about our reps, and those reps hadn't really been talked about much (nor in a way that shows that people are "set on edge") at that point in time, so I find this a very peculiar twist for him. Unless he's in a doc and people have been talking about those reps in there. That would make a lot of sense then.

[Elbereth she/her]

Really quick before I have to leave for my internship - the first post could be explained because he's a new player and thus what seems like a minor mess of assumptions and allegations to us might seem much bigger and more confusing to him than us. I agree overall, though, and now I must go. Won't be back until turnover time, ish.

[jaimeleecee she/her]

Why would the eliminators protect me instead of detaining Straw? This makes no sense.

 

That is a good point... my theories are: 

• That you were detained to protect you from being scanned or targeted by wolf brothers (but I see it would make sense to target someone like straw, unless they were trying to throw us off)
• A village whitecloak trusts you and wanted to protect you from being targeted
• That you were the one to put in a kill order but your detainment blocked the kill explaining the lack of darkfriend kill.  

Of course there could be other reasons for no darkfriend kill I understand that. But 2 and 3 happening together would explain the block and the lack of kill going off these thoughts alone..

 

I am not casting a vote yet, I am still just looking for evidence, so I'm sorry if I come across as attacking you.

[Master Elodin]

Wilson, the first game I played I knew about you guys, so your argument about that part is completely invalid. Honestly, people have you in their member titles ! You can't get much more well know than that. Also, the Darkfrinds would have known that I was a Dreamwalker.

EDIT: See my post, jaime.

Edited June 6, 2016 by Master Elodin