Seonid
-
Posts
2349 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by Seonid
-
Well crap. That's nowhere near as strong as I was hoping for. I was sure clanky was an ardent in hiding, revealing the results of his scan. The artifabrian trick is nice, but not as conclusive as it first was presented as. Question though: hero, did you actually place a secret vote last night?
-
Yep. Gamma had to pull out before the game started. Some GMs use players who do that as the first kill in the game, for RP purposes
-
Only if you're a conspirator
-
On the strength of that assertion, I'll vote Hero. If he turns out to be innocent, I'm voting for Clanky.
-
I'm almost willing to drop my vote to remove the tie, because we need a lynch today, but I think I'll leave it up just to see if there are any shenanigans. We've lost one Worldsinger, but I can't believe that there was only one. So this is an opportunity.
-
Ah, why not. Sheon Idris, originally from Sel, but lately from the court of Dalinar on the Shattered Plains, has learned of the threat posed by Odium and is signing up. Don't expect too much out of me, because school is starting up, but I'm in.
-
Right. Kas's faction game overshadowed that incident for me, and I forgot about it. I'll take it as a badge of honor.
-
I definitely need to retract my vote from hero - that last defense has the feel of innocence (although I suppose only time will tell whether that's a genuine feel or a counterfeit). I'm not sure how much weight to give kipper's suspicions. His role was important enough for the Eliminators to want to get rid of him asap, regardless of how close he was too finding them. But since I don't have any better leads at present, I'll join the call for Araris to speak up.
-
There's also the possible scenario where you find yourself with a village kill role, and are presented with sufficient evidence of Eliminatoriness that strategy and your kill list line up. Or, you know, just get given an Eliminator role. Also, just out of curiosity, have I ever ended up on that kill list?
-
Well crap. That's not good. Alrighty everyone. Now activity is even more important than ever. We need discussion, and badly. My suspicions are still on Hero. What do you have to say for yourself?
-
Tying the vote would let us see any worldsinger shenanigans, but if there aren't any, then it probably isn't worth it. In general, if you are sure that someone is good and want to save them, tying is worth it. If you just have stronger suspicions on another player, it's much more dubious of a move.
-
Hmm...no blatant target is sticking out to me right now. My heaviest suspicions are on hero and sart. Both are experienced players (and therefore could have deceived Wilson), both knew Wilson's role. Both could still be innocent, but they are the most suspicious too me right now. At present, the only thing that differentiates them is sart's vote on ripple. So I think that my vote goes on Hero
-
With regard to why the night vote didn't go through, has anyone considered the possibility that the vote was on Stink? If the vote went on him, but he was killed, then we'd have a situation like the one we see. The other option is a tie. Honestly, I don't see the lack of a night vote as all that important this cycle. Either of those two situations gives us little to no information beyond what we already know.
-
Oh, those were good times! We kept you alive as long as we could get you to do our dirty work for us. But in that game, we had a well-placed spy right in the middle of all of the action, directing what the Village did. I hope that the Eliminators don't have that in this game. Then again, there isn't a set group that has risen to prominence in giving direction, like Wilson, Mail, and Claincy did in the AG. If our Ardent has been active, I hope he/she is PMing the people that they have scanned and putting together a trust group. The Eliminators can conspire in their own doc without worry. We need private discussions with that level of trust too. As far as my own vote goes, I'm not sure where to place it yet. Wilson was the driving force behind Mailliw's lynch, and she turned out to be innocent. My suspicions of Stink turned out to be wrong. I'll be keeping tabs on the discussion as much as I can though. EDIT: Pushed Enter halfway through.
-
Sorry for not being on a lot. Sunday's are bad days for me. In the future, I'll be on around turnover (a coupe of hours before and after), but not likely during the bulk of the cycle. Since it has been advised not to place any further votes, I'll abide that judgement. Although it seems counterproductive to me to shut off discussion/voting before the cycle's end. My gut still suspects Stink, even though his arguments seem reasonable at face value. I'm also reasonably sure that Mail is innocent. I was thinking the same thing about Kipper after I read the write-up, that it could have been a Wounded Gazelle. I'll be happy to be proven wrong about Mail, though.
-
With regards to Day 1 lynches (which I know is past, and more than a little superfluous, but I didn't have time to post my repetitive thoughts last cycle), they are rarely accurate in finding the Eliminators. Everyone here knows that. So whether we actually end up killing someone or not almost doesn't matter at all. So in this sense, we can afford to skip the Day 1 lynch. But what all of the proponents of D1 lynches know (and this is the important point), is that we cannot afford to lose all of the discussion that comes around it. Without that, we are a cycle behind the Eliminators. We can't just hand them an advantage like that. The unfortunate thing is that the discussion doesn't happen unless we are going to lynch someone. If everyone knows that we aren't really serious about lynching the first day, then the discussion is as useless as if we had skipped it as well. So in order to get the discussion going that we need in order to win this game, we have to be serious about lynching. Now, this doesn't mean that we have to follow through with it. If, by the end of the discussion, nobody is suspicious enough to lynch, we don't actually have to do it. We can tie it up or remove our votes or whatever. But the discussion has to be with the intent to lynch if it is to be any good, for the first cycle or any of them. And, most often, discussion with the intent to lynch really does end up with someone just suspicious enough to be worth lynching to find out. This argument has been a staple of nearly every game I've played or watched here, and oddly enough, it almost always ends up with the same conclusion. But few people here bother to go back and read through the old games (which is a useful thing on its own, as it can give more data points about behavior of long-time players as well as insights into the local metagame), so we have this argument over and over and over ad infinitum.
-
Well that was sad. I missed the end of cycle by 4 minutes. Of course, I wasn't planning on voting, because where things stood before I checked back in was a place that I wanted to leave where it was. I had no strong suspicions and, likewise, no strong reasons to believe any of the potential targets were innocent. One had a 1-vote lead. On Day 1, I was going to leave it like it was to see if any vote shenanigans happened. And then the lynch train happened. From 2 to 5 votes in the last hour of the cycle? Screams that something was wrong with it. On the other hand, phattemer had been talked about as a potential lynch target beforehand. Why did everyone become so sure so fast that he was a viable lynch target? Sure, he hadn't been active. But this is the first day. Plenty of people miss the first day and come back to be active, productive participants. A data point of one day is not enough to confirm game-level inactivity. The reasoning was poor all-round. Stink, at this point I am most concerned with your vote, placed without any supporting reasoning. Alvom, you're my second suspicion at present. Why an inactive on the first cycle, and why phattemer specifically? And perhaps we ought to ask why Ripple was saved. Any or all of these could be bum leads, of course, or even deliberately orchestrated to put us on the wrong trail. We don't have access to what happened in any PMs, where Eliminators could have been influencing innocent people to vote in suspicious ways. But we can't afford to ignore these questions, either.
-
Hmm...just dropping by to say I'm here! I've just read through all 8 pages of discussion - thanks for listening to me last night folks - but I need to analyze it before I place a vote. I should be able to be on before the end of the cycle to place my vote, but no guarantees.
-
The past few games seem to have suffered from a lack of talking. In part, this seems to be because people sign up for games they don't really have time for (guilty here too), but there's also been a recent tendency towards lynching the most active people. This trend is not disturbing in and of itself, but combined with the broad movement toward semi-activity, this leaves the village in a potentially precarious situation. The smaller the pool of active players, the easier it is for the Eliminators to manipulate the conversation, the lynch, and end up pulling out the win. I don't have any concrete suggestions right now other than this: be active. If you are not active, you are essentially playing on the Eliminator's team.
-
Having a Bad Day? Stop here for a Good Rant!
Seonid replied to traceria's topic in General Discussion
Gotcha covered! -
Thanks, Bort! Current iteration of the Metallurgist/metal vial rules: The Metallurgist(s) is(are) on their own faction, separate from both the House Conrad villagers and the House Venture Eliminators. The win condition is to have at least one metallurgist surviving until the end of the game. Each Allomancer starts with a private PM (not affected by the Courier) with one of the Metallurgists to place their metal orders. The Metallurgists do not begin the game with their identities publicly known. Each night cycle, an Allomancer may place an order for 1 metal vial, chosen from the list of vials that are available that round. Non-Allomancers may not place orders. If the Metallurgist that you have a PM with is killed, you may start an order PM with another Metallurgist, provided you know who they are. And provided there is a Courier still alive to let you make PMs. This new order PM can still be used if the Courier dies after it is started, but no new order PMs can be started if the Courier dies. Metal vials may not be traded or gifted to other players.
-
One roll at 20% and everyone can get some
-
Thanks for the compliment! I like the idea with the metallurgist. That would fit thematically, as well as mechanically. (Honestly, I was halfway to putting in 2 Metallurgists and making one of them an Eliminator, but this balances better, I think.) The lurcher suggestion fits well, I think. As defender, it overlapped a little bit with the Hazekiller. As roleblocker, it overlapped even more with the Captain. But stealing a vial of metals is a fascinating idea, although it seems like a better secondary ability than a primary one. If all you can do is steal other folks metals, and stealing their metals costs you a vial of your own, that seems a little underwhelming. What about redirecting an Action as a Night ability and stealing a vial of metals in the Day? That would bring up an interesting problem, as only a few roles have actions that can be performed in both cycles, and this would be the only one with 2 different actions, though. But maybe if I put in a few other action opportunities for other roles too, leaving all the roles with the option to take an Action in each cycle...that could work. I'll be back in a few hours with more thoughts on it.
-
Go ahead and sign me up. Sheon Idris, the retired king of Arelon (with all due thanks to Wilson), finds himself on Roshar. As former royalty himself, what would be more natural than to find himself at the Highprince's feast?
-
Hmmm...That might be an idea, Bort. I would worry about having too many metals in play, though. If everyone could order 3 different metals, that would be 3*(# of players) new vials added per Turn, which is more than could be conceivably used. The metallurgist would become superfluous and therefore vulnerable very fast. I think I'm going to go with making the Metallurgist a public role. Everyone knows who they are at the start of the game. Anyone can PM them for metals. Allomancer or not. Only 2 metals per person. 2 metals per person should get enough metal vials out there to jumpstart trading, and also obfuscate which metal you really want. That combined with the fact that a non-Allomancer can also order metals should further muddy the waters. And once trading starts, the metallurgist's role becomes much less powerful, because they don't know all of who is getting what metals. So - still powerful, and still has access to a whole lot of information, but has a whole lot less certainty than the Tineye or the Seeker. Small mechanic change to the Smoker - their ability may be used in either cycle, but only lasts for that cycle. So they can Smoke someone in the day, and protect them against vote manipulation, or do so in the night to ward against Seeking, but to do both takes 2 vials of metal. Also, Bronze used on a Smoker or someone being Smoked as if they hadn't used metals. Small change to Tin - it can be used in the Day or the Night cycle (or both, with 2 metal vials). If more than one Action was performed, the Tineye finds out about one of them at random. Votes do not count as actions for the Tineyes ability (but they still count as actions for the person doing them.) I'm also going to edit in a Turn Order and a Mechanics section, but I'll repost them here because this is the post that will likely be read. Mechanics: Any thoughts on whether I should swap out the Lurcher's ability to roleblock instead of protection? I can see pros and cons either way.
