Kasimir

We have an Emissary claim in our doc and it's not with Xino. Don't know if that helps. Basically it's a "I'm ok with the filter taking care of Books, and if Books filter-dodges, then that's sus." But FYI, I do somewhat suspect Books might be deliberately refusing to engage with the doc. I just don't know if it's Evil or not - I base this off the fact we haven't yet had communication, and it seems to me unlikely that the GM would not make accomodations for a player with no doc access. It's basically in the generic rules. So that feels a bit deliberate and IDK what to make of it.

But he could only direct them onto someone in the same faction doc, no? That's a bit of a double-edged sword because if you're wrong, you're killing a fellow docmate and potentially reducing your chances of victory as your side doesn't have protect roles either. I'm still struggling to work this one out but I'm more keen on xino between xino and Archer for the moment. My reasoning really just boils down to Books being up for the filter kill/replacement on failing the check-in in one more cycle. Edited to add: Afaik e/e Emissaries are theoretically possible. What has your doc heard about Emissaries? Interested in why your trust in xino being low means voting Wiz.

Urgh, got distracted and meant to qualify - likely a Villager. Paranoia brain says WBG is possible but I still don't see the pay-off for a WBG. But paranoia brain demands it be said, so it shall be said. Just to confirm, this means their wincon is still the Elim wincon? There's no compound/disjunctive wincon?

To throw some of the doc discussion into the thread: My issue with xino is I basically don't understand xino's willingness to place a stable vote on a doc mate from the start. (Ok look, I started typing this and got ninjaed by xino's post but whatever) It was informed by not liking TUN's position about roleclaiming: And it just never seemed to move, despite @Archer noticing that xino was on at EoD. I think I've got more questions there, because if Archer is correct that the doc basically turned into a roleclaims fest, then why didn't xino retract from TUN? I feel like thinking that TUN's behaviour is claims fishing is certainly compatible enough with keeping your vote on TUN but I also feel like some of that impetus has to go away if everyone in your doc was claiming anyway. IDK. Can someone within the Cryptics doc comment about whether xino was disengaged enough for this to be plausible? Issue with Archer is similar: that with Archer's explicit comments about looking for a vote target that satisfies the conditions of being HS and suspicious, and commenting that he thought both Mat and Hoid were Village, why vote them? Within my own faction, the main issue we have right now is that I was protected, and whoever it was was likely either a HS or a Cryptic Defector. I am not too sure if an Elim would try protecting me - weird to WBG if you can't get much credit for it and need the kill. And for the purposes of Elim hunting, Cryptic Defector doesn't matter - what matters is the player is a Villager. This means I'm not really down for lynching in that pool right now. So, questions for @xinoehp512- Are you implying you believe your doc has no Elims? And in C1, you were concerned about roleclaiming within the HS endangering protect roles or RB roles. We have confirmation of one protect role. (I grant you might think I am Evil and there is no protect role, but if this is true of your beliefs, then you should be voting me instead.) Yet you are currently willing to shoot there. What changed?

Sirak felt a little bad for the weeping Cryptic. But only a little. He really didn't want to be here, either. He wanted to be in his Archives, damnit! Instead, someone'd tried to kill him which meant they were trying to sabotage the negotiations. And the Cryptics seemed a little confused - even for Cryptics! - about who was in their delegation, and Sirak didn't understand that at all. Didn't people just straightforwardly declare themselves these days? Cryptics. Always good for thinking in loops and layers when you wanted straight lines. Except that now, Angry'd thrown even more knots into the tangle, and Sirak wasn't sure they could cut through it all. He slammed his book shut. The next time Lasting Integrity talked him into anything, Sirak would tell them where to stick their storming ultimatums. Ok. So I think things are a bit more confused now. It's clear who the factions are or should be, so let's put all our cards on the table: Cryptics: <Archer, TUN, xino, Hoid>, HS: <Kas, Mat, Wiz, Books> This is the best sense I can make of it, with what we know. The thing is that if Archer is truthful about Hoid's claim: can @xinoehp512 or @HOID WANTS INSTANT NOODLES weigh in on this? - we have a prima facie problem. This means our starting line-up is really something like this: Cryptics: <C1, C2, C3, HS5>, HS: <HS1, HS2, HS3, HS4> If we further suppose that one Cryptic and one HS is actually Evil, we get something like this: two Cryptics to four HS, even before lynching. Is this a reasonable number, given we know the wincon requires outnumbering or parity and the death of all Elims? I don't think so. Mat and I were talking about this possibility last cycle and our conclusion was that we're more likely to see two Elims in one doc to balance the numbers a bit more, so: Cryptics: <C1, C2, C3, HS5>, HS: <HS1, HS2, HS3, HS4> 3 HS - 3 Cryptics in total. Happy if anyone can see some reason to think this line of reasoning is wrong, but if the Defector claim is true, it just penalises the Cryptics a bit too much in a 1-1 world, I think. Unfortunately, I feel this picture is complicated by the fact that I subtly roleclaimed/hinted at my role in the doc C1 for reasons. It's tempting to think that a HS Elim is less likely to kill within the doc of that faction (since it narrows the PoE) and moreover, they should have had reason to believe I was not the best target. So this leans me just a little towards thinking the killer was a Cryptic. We have received independent confirmation Hoid is in the Cryptic doc, but this is consistent with Hoid claiming to be a Defector. Hoid, if you are a Defector but are in the Cryptic doc, this means you win with us. I can't really help if you want to play with the Cryptics, but I just thought I'd clear it up that you don't count to their wincon but to ours, which is what Archer is saying here. Mat and I have considered the possibility of an Elim Defector since Elims can have roles but we feel it sort of doesn't make much sense. It doesn't mean there can't be one, but it seems like the Defector role would be null with an Elim. @Devotary of Spontaneity - would like to know how a Defector Elim would work, and whether a player can have the Defector role and another role as well. Finally, I'd like to ask if for an Emissary to have a PM with another player entails both of them must be Emissaries or just at least one of them. I am confused why xino was willing to vote in doc off the bat, but also generally confused about why the roleclaiming fest @Archer mentioned happened, given that TUN was attracting suspicion for asking about roleclaims. I suppose there's a Cryptic Defector world as well, which would return us to 1-1 for the sake of balance, but implies that you are the lone Cryptic in your doc just as I'd be the lone HS in mine. Edited to add: But the lone HS world is weird because then our Cryptic Defector HS either misunderstood the rules, or decided to protect me anyway. I'm not really sure that makes sense.

Recognisable in what way? Is there someone pretending/claiming to be Mat among the Cryptics?

On the assumption of a 1-1 Elim distro, the Elims don't know each other, so we have to be careful reading the votes. The Elims aren't likely to leave a significant footprint (sigh) due to lack of coordination. If we're looking at more exotic 2 Elims-1 Defector scenarios, then we might be able to glean something from the votes. My current thoughts: Leaning light V on Hoid (potentially, need to think this through) for interactions with TUN. It's possible E!Hoid found TUN a useful reason for votes, and solo Cryptic Elim Hoid would be just as lost, but...eh, I don't know. Don't really think so right now. Xino's vote on TUN is weird to me. Why start out voting among the Cryptics, @xinoehp512? Can any other Cryptic shed light on whether there were strange doc interactions? Hoid, is TUN saying anything about that? Archer's self-pres on TUN: ? I'm leaning towards having to vote on Books or Wiz at the moment, which doesn't really make me feel all that comfortable about this situation because it feels too low info, but maybe that's a good place to start, IDK. I currently have a weak Village read on Mat but that's honestly activity-based and I dislike activity clears so I'm going to have to come back and rethink this. Honestly, am happy to be lynched if necessary. I think I'm a goner this cycle anyway - due to the rules, the Elims would know I'm not an Elim, since they would otherwise be notified. What they have to ask is if I'm a protector who self-protected, and is pretending to be shocked Pikachu right now. If they think this is likely, then they will kill me since this is a guaranteed kill that will go through unless a roleblock gets lucky. Other things that will probably affect their decision: The likelihood they can ML me (or get me MLed in future cycles) Whether I am likely to be problematic in future cycles (probably, since I'm either an 'only known HS' kill which implies the Cryptic Elim had the kill this cycle or a control kill, in which case I am a dead man walking either way you slice it.) I'm going to say that Cryptics will likely request a HS suspect lynch out of fairness, and creating too large a gap does create a situation in which the Cryptics are locked out of winning, so would not be likely to go for that. Ultimately, we can win with the Cryptics but cannot with the Elims, so in my view, a HS-centric lynch may not be awful, and reasoning that the kill hit me and failed because I'm Evil is fair enough.

Sirak sat on his chair, paged through his book, and glared stonily at anyone who approached. He'd not wanted to come for the negotiations. In any case, he was retired, and all he wanted was a nice, hot cup of tea, and the scent of old paper in the Archives. A nice, quiet retirement. Wasn't that what they'd promised him? And now everyone was trying to kill each other. He hated that. Even worse, someone had tried to kill him. Blasted spren, no sense of decency these days. Nothing he'd done had called for that. And someone'd saved him - probably another Honorspren, but Sirak hadn't gotten a good look at whoever it was so he couldn't even curse the other spren for not sparing him from the dreadful boredom of the negotiations. The two leading trains into the cycle close were Cryptics. In my view, it is likely that the Elims would, one way or another, have put in a kill on the Honorspren (henceforth HS.) A lot of this was going to be speculation but there's no need for that as I just got a PM from Devo that I was attacked and someone saved me. Probably another HS, but I respect that this might be indistinguishable from "they hit an Elim" to everyone.

@Devotary of Spontaneity - Does an attacked player know they were attacked? And do we get to see the vote results? @HOID WANTS INSTANT NOODLES - gdi = god dang it, probably should not have sworn but I was feeling some pressure to do something about the trains in that moment.

Gdi. Archer Adonalsium forgive me if I'm wrong.

You've been trying to get him to do doc trains?

Cannot say I am comfortable with this state of affairs and without some E!Archer credences to justify this, would not go Archer this early on after all. Archer, TUN. Willing to be talked onto Hoid given Hoid's earlier abstentions and sudden late decisiveness.

Ok, but that's weird, because you're implying this is confidential information, so not thread-reads based, but likely role-based. Except no roles work this early, and as always, I welcome any roles that claim to have discovered my alignment to claim in thread so my faction mates can ensure you die after me, because you are obviously lying Claiming it's faction doc information isn't going to make you a target, so this is at minimum exaggeration, apart from the fact that a false faction doc claim would get you killed by the other Honourspren.

1. Please don't edit votes into your posts. It confuses the GM. In fact, please re-read the rules again, because you should not be editing the content of your posts substantively. The rules are here. 2. As Archer and I have been implying, I'm an Honourspren, and Archer's a Cryptic, so if you're voting for me with no real basis for suspicion but just for lulz, I really hope you're a Cryptic

Oh, I feel this pain. My Nokia used to be that way .__. Had to use Facebook messenger donkey years ago to communicate with a doc mate but those were weird circumstances and we don't do that here anymore. Does mean your faction mates can at least send messages to you in a doc, which is helpful for you guys when coordinating. Elim doc = the doc the Enlightened use. According to the rules, HS Enlightened get one doc, and Cryptic Enlightened get one.

You can just say Elim doc, that's okay

I think for me right now, I don't have a strong-valenced read on TUN or of you. I could see a weak preference to not voting for you C1, on the basis that we still need to find Elims, and V!Archer (if V) is still a boost even if it's likely we're on opposite factions. I'm also feeling a bit grimly resigned about either: A. hunting among the inactives* for potential Elims (which become just a bit more likely if we lynch V!you today, and the Elims make an activity kill), and/or B. Elims and Village activity killing, leading to a low activity Village which is easily overwhelmed in both factions. I'm not fully comfortable with this situation as I think it boils down to (effectively) punishing new players for potential inactivity. I'm still trying to evaluate what I'm more alarmed by at this juncture. I am also very confused now, so good job, Cryptic... On brand? How are you both unable to access Google Docs and simultaneously able to form some hypothesis about who your faction mates are? >>

Have you checked your GM PM? If you have, it should have told you your role and your faction (Cryptic/Honourspren.) We don't want to know what your role or faction is But that being said, if you are a Cryptic, you'll want to vote to kill the person you suspect most among the Honourspren, at least for this cycle. If you are an Honourspren, you'll want to vote to kill the person you suspect most among the Cryptics. (To be clear, you win when all the Enlightened are dead, and if your home faction = or > the other faction. So it does kind of matter which faction your suspect comes from.) Without spren doc access, I'm just going to point out you'll want to be careful with your votes because you can give the opposing faction a numerical advantage. (In the perfect world, we'd all agree, kill an Enlightened with our vote, and proceed to win a joint victory between Cryptics and HS. I'd like this to happen but I don't think it is likely right now.) Since you can't access Google docs, I think your spren faction mates have figured out who you are.

Same. This has led to me having to include you in my suspect pool ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Strange, because I believe I have too, and Mat's votes make complete sense to me, which implies one of us is mistaken. FYI, it's in red if you're voting for me, and if you're in my faction, which I suspect you are, then you should keep in mind that's a bad move for us if the Elims kill within us, less bad if the Elims kill in another faction ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I do, and I respect you enough to figure you have probably run the numbers enough to realise it is not a good situation for one faction to be the faction who loses a player on the first game. Even if you say that's not your primary motive, which I'm happy to grant you, I think you're good enough with modelling for it to not have occurred to you, and I think that's also reflected in your choice of vote targets. Edited: On the first cycle, RIP typo.

As far as I can tell, it's currently:

It's precisely because it's known that my doc has an incentive to vote someone they suspect who isn't me. Voting outside Shshsh is pretty bad for us. It doesn't mean don't vote for suspicions - it means vote for people you suspect who aren't in Shshsh. By the same token, what you're not saying is you have an ulterior motive for voting me - because it benefits your faction to do so.

Why not? In the toy scenario we're modelling, the lone survivor is in the faction doc with an Elim, and everyone else is dead. Deadeyes in that faction doc could complain about it to the other faction if they have a PM, but what's the incentive? Moreover, the lone survivor functionally has pretty much no chance of winning - you can help lynch the Elim and your faction still loses, because you need parity or to outnumber the other faction. Sure, but you want to help them whittle down the other team, and you don't want to lose (and as the last survivor, your dying more or less guarantees your team loses unless the other team has a defector, which you can't reasonably assume) - that's a compatible short-term goal. I could ask you the same question: without a guarantee or a reasonably achievable parity win, if you are serious about playing to your win-con, how does this not involve screwing the other faction over? I mean sure, we can MR7 this and go Village über alles, if we're clear that's playing partly against wincon. I just don't see a "welp, I guess I'll help kill the Elim since I don't think I can win here" to necessarily be the most pro-wincon mindset from our hypothetical lone survivor. Personally, I think the survivor is better off trying to cut a deal with the other faction for a parity win but I think what I'm trying to say here is that I can see a reasonable case for the survivor deciding to not do that, which is not being modelled in Archer's plan. I will be very honest that this is the main reason that while I'm suspicious of you for suggesting faction decimation (which feels more Elim to me, though I'm reconsidering this view), I also think that PoE elim death is potentially bad enough that your thoughts could be coming from a Village perspective. Feels like I'm just going to be splitting the difference and nulling you, honestly I'm happy with where my vote is. Haven't played E!TUN in quite a while so unsure if my sense that this is more TUN being TUN is reliable. Would like to hear from the more quiet new players who aren't Hoid as well.

smh says the guy trying to game this one. Besides, this didn't break LG12! Okay, yeah. Without knowledge of doc identities, it's most likely a shot in the dark for them to try to avoid the double kill. But a bit benighted as my doc has sort of lost anonymity - nothing confirmed but people don't seem to be as good as hiding as they say they are, though maybe it's indicative of who the Elim among us could be. What's the gameplan if they don't? From my thoughts: 2va:1e + 1e:2vb We could play this the same way, but I think we need to do some analysis as well. One thing on C1 with thin gruel for analysis, not sure about C2. Feels like they almost can't kill in the same faction as the lynched player and the best play for them at that juncture is to cut a deal with the survivor and hope the survivor isn't a Defector, since any surviving va/vb knows will effectively lose the game if vb [Edit: or va] isn't whittled, so has little incentive to comply with a ML on them. The counterpoint is that keeping Village factions in equilibrium means the Village can win together, and the Elims benefit from keeping us divided, so I wonder if they are really going to go with this. Obligatory squint at the faction asymmetry suggestion here, Archer, even if I like the plan (but have honestly never been one for prioritising faction wincons over Village wincon, RIP.) I've re-read the rules and forgot the Elims do not in fact know who each other are (on the 1-1 supposition; imagine we could have a slightly bigger Elim population since there is no covert communication or identity knowledge across faction docs.) Suppose there's also the possibility where they accidentally NK each other, leading to a no kill. I guess I'm just saying I don't see too big a problem with this play - I'm hesitant about distro assumptions but I think the neat thing about this plan is it currently feeds in to what we'll have to do anyway, then we can sort through the rest next cycle with hopefully a bit more information. It is. I'm just too tired for roleplay right now but some people do that.