Long Game 72: The Secret of Shinovar

[Alvron]

2 minutes ago, Ooklil' the Wei said:

Hm? Why aren't they village then?

Most likely because they can win with either the elims or the village.  Depending on their win con, they might find it easier to side with or help the elims so them being listed as Village doesn't really work.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

1 minute ago, Ooklil' the Wei said:

Hm? Why aren't they village then?

Specifically, the rules for the secret roles are:

Quote

In addition, there are two secret roles: each has their own unique win condition(s). Upon winning, they will immediately be removed from the game; however, this will not end the game.

Danex's Vasher role for example, would win by gaining control of/possessing Nightblood, but the village can still win whether or not that happens. That wouldn't make Vasher a villager though, since his goal differs from the village's win con of killing all the elims (though Vasher is still somewhat village aligned in this particular example since he would need a specific elim to die in order to win).

[Condensation]

17 minutes ago, Furamirionind said:

So... here you are putting suspicion on Illwei and yourself... Not sure if that's intentional or not. xD
Also keep in mind irl stuff is a thing. I for instance have very much read the rules, I don't remember everything or have a great understanding of possible ways to abuse the rules, which complicated games typically have to some extent. Good points overall though.

Wait, putting suspicion on myself? Are you thinking I'm Ookla's Dice? How am I putting suspicion on myself?

So if Chanarach or Ve... something(can't remember the name) doesn't open the PMs, can we assume that the holder is an elim?

[---]

4 minutes ago, Ookla the Hypodecadal said:

Danex's Vasher role for example, would win by gaining control of/possessing Nightblood, but the village can still win whether or not that happens. That wouldn't make Vasher a villager though, since his goal differs from the village's win con of killing all the elims (though Vasher is still somewhat village aligned in this particular example since he would need a specific elim to die in order to win).

Ah right. the rules. forgot about those...

[Furamirionind]

10 minutes ago, Ookla the Grammatical said:

Wait, putting suspicion on myself? Are you thinking I'm Ookla's Dice? How am I putting suspicion on myself?

So if Chanarach or Ve... something(can't remember the name) doesn't open the PMs, can we assume that the holder is an elim?

Yup, I thought you said "me and Illwei" not "mat and illwei"

And no I don't believe that's a good assumption... Though people can assume that if they wish. : P
Personally, I think Vedel very much could just try to protect someone every night and not open PMs, or maybe they choose to open PMs early in the game when the chances are lowest of saving someone, but later (even if it doesn't switch hands) chooses to try to save someone each night. 
For Chanarach I think it might be more likely AI... But depending on the kills. If they are killing people generally thought to be very village, it's holder will be more likely to be elim. If the people dying are suspicious or flip elim, pretty likely village.

[Condensation]

13 minutes ago, Furamirionind said:

Yup, I thought you said "me and Illwei" not "mat and illwei"

And no I don't believe that's a good assumption... Though people can assume that if they wish. : P
Personally, I think Vedel very much could just try to protect someone every night and not open PMs, or maybe they choose to open PMs early in the game when the chances are lowest of saving someone, but later (even if it doesn't switch hands) chooses to try to save someone each night. 
For Chanarach I think it might be more likely AI... But depending on the kills. If they are killing people generally thought to be very village, it's holder will be more likely to be elim. If the people dying are suspicious or flip elim, pretty likely village.

Okay, good. Because I was confused.

That's good advice, I'll keep it in mind. And depending on how many/what kind of targets there are, we might be able to tell if it switched or not.

[Guest Somebody from Scadrial]

Quite thought (please tear this apart and explain why I wouldn't work), couldn't the Stone Shaman take all the Honorblades and dump them on a trusted player? If the Elims kill them they only get one blade, plus they can use Tension on another player that they and the Stone Shaman trust to give the blades to after they die. Also, if the Stone Shaman trusts two or more people, they could give one Tension and tell them to use it on the mega-holder.

[Furamirionind]

4 minutes ago, Somebody from Sel said:

Quite thought (please tear this apart and explain why I wouldn't work), couldn't the Stone Shaman take all the Honorblades and dump them on a trusted player? If the Elims kill them they only get one blade, plus they can use Tension on another player that they and the Stone Shaman trust to give the blades to after they die. Also, if the Stone Shaman trusts two or more people, they could give one Tension and tell them to use it on the mega-holder.

That's a good idea, unfortunately I think the GM accounted for it:

Quote

Reclaim: Once per night as an action, the Stone Shaman can reclaim all Honorblades from a single target, removing them from the target and returning control of the blades to the Shaman. This ability can only be used if the Stone Shaman is not currently holding an Honorblade

Quote

• • The Stone Shaman can only keep a hold of one Honorblade at a time - if due to Blade transfers the Stone Shaman ends up with multiple Honorblades, they must use their action to transfer down to 1 Honorblade the next night turn.

Edit: Basically I don't think there's a good way for them to get all of them unless everyone in the game agrees to transfer theirs... Which is very very risky, and many players (myself included) likely wouldnt be willing to do that.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Furamirionind

[Guest Somebody from Scadrial]

Just now, Furamirionind said:

That's a good idea, unfortunately I think the GM accounted for it:

 

That has no effect on dumping them on someone, I'm not suggesting the Shaman keep them, I'm suggesting someone who the Shaman trusts keeping them.

Edit: it would take multiple turns, but that doesn't do anything to stop it, really.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Somebody from Sel

[Flyingbooks]

I will take my vote off of Connie, since the main reasons why I were suspicious of her were starting up the D1 lynch discussion after the most recent game had it and later the acting and calmness issues, but the explanations of those behaviors seem to make sense. I'm not going to vote on somebody else yet because there's nobody who I'm suspicious enough of to vote for at the moment, but I probably will put my vote on somebody new by the end of the cycle.

 

3 minutes ago, Somebody from Sel said:

That has no effect on dumping them on someone, I'm not suggesting the Shaman keep them, I'm suggesting someone who the Shaman trusts keeping them.

But it would take many rounds for the Shaman to reclaim them all, and in the meantime the trusted person could be killed.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Flyingbooks42

[Eternum]

So, I'm gonna read through the thread 'til now and summarize my thoughts in chronological order. Hopefully this doesn't become a wall of text. (Spellchecking Eternum here, I lied. I knew what was going to happen.) 

Gears analysis post, as per usual. Notably, this time they actually wrote it after their GM PM, which might have affected things. Last time I saw them do this, they'd written the post beforehand. Not an alignment indicative thing, just something I remembered. (I was elim that game, if it matters :P)

Reading through the analysis properly, it's odd that they gave advice to the elims even though they wrote the post after their GM PM. I don't know how I feel about that. 

Stink votes Gears. Just Stink being Stink. Moving on.

Quinn says the bearer of Nightblood should hold off on killing. Again, weirdly, advice to the elims, though I suppose this can change as the game progresses. 

Mat delves a little into the jester mentality and how we should play it. Pokes Gears on the topic. NAI. 

Shade aggressively votes Gears, and seems content with lynching the Truthless if it comes to it. I think that's pretty fair, in an ordinary game, but it actually harms the village in this one, so I don't know how to feel about it. Truthless claims should obviously be taken with a solid heap of salt, but we shouldn't be too eager to get rid of them either. On the other hand, claiming helps neither the Truthless nor the Stone Shaman. Truthless can be elim-killed to free up the Shaman's protection, so the elims would rather they be dead too. An elim claiming Truthless to defend themselves when they'd prefer the Truthless die doesn't make much sense. Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, though. 

Books gives some very good advice to the Shaman. I'd actually forgotten about the list they get, so that's nice. Responds to Mat, which I also like, cause it promotes more discussion about the Truthless. Weirdly strong village lean from a single post. Not sure why. 

A little bit of confusion over whether Gears claimed elim or not. Experience doesn't say much, pokes at Stink to clarify his vote which, well, doesn't tend to yield much information

Quinn rereads the thread, specifically rethinks their opinion on Gears's post, which feels a little off to me for some reason? Mostly because it seems to be a result of TJ being so vehemently against the Shaman claiming. 

Araris votes Experience, clarifies Gears's "claim". I didn't feel like it was that confusing, but hey, others seemed to not get it. Fair enough. 

I didn't get much out of Quinn's next post, but on their Nightblood comment: I think one of the secret roles might have the goal of getting Nightblood instead of being killed by it. 

Alv notes the elims want the Shaman dead, obviously, and generally agrees with Gears. NAI. 

Illwei is confused by jester roles, wants to play as if the Truthless doesn't exist. Valid but, imo, not a good idea. 

Araris clarifies on the Truthless's relationship with the village and I completely agree with his take, I think I said something about that earlier. 

Mat's next post doesn't say much. Keeps mentioning they didn't know about the importance of the Truthless. Devotary points out that Gears is giving advice to the elims, worries about Ishar's blade going to the elims and facilitating NB kills. Valid concern, though statistically unlikely, I guess. Also first person to mention the possibility of elims starting with Honorblades. I think that's the case. If that didn't happen, the Shaman would just get a list of villagers at the end of D1 or C1 or whenever they actually see the Honorblade wielders. 

Illwei says Araris is assuming the Truthless knows the Shaman which.. changes nothing? I don't get the point, and wouldn't mind them explaining. 

A couple NAI posts, then Illwei votes Connie for.. a NAI post, with no reasoning for it. Weird, but not much to delve into here. Connie asks for a reason 

SfS.. claims elim. Sigh.

Araris, like the jaded old man he is, yells at clouds. Clouds being new players. NAI post, jokes aside. 

Danex's first post is about secret roles, and this seems to be a pattern with them. Interesting. I skimmed the posts that happened since I started writing this, and they presented the same theory as me, but I'll get to that later. 

Quinn asks about Honorblades possibly starting in elim hands. Imo, absolutely. Not sure why I'm getting a bad vibe from this post. 

Stink isn't vibing with the discussion, sort of explains his vote on Gears. Valid, I suppose. Not out of character for him. Quinn sort of kind of defends Gears, Stink doubles down. I like Stink a little more for that, but I disagree with ignoring the Truthless (though the other roles aren't really worth contemplating until we know more about them), I think I mentioned that earlier too. We would kind of like them to stay alive for a while. Quinn seems super hesitant to vote off Gears, which I don't get. It doesn't really hurt us? 

Illwei contemplates the possibility of PMs just not opening, seems to forget two Blades can do that. Quinn hopes the elims think PMs can help them too, which makes some sense but it helps village more than it helps them, also has the same epiphany as Devotary, seems to forget only one Blade can do that. 

Connie finds rule analysis posts helpful, thinks it's weird people don't read through the rules entirely before the game. Honestly, I don't do that either I like doing it as I analyze the thread, though I don't really know why. It's just kind of how I do things now, I guess. Helps me put my thoughts together. It isn't an excuse to not post, though, and I don't think anyone used it as such. Weird vibe from this one. 

TJ's giving me the same vibes as in the other game we played together and they were village in that one, so I'm leaning in the same direction this time too. They.. kind of say this exact same thing about Stink. Lmao. A few reads, which are good to have. Mat posted his earlier as well, I forgot to comment on those. Good to keep any reads posted in mind for the future. 

Quinn sort of falls in line with TJ. Again. That's.. weird. Makes me rethink TJ, too. Pokes Mat about his SfS read. 

My post is obviously the most effortlessly village post the english language allows. Probably single-handedly solved the game right then and there. Thanks for playing, guys, gals and nonbinary pals. T'was fun.

Mat votes on Connie, though it doesn't seem to have much intent behind it. It's understandable, and not a very elim move imo. SfS take is NAI. 

A rule analysis post by Quinn, which imo doesn't say all that much? I've been feeling iffy about them the whole time. 

Illwei doubles down on their vote, Connie just sort of putting a bunch of thoughts in there makes them feel better about it, apparently. I get where they're coming from. That's how Gears phrases those posts, for the record: His advice is just how he sees the game and, from what I remember, he's been pretty amenable to accepting his strategies could be wrong. People aren't quite tunneling on Gears, though how many people are defending him is very weird to me.

It's the end of page 2 and I'm *exhausted.* I'll leave it here for now, see what's been happening recently, and continue the rest of the analysis when I can. This is 11 whole pages on my notes app. Yikes.

[Furamirionind]

1 minute ago, Somebody from Sel said:

That has no effect on dumping them on someone, I'm not suggesting the Shaman keep them, I'm suggesting someone who the Shaman trusts keeping them.

How would the Shamen get them so that they could give them away? Unless you're suggesting each time the shamen gets one they give it to a player, then get one the next day and give that to the player the following day... That would take so long to build them up and no guarentee of the Shamen to hit a blade in the first place I think it's more likely the elims kill the player the Shamen has chosen and takes their single blade.

We'd also have to make sure the chosen player has absolutely no chance of being an elim, however if such a player ever existed the elims would make killing them a top priority.

[Ashbringer]

Hmm. The Shaman can't hoard all the blades, but they could theoretically pass them all to the same player. They just would need to take a blade, pass a blade, take a blade... it would take a long time but it would function. (The Shaman knows where every blade is as of the end of every Day cycle, but it would still take 2 turns to redistribute an Honorblade / set of Honorblades.)

Note that this theoretical all-Honorblade-Bearer still only has a day action and a night action, and would only get 2 Stormlight charges. If fully fueled with Tension they could still use a Surge a turn, but no more than that. And, as noted, they cannot be the Shaman themselves.

[Flyingbooks]

6 minutes ago, Furamirionind said:

How would the Shamen get them so that they could give them away? Unless you're suggesting each time the shamen gets one they give it to a player, then get one the next day and give that to the player the following day... That would take so long to build them up and no guarentee of the Shamen to hit a blade in the first place I think it's more likely the elims kill the player the Shamen has chosen and takes their single blade.

We'd also have to make sure the chosen player has absolutely no chance of being an elim, however if such a player ever existed the elims would make killing them a top priority.

The Shaman gets a list of the Honorblade bearers at the end of each day, so they're guaranteed to get an Honorblade if they reclaim. Also, since the player who they would give it to would definitely read as very village if they don't want to run the risk of giving the elims a win and the elims would probably target players that read as very village anyways, this would probably let the elims get Honorblades easily.

5 minutes ago, Ookla Fell From The Sky said:

Hmm. The Shaman can't hoard all the blades, but they could theoretically pass them all to the same player. They just would need to take a blade, pass a blade, take a blade... it would take a long time but it would function. (The Shaman knows where every blade is as of the end of every Day cycle, but it would still take 2 turns to redistribute an Honorblade / set of Honorblades.)

Note that this theoretical all-Honorblade-Bearer still only has a day action and a night action, and would only get 2 Stormlight charges. If fully fueled with Tension they could still use a Surge a turn, but no more than that. And, as noted, they cannot be the Shaman themselves.

Tension can only be used to give Stormlight to someone else, so the bearer of Ishar's blade would need to know who the mega-bearer is, which would increase the risk because they might be an elim.

[Condensation]

I don't think this is a very logical option. It would take a while and be extremely risky. I think it's fun to speculate, though!

[danex]

1 hour ago, Ookla the Grammatical said:

Think about it. Those last times, I had an important role. I'm not important this time, I'm just a villager. I'd still like to keep from dying, but it's not really all that vital. First game I was a Hemalurgist, second game I was Convincing(Mat knew), and third game I was an RBer who knew the other RBer. Even if I had an Honorblade, it would more likely than not get passed to a villager.

Hmm. Fair enough. Connie.

[Condensation]

I think that was the last of the votes on me... right? Because Mat took it off, Illwei changed it to Fura, and Danex just took it off? @Ookla Fell From The Sky

[Ashbringer]

2 minutes ago, Ookla the Grammatical said:

I think that was the last of the votes on me... right? Because Mat took it off, Illwei changed it to Fura, and Danex just took it off? @Ookla Fell From The Sky

I think Quinn still has a vote on you. Lemme look.

 

Edit:

Gears (2): STINK, TJ Shade,
Ookla the Shadowed / Experience (1): Ookla the Araris Valerian / Araris Valerian,
Ookla the Grammatical / Condensation (1): Quinn0928
Furamirionind (1): Ooklil’ the Wei / Illwei
Ookla the Disproportionate / Danex (1): Ookla’s Dice / Matrim’s Dice

If I missed any, let me know. Bolding votes/retractions makes it easier to find them.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Ookla Fell From The Sky

[Condensation]

Just now, Ookla Fell From The Sky said:

I think Quinn still has a vote on you. Lemme look.

Really? Huh, I didn't notice her voting on me.

[Quintessential]

1 hour ago, Furamirionind said:

Pretty hard defending Gears here. Another player I need to look into the history of I guess. I think this is sus because of what I bolded... but again, need to look at past games.

~~~

You seem very confident about what the elims will think and do... PMs don't always benifit every faction equally. It depends on a lot of factors... One of which is who is on the elim team.

I'm defending Gears mostly because there wasn't really much of a reason to vote him, as I said before, and because I like playing with him so I'd rather he not die D1. I guess I can see how that would read as sus but we did spend a lot of time talking in PMs the previous two games we played, so... Yeah. That's why.

Also, honestly I don't know why you say I seem confident about what the elims will think/do. I mean, do I have to add the qualifiers "maybe/probably/kind of/sort of/I think/etc." to everything I say? I've been trying to do that less since I'd rather not sound as insecure as I am... 

37 minutes ago, Eternum said:

Quinn says the bearer of Nightblood should hold off on killing. Again, weirdly, advice to the elims, though I suppose this can change as the game progresses. 

~~~

Quinn rereads the thread, specifically rethinks their opinion on Gears's post, which feels a little off to me for some reason? Mostly because it seems to be a result of TJ being so vehemently against the Shaman claiming. 

~~~

Quinn asks about Honorblades possibly starting in elim hands. Imo, absolutely. Not sure why I'm getting a bad vibe from this post. 

~~~

Quinn sort of falls in line with TJ. Again. That's.. weird. Makes me rethink TJ, too. Pokes Mat about his SfS read. 

~~~

A rule analysis post by Quinn, which imo doesn't say all that much? I've been feeling iffy about them the whole time.

Those first two (me giving advice to the Bearer of Nightblood, me reversing my opinion on part of Gears' post) were solely because I hadn't read the rules since I signed up, so I'd forgotten that Nightblood started in elim hands and that if the Truthless died, the Stone Shaman could then be killed. After a couple of people pointed those things out, I went back and reread the rules, so hopefully I won't make anymore mistakes like that.

The third was because someone else acted certain that there would be Honorblades in elim hands, so I wanted to double-check whether that had been confirmed at some point and I just missed it.

I... don't actually remember what the fourth thing was... oof I'll go back and check and put my response in an edit. Edit: yeah there's no indication of what that was referring to...

As for the last thing, the rules post? Please remember that this is my third game and the first LG I'm playing, and that was essentially the first rules analysis post I've ever made. So like... cut me some slack, perhaps?

Edit:

@Ookla the GrammaticalEven though I put it bolded and in red... anyway Connie I guess. I do dislike the D1 vote, even though I know it's necessary, because everyone says we should all give reasoning but there's no reasoning to give, except for gut-reads based on previous games, which I don't have because I haven't played enough oof... 

Edited December 5, 2020 by Quinn0928

[Mat]

1 hour ago, Furamirionind said:

On first read of this I liked it. Thought it was generally accurate based on what we have seen in thread... However it also doesn't provide anything new. It puts both Connie and Experience as slight elim, but both of them have been called out already and this is providing no individual perspective... I'm not too sus on this yet but I'ma keep my eye on Dice.

...Fair, I suppose. Though it's not really my fault if I agree with the other reads  

However, I was the first to village read SfS and Books, with the former being questioned. So while both of the elim reads there might have been just in agreement, it's an overassesment to say it provides "nothing new."

---

Am I back already? Yes. Is it because I quit playing minecraft for the day/week/year after falling in lava and losing all my stuff? Maybe.

[Condensation]

8 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

Edit:

@Ookla the GrammaticalEven though I put it bolded and in red... anyway Connie I guess. I do dislike the D1 vote, even though I know it's necessary, because everyone says we should all give reasoning but there's no reasoning to give, except for gut-reads based on previous games, which I don't have because I haven't played enough oof... 

I guess I didn't notice it. Huh, I didn't think I was that oblivious.  Can't wait until I'm not new. Once I sign up for 5 more games(I'm joining the new QF) then maybe I'll be better at it.  Apparently the line is 10.

1 minute ago, Ookla's Dice said:

Am I back already? Yes. Is it because I quit playing minecraft for the day/week/year after falling in lava and losing all my stuff? Maybe.

Ugh, that's annoying. Hope it gets better!

[Eternum]

6 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

Those first two (me giving advice to the Bearer of Nightblood, me reversing my opinion on part of Gears' post) were solely because I hadn't read the rules since I signed up, so I'd forgotten that Nightblood started in elim hands and that if the Truthless died, the Stone Shaman could then be killed. After a couple of people pointed those things out, I went back and reread the rules, so hopefully I won't make anymore mistakes like that.

The third was because someone else acted certain that there would be Honorblades in elim hands, so I wanted to double-check whether that had been confirmed at some point and I just missed it.

I... don't actually remember what the fourth thing was... oof I'll go back and check and put my response in an edit. Edit: yeah there's no indication of what that was referring to...

As for the last thing, the rules post? Please remember that this is my third game and the first LG I'm playing, and that was essentially the first rules analysis post I've ever made. So like... cut me some slack, perhaps?

That's.. fair, I guess. I feel like dude with Nightblood = Szeth = Elim isn't that farfetched a logic train to follow, though.

Again, valid. Don't think about that part too much. There really isn't anything you can do about gut reads, and that's what that is.

That was you leaving Stink alone after TJ remarked he voted on Gears the same way in.. MR44? Something along those lines.

Don't worry about it much! I'm trying to pressure more information out in general, but I don't want to stress you out. That last part was mostly just me saying I didn't get much information out of that post rather than a burning condemnation of you

[Quintessential]

11 minutes ago, Eternum said:

That's.. fair, I guess. I feel like dude with Nightblood = Szeth = Elim isn't that farfetched a logic train to follow, though.

Again, valid. Don't think about that part too much. There really isn't anything you can do about gut reads, and that's what that is.

That was you leaving Stink alone after TJ remarked he voted on Gears the same way in.. MR44? Something along those lines.

Don't worry about it much! I'm trying to pressure more information out in general, but I don't want to stress you out. That last part was mostly just me saying I didn't get much information out of that post rather than a burning condemnation of you

Oh, right, I switched to follow TJ on reading STINK as village(ish) because I tend to trust more experienced players' reads of people, since I don't have my own. 

Yes, I felt like an idiot when I remembered that Nightblood starts off as an elim mechanic... I mean, like, how did I forget that? 

Also yeah sorry I may have slightly overreacted to your post and Fura's... I'm... not exactly in the best mood atm? My brain decided to remember the fact that I haven't seen anyone other than my immediate family since March... I... yeah anyway (Illwei with her excessive ellipses is rubbing off on me)

[---]

So I guess I'll respond to Eternum's post. Sure. why not.

1 hour ago, Eternum said:

Illwei is confused by jester roles, wants to play as if the Truthless doesn't exist. Valid but, imo, not a good idea. 

Illwei says Araris is assuming the Truthless knows the Shaman which.. changes nothing? I don't get the point, and wouldn't mind them explaining. 

A couple NAI posts, then Illwei votes Connie for.. a NAI post, with no reasoning for it. Weird, but not much to delve into here. Connie asks for a reason 

Illwei contemplates the possibility of PMs just not opening, seems to forget two Blades can do that. Quinn hopes the elims think PMs can help them too, which makes some sense but it helps village more than it helps them, also has the same epiphany as Devotary, seems to forget only one Blade can do that. 

Illwei doubles down on their vote, Connie just sort of putting a bunch of thoughts in there makes them feel better about it, apparently. I get where they're coming from. That's how Gears phrases those posts, for the record: His advice is just how he sees the game and, from what I remember, he's been pretty amenable to accepting his strategies could be wrong. People aren't quite tunneling on Gears, though how many people are defending him is very weird to me.

Uhh okay I remember saying that

I...don't...remember saying that...

Uh huh

Nah, I'm just assuming...you know, I don't know what I was assuming but I am assuming that the kill guy won't wanna kill, but also won't wanna use up all his Stormlight and save it for a rainy day. and even if he does open PMs then it's not gonna be open the whole time, because at max he can do 2 and idk if they'll wanna.

Uh, yeah. Also Connie

 

34 minutes ago, Ookla's Dice said:

Am I back already? Yes. Is it because I quit playing minecraft for the day/week/year after falling in lava and losing all my stuff? Maybe.

just get netherite armor easy peasy

32 minutes ago, Ookla the Grammatical said:

Apparently the line is 10

I mean, no? I'm pretty sure Araris was using that in LG71 because kinda a whole group of people had 10/11 games then because we all joined around the same time. Quarrantine If araris had used anything else, then pretty sure only him and Aman would have qualified :P. 

 

EDIT:

Ahh looked back. Yeah. Thought Araris was talking about the truthless like, somehow outing the Stone Shaman in return for the Elims like, not killing them or something. Doesn't make sense, but yeah.

Edited December 5, 2020 by Ooklil' the Wei