Kasimir

Thanks to the M'Hael for running this game! You'll be missed Congrats to the Eliminators. My thoughts on the inactivity filter are that it's necessary, and it's helpful, IMO. Sure, it helps the Eliminators a bit, but really, it doesn't prevent people from lurking (whether Eliminator or power role) - you just have to be a bit more strategic about doing so. Just look at the number of people who managed to generally go beneath the radar for this game, despite the filter! Not to mention that long-term inactives just generally drag the game out because they're not the people Eliminators tend to pick off first, especially in a standard game, so you'd end up either having to call the game, or having to go through the boring parts of culling inactives. That being said, I don't really think we need 'objective' criteria for avoiding the filter, but it would be nice from a GM perspective to spell those out more concretely. Even if you can't give a set of necessary and sufficient conditions, giving a few examples of what doesn't count as having made a post would have helped borderline cases get a better idea, IMO. (And it also pretty much prevents someone from coming back to complain you didn't tell them until after the cycle that it didn't count.) I don't think it's that much of an issue for this game, but it might be better practice to have clarified that from the beginning, going forward. I'm actually interested in what those like @Elbereth or @Alvron might think about the free pass system, though. Granting free passes at GM discretion is definitely a good idea, but at the same time, the worry is that it could get ugly, depending on whether people think the GM was being a bit too lenient with the Eliminators or not. Ideally, one might suggest letting the IM decide on the free passes, but they're already plenty busy - bogging them down with extra admin isn't a good idea and it's like turning them into GM#2. My solution to that might be for the GM to recognise possibly contentious cases/swingy cases and talk to the IM on those. But I'm by no means sold on this - I'm honestly just pinging Alv and El because I know they have strong views on GM impartiality that may be a counterpoint here.

Emphases mine. Could mean two things: (1) lynching a Shard helps the Eliminators, or (2) we could end up both lynching a Shard and helping the Eliminators. Both claims are not strictly speaking correct. (1) assets a causal connection that isn't necessarily the case. It's not immediately clear that lynching a Shard auto-helps the Eliminators, except in a trivial sense, i.e. the sense in which we would be lynching a member of Team Village (I think? The Factions are really confusing me...) unless it just so happens that Autonomy / Survival / Odium are up for the lynch. Don't forget that according to the rules, Vessels can pass their Shards prior to a lynch, meaning that if a Shard is up for the lynch, we're not going to lose the Shard itself. Not to mention that even if they don't and get lynched, Shards will then pass to a random player. One might even argue it doesn't help Hoid much unless the Shard accidentally goes to him, because Hoid starts knowing who all the Shards are. Having the Shard pass to someone else he doesn't know is really not the most damaging possibility in play. I think (2) is a little more careful: it's still not clear that lynching a Shard is a net minus (or at least one distinct from losing any Villager to a mislynch in a conversion game.) Although I don't like to take risks, and we can, at least for now, feel reasonably certain that the Shards are not on Team Hoid, I notice some earlier people have commented that it may be best for Shards to change hands as quickly as possible, so as not to provide Team Hoid with neat targets. I generally think that sounds like a sensible idea. And if that's a plan we do go with, then it's not clear that lynching a Shard qua Shard is any more problematic that lynching a Villager, since the whole point is to shift Shards around anyway. I've not played a game like this before, so I'm not clear about where the idea that Team Hoid starts with just Hoid and possibly one or two flunkies comes from. Is it because Team Hoid begins with conversions? Either way, I'm just going to mark that as something I have no bloody idea about (sigh), but if it's just Hoid right now, then I don't think a Day 1 lynch is going to be a good idea - with reservations. We still want to get a lot of discussion out (sigh, yes, I know :/ ) and I'm still a big fan of the notion that people aren't really incentivised to say much until there's that psychological pressure of being in the hot seat, having their name lit up in red, etcetera. Why is primarily because I think having discussion would form a good baseline for comparison, especially when the conversions begin. So tldr; I don't really see why lynching a Shard auto-helps the Eliminators, as opposed to if we lynched a Villager. I think that if there's anything bad about it, it's the badness associated with lynching anyone who isn't Team Hoid, period, and Shard-passing, with the caveat that as per the original plans, the Shards get a lot more control over this. @Lopen: Skaa Bro, your point is an interesting one. But I find myself a bit uneasy with the whole "Let's not lynch D1, the odds of hitting Hoid are really low" and "Joe, something's weird about you" conjunction. The two separate points seem to be somewhat in tension, there.

Tenth of the Dusk waited in silence. That, at least, was something he was good at. Life as a trapper on the Pantheon islands punished those who were impatient or hasty; those who sought easy solutions or rewards. If you were careless, you died. This was especially true for the trappers who had chosen Patji: the Father, the largest and most dangerous of the Pantheon. Tenth had left that life behind him, though: smoke drifting upwards from the final offering he'd burned to Patji. He breathed in, and could almost imagine he detected vestiges of that final prayer, still clinging to him, like cobwebs. This was the Homeisles, he knew. But it would be foolish to think that it was safe. There were dangers here, no less than the deathants and the spiked anemones and the nightmaws. He fed Kaikoa a seed from his pocket, as he shouldered his way through the crowd, checking only to make sure he was still carrying his steel machete. He'd seen the flash of colour, earlier, and now he made his way towards it, as fast as the crowd would let him. He'd tracked his target all the way through the streets, following that tell-tale flash of colour - an Aviar mating plume stuck jauntily in a red hat. But now he'd come to a dead end. Part of him wondered if it was a trap. Or a message. He took one breath, and then another. Perched on his shoulder, Kaikoa chirped quietly. There was no sign of where she had gone, that woman in the red hat. A soft, humid breeze whispered through that alley, bringing with it the faint promise of rain. He'd been beaten, this time. It happened sometimes. He would have to try again, to pick up her trail. Tenth turned away. Back from a long day out, and too tired to contribute much. I'll be out the whole day tomorrow as well. Things should be better after that. General comments on reading the thread is that I'm still really lost about all the rules and will need to do more reading. I don't understand the stakes of having Ruin destroy a world now, though. I get that we want to prevent an Evil Ruin doing things, but is the gameplan to completely remove Ruin's Shardic ability (überkill), or is it to remove Ruin's world-destroying ability? (Because Joe seems to be thinking along the lines that an Evil Ruin would prefer to destroy worlds than to make that kill. I'm not making sense of that preference.) And if it is to remove Ruin's world-destroying ability, is Ruin's Shardic ability supposed to just be an unfortunate casualty of that, since the only way to do that is to deplete the worlds Ruin can destroy? :S I'm just not really clear on what the point of this whole thing is. No concrete thoughts on revealing world info either. Will think more on it. My current instinct is that delayed release sounds better, precisely because of the role-block possibilities, but I'm guessing that Joe's plan is supposed to nix that and allow hot-off-the-press release.

Rule Clarifications 1. The Village only has to kill the Heart to win, yes? The rules clearly state that the Village win condition is to kill the Heart and all the Traitors. In fact, this is actually closer to being true of the Eliminators: they don't have to keep the Heart alive. They merely have to outnumber the Village.

Is ok. Thanks, GM Almighty, but I guess I signed up already - despite getting ninja'ed - so I'll see it through? (Besides, who knows, two other people might pop up, then you'd wish I'm still filling numbers so you can do Threnody )

Frankly, I'm kind of hesitant about this, because I'm not all that fond of complex games, this game looks really time-consuming, and I'll probably be "Mr Didn't-Read-The-Rules-Properly" for most of it, since there's so many. If you really need numbers, though, I can sign up, I guess. I wouldn't be extremely active, but I definitely won't go inactive. I'll be Tenth of the Dusk, a former Eelakin trapper turned (bounty) hunter, and would prefer to begin on First of the Sun (lol), where possible. Edit: Oh hell, I left this open for a few hours and I come back and get ninjaed :/

[Reserved for rule clarifications]

Rule Clarifications: 1. Is the Heart of the House an Item? Is it in someone's pocket right now? No - it's just the physical and spiritual centre of the House, i.e. a location which has been discovered. 2. Is it possible to arrange a pinch-hitter for this game? No, for several reasons, including information hygiene, and that it's too late for them at this point. There is also no 'drop out' mechanism. This doesn't mean you can't go inactive - but it does mean we have no formal mechanism for allowing a player to retire their character from the pool of living players.

Urgh. Last thoughts before I sign off for the night to get a drink and be utterly miserable about screwing up again and getting yet another yelling at from my supervisor. [Guys, unless you think you're immortal, I'd recommend posting a list of your 'definitive suspicions' and reasoning - doesn't have to be fully done, but at least it gives people something/somewhere to go on, if they should so choose, in case you die by the next cycle.] So: At this point, I have no reason to really think so/it's mostly gut, but I'm wary of most of the people lurking around the edges. IMO, inactivity is an extremely unappealing strategy for the Eliminators this game because of the filter, so if you think the Eliminators are chiefly lurking and letting us kill ourselves and loling at our lynches, then you should be looking at the quiet people, or the people appearing to contribute/showing up every once in a while but not doing that much. (Even if you don't think they're all lurkers, it's worth considering that there might be at least one or two of them employing that strategy.) Assassin, for instance, popped up a few times this cycle, but didn't really say much. (And I'm not going to rehash that Wilson v. Elenion and co. issue in LG28, or trigger Kipper with 'oh how the hell do you determine 'much' ' anyway so I'm just going to articulate my standards.) People who say 'much' are people who tell us where they stand. We know who they're suspicious of and why. We know what their views are, which gives us data from which to work: are their views ones that help the Eliminators? Are they responsive to evidence? Are they showing a tendency to distort the events of past cycles? What do they gain from their particular perspectives? Etc. Some people who've said some things don't really map well onto this metric. Kipper left a promissary note about posting more, and I'm hoping someone will prod him this cycle or the next. I generally think JUQ has been hanging back a bit, but maybe that's me - it would be good to hear more too. Same for Assassin, and I think last cycle, Magestar [I'd consider him a borderline case] asked us to ask him why he thinks Alv is suspicious. Well, okay, I'll bite: why is Alv suspicious, in your view? I find Sart beginning to blend into the background for me, too, but he'd be yet another borderline case. I'd say the same of Burnt and Arinian: given my own RL thing making me not so keen to analyse, I can't blame her, but it's [=her reasons for her suspicions, even if they're in percentages] definitely worth flagging and pursuing over the next cycle. One might wonder about a similar issue for Arinian - lots of his voting appears to be reactionary, i.e. saving his life. Which is understandable, but then that leaves us at a definite blank for what/where his suspicions are. He's voted for Stick at points, but why? Who do you suspect, Arinian? Who are you beginning to trust, and what are your reasons? Similar issues for Orlok - he expressed suspicion of Alv, but that's just about it. It would generally help to hear more from him, but again, RL. Joe did do a long post, but same thing applies. I don't think this is an exhaustive or a conclusive list. And I'm wary of having people focus on a list because this is dangerous - it means I'm dictating the terms of the debate and I shouldn't be allowed to do that. Rather, I'd encourage people to think about who you think hasn't been forthcoming with their views and suspicions and to press them for it. It's understandable that suspicions can shift - and really, they should, with more evidence. But forcing people to nail down where they stand at this point in time is helpful for us, especially in terms of tracing out connections between players, even illogical ones. So. Enough with this cautionary pre-amble. My actual suspicions at the moment: Elenion (reasons suggested earlier, chiefly I'm having difficulty reconciling his willingness to go down on Ecth with his sudden caution and what seems like almost a way of attempting to shift the focus of the debate onto other people), and Alvron. Since I'm signing out and will probably miss rollover, I've decided to go with the person I'm most suspicious of, but I'd definitely like an answer from Elenion. I'm not sure what to make of the Nyali - Arraenae - JUQ - Straw quartet. There are things that don't make sense to me about the people in this set, but I'm not absolutely certain if it's enough to elevate them into actual suspicions. Of all of them, I think I would be the most concerned about JUQ or Nyali. Finally, since my desire to analyse has gone bye-bye with getting yelled at, I can safely say I'm just going to leave a big question mark on STINK >> See y'all on the other side. Edited to add: JUQ and Nyali reasons already mentioned; Arraenae is just because she seems to be pushing really hard against someone for Day 1 stuff. But I'll look more closely again. Straw - I've also mentioned in past cycles. 2nd Edit to Add: Elodin's another one I'd put in the 'needs to say more' category.

I'm seeing a bit of both of you talking past each other here. Nyali is saying that it makes no sense for an Eliminator to allow one of their own to be killed by a random coin-toss (well, RNG), so if JUQ and Arinian had been evil, (and since we already know cloudjumper is a Villager), the Eliminators would have preferred to force a lynch on someone rather than risking a 1/3 chance (epistemically, anyway) that a teammate would die. Sure, JUQ and Arinian could both be Eliminators, but that just stacks the risk even more heavily for the Eliminators: they would then have to run a 2/3rd risk of losing someone, which doesn't make sense on their risk calculus. I think Assassin (unfortunate name! ) is claiming that it would have been bad for them to have done so, because to do so would be to reveal themselves: generally, the Village frowns very hard on last minute votes, and that would have more or less guaranteed insta-suspicion. On the first level, both of you are correct: it could have been a case where Team Evil had to weigh the risks between tanking the 1/3rd chance, or tanking the suspicion sure to arise from a last-minute forced-lynch of a Villager. Except that Nyali's reasoning slightly misrepresents things: The first point of interest I'm going to focus on is the period before 6:25AM. (Everything is indexed to my time, but I've included the relevant posts in the links, so if you're curious what that converts to, just mouseover the 'hours' timestamp to see when they posted.) Why 6:25AM? Because at 6:25AM (my time), the M'Hael reminds everyone that a tied lynch will result in a randomly-chosen death. This could have been because of Magestar's question. Or this could be because the Eliminators asked, in their doc. (Hinting that they might have had reason, this time, to be concerned about a tie - as compared to in the previous cycle.) So: the state of the voting in the period just before 6:25AM is as follows: STINK (0): Alvron<1> Arinian (4): Kasimir <1>, Nyali, JUQ, Kynedath, Alvron<2> Stick (0): Arinian<1> Joe (0): Kasimir <2> JUQ (2): Kasimir <3>, Elenion Kynedath (3): Doctor, Magestar<1>, Arinian<2>, Arraenae, Arinian<4> Cloudjumper (2): Sart, Joe Arraenae (1): STINK, Arinian<3> I've italicised Alvron<2>, using his shift from STINK to Arinian as the beginning of the period of interest - right before Hael gets on to clarify stuff. What goes on in this period? At 5:52AM, Alv shifts his vote, as previously noted. His reason is that he thinks one of <STINK, Stick, Orlok> is evil, but they won't get lynched today, so he'll go for the lesser evil ( ) and thus Arinian. At 5:59AM, Arinian shifts his vote from Arraenae to Kynedath, chiefly because he doesn't want to die. And a minute later, at 6AM, Elenion puts a vote on JUQ. The state of play, thus, is that we would expect Arinian to be lynched. Kynedath is trailing at 3 votes to 4. Then: (and this is after Hael's clarification about the tie), at 10:58AM (my time), Doc swaps his vote to JUQ, reasoning he would prefer to force a tie because "I'm less certainty [sic] that kyne or arinian are Elims and I might as well force a tie. " So noted. We now know Doc is a Villager, so that at least doesn't help us too much. The rollover is, for context, about thirty-two minutes away. This, therefore, is the state of play at 10:58AM: STINK (0): Alvron<1> Arinian (4): Kasimir <1>, Nyali, JUQ, Kynedath, Alvron<2> Stick (0): Arinian<1> Joe (0): Kasimir <2> JUQ (3): Kasimir <3>, Elenion, Doctor<2> Kynedath (2): Doctor<1>, Magestar<1>, Arinian<2>, Arraenae, Arinian<4> Cloudjumper (2): Sart, Joe Arraenae (1): STINK, Arinian<3> Why does this matter? Because the final vote switch happened at 11:24AM. That's not the last second, but that's an extremely last minute switch from Arinian to cloudjumper, coming just six minutes before the rollover. Alv's reasoning appears to be along the lines of, "If Arinian is an Eliminator, then we would expect his teammates to make a fuss about the fact he's headed for a lynch. But there is no such fuss, therefore it seems that Arinian isn't an Eliminator." He removes his vote from Arinian and places it on cloudjumper, giving us a three-way tie between Arinian, JUQ, and cloudjumper. That's immediately strange: if Alv thinks that the lack of fuss surrounding Arinian's lynch indicates Arinian is likely innocent, then why go for a three-way tie? Why not place his vote on JUQ? After all, if he's happy to go for a tie, that means he's okay with a 1/3rd chance JUQ could be lynched. So why suddenly create one? I initially had more detailed analysis, but I just got massively chewed out by my supervisor, so I'm sorry to drop the ball, but I'm frankly not in the mood to analyse stuff, play, and generally be a fun person right about now. Suffice to say that I think one major caveat on the "Eliminators would save their teammates" narrative would be that they'd have to be on to see Alv's stunt. Not to mention it would depend on how they weighted the risk of being suspicious (for forcing a late lynch) as compared to simply allowing the dice to roll. Let's not forget that if they were suspicious and got lynched because of that last minute vote, it would automatically render whoever they tried to save suspicious. So I'm not really convinced by Nyali's reasoning that this means we shouldn't be as suspicious of Arinian and/or JUQ because they're more likely to be Villagers: Team Evil could simply feel that the consequences of saving a teammate would lead to worse consequences.

Holy Batman, are we even playing the same game? (Emphases mine) I do think it's well worth going back to the Ecthelion lynch, and what people have said about it. Earlier, I disagreed with the claim there is likely an Eliminator on the Ecthelion lynch. I do think we can't tell that immediately, because just as it is plausible that at least one Eliminator voted for Ecthelion, it is also plausible that no Eliminator did, and they just watched us and loled at the mess. So, five people: A. Elenion, B. myself, C. Kynedath, D. Alvron, and E. Nyali. Let's accept JUQ's claim for now as a working assumption, and see where that gets us. (This, of course, will be flagged as an assumption.) Alvron put down a vote with a blatant "no real reason, just hopping the bandwagon." At the risk of being overcharitable and reading too much into this, I have a guess as to what Alvron's reason was: probably something to do about seeing if anyone made a last-minute fuss about bandwagoning, or if a counter-wagon sprang up to try to save Ecthelion. Except that he claimed to agree with Elenion, so a bit of both? (I'm having difficulty making full sense of this.) Nyali's an interesting case, because her vote went down quickly [0751 hrs for me] and went off just as quickly [Lopen's post came through at 0754; Nyali removed her vote at 0810hrs.] It could be either case, IMO: a show-vote to indicate engagement in the game, or responsiveness to countervailing evidence (i.e. being a good Villager.) I'm not really sure which it is at the moment, but I do want to highlight that, because what's striking is that no one else removed their vote, given Lopen's clarification. So. On to myself. What I can say for myself is that my reasoning relied on the critical - but ultimately false - assumption that flavour items were allocated according to our character, including what we were in the game. Hence, for someone to have an item closely associated with the Dark Brotherhood seemed to indicate they were actually an in-game Assassin. What's key is that people who call this silly reasoning or illogical don't seem to dispute the inference - they seem to dispute the initial assumption in the first place. But enough of that. As I've explained, I really dropped the ball hard on this one in reading the M'Hael's clarification thoroughly. Whether or not that is convincing is not for me to decide. What I do claim though is that I went to bed after a late LG28 rollover, and so missed most of the late shenanigans here. Had I in fact caught wind of Lopen's post, I would have dropped my vote, since my initial assumption was false. (Again, whether you think that is a convincing claim is up to you. But I think it's a pertinent point for me, because we want to look at whose vote was responsive to countervailing evidence, and whose wasn't.) Kynedath has been heavily discussed, for issues with the reasoning behind her opening vote on Lopen, as well as switching quickly to Ecthelion. (Same link.) I'm going to assume that what Arraenae is really trying to accuse Kynedath of, since she never quite came out and said it, is of matching an Eliminator eager to get someone - just anyone, really - lynched. My issue with that line of reasoning is more or less the same as my reply to Elodin, which is that if and unless a fellow Eliminator was on the line, I don't really see why an Eliminator would need to be so specious in placing votes. Perhaps there's something to be said for hiding one's self on a bandwagon, but it seems to me that an Eliminator would not need to go so aggressively after Lopen (note: this is my read/framework, you are welcome to dispute it, and I would encourage disputation because you shouldn't be buying what someone else is selling without reason, and even then) because there were many other good candidates to go after! Kipper, for instance. Or Magestar. As I said, a cheap way to rack up 'Village participation points' is to just place a vote on an inactive and come back once in a while to swap to another inactive, without ever having contributed much to discussion. There's really no reason or need to go after Lopen so aggressively. This doesn't mean Kynedath can't be an Eliminator, but this does mean that this line of inference doesn't quite offer as much evidential support to the conclusion that Kynedath is an Eliminator as has been suggested. What's telling, though, is that Kynedath's reason for not shifting her vote from Ecthelion is information. And I'm not quite sure I agree with that. Simply put: not all lynches are equal. Let's say we all agreed to sit down and lynch DA at the end of this cycle. Would we gain information from that? Certainly. As much information as lynching Arinian? No. Not all lynches bring the same amount of information. For no other reason than the fact that he has been so thoroughly discussed, a lynch of Arinian would offer more information than a lynch of DA. (As I've previously mentioned, I would not be opposed to an Arinian lynch just to resolve the issue for once and for all, but that's strictly on an informational basis, rather than with where my suspicions are.) Would a lynch of Ecthelion have been extremely information-rich? Maybe. I'm not really sure about that one. Kynedath certainly thinks the Ecthelion lynch was the most information-rich of all possible lynches that day. I'd like to hear why. Last person: Elenion. And this is where things get really interesting. When I was reading today's posts, Elenion's stood out the most to me. Now, it's hard to quite articulate why: on the one hand, he does have a point. One piece of Meta's advice I always try to follow is keeping suspicions fluid. So, if you're in a hole, stop digging. If you've been talking about the same three suspects all cycle, maybe think about other suspects too. But that doesn't seem to be the same as completely sweeping past suspicions under the carpet, and there's a hint of that to Elenion's talk - if you genuinely think one of <JUQ, Arinian, Kynedath> is an Eliminator, then why on earth would you just completely ignore them and open an entirely new discussion on STINK? This strikes me especially odd in light of Elenion's words on Ecth, after the Lopen post (recall, Elenion was one of those who didn't switch.) "I'll keep my vote on, however, because even without the tenets, Ecth's tone still has me reading him as an elim, and I don't want to run the risk of letting him go." (Emphases mine.) Why the sudden change of attitude, then? That's just strange. It would have been nice to have heard more about what of Ecth's tone set Elenion off, but even so, his insistence on not letting a potential Eliminator go just seems weird in light of his attitude towards <JUQ, Arinian, Kynedath> this cycle. What actually surprises me most of everything thus far is your flagging STINK's contribution/analysis as weird/suspicious. I would think that of all people playing this game, you would know better than to be astonished that STINK is capable of doing so. But this goes a bit too far into LG28 territory, and so I'm going to step back from here, lest I break the information embargo and get Wyrm really annoyed at me >> But I do want some kind of answer to my questions, and so: Elenion.

I'm currently still doing a bit of reading, so I'll come back to this in a bit, but Joe's comment earlier struck me as being a bit odd, and I wanted to say something about it: I'm guessing 4-5 Eliminators for this game, going either by the 1/5th rule, or Meta's square-root rule. I'm going to work with the assumption there are 5, because it's better to overestimate when figuring out how much breathing room we have, as compared to underestimating. To make it clear, this therefore assumes we began this game with 18 Villagers (23-5). At this point, we've lost 4 Villagers, putting us 14 : 5. I want to say we have a decent amount of breathing room, because we have a buffer of about 8* people between us and the Eliminators. (I say 8 because I kind of disagree with Joe dismissing the ability of the Eliminators to put a quick hammer as a completely end-game strategy. It's all going to depend on the end-game dynamics. So. Here's a scenario that assumes we're 6 to the Eliminator 5. But the Village is not voting unanimously - our votes are scattered. The Eliminators put in a hammer, and now we're 5-5. They can effectively just tie us the next cycle, and go for the kill. Of course, this requires perfect activity from Eliminators and Villagers, which is unlikely. That could complicate things. Here's an example of how this could be complicated - say we're actually 6 - 5 or 7 - 5. But it's nearing the end of the cycle, and one or two inactives are likely to get killed by the filter. Cue quick hammer. So I really want to make two points about this: I think Joe is being too dismissive (by design?) - I think that as the game drags on, whichever of us is still around to see the late mid-game or the endgame has to be wary because the Village can't afford to be blindsided that way, if it should pass. We especially need to keep an eye on inactivity, and especially the sort that means someone is going to be filter-killed.) So essentially, I think two things affect our buffer: inactives getting filter-killed, and how close we are to the critical point when the Eliminators could, in theory, force-vote their way to victory. Still, it's fair to say that we have a bit of breathing room, at this point. (Proper analysis later, I promise.) More deaths. One of them was the nasty Altmer. Kjartan did not care. The Altmer was fond of talking. Why, Kjartan did not know. But you could never trust Altmer, they relied on magery, and surely that was a bare step away from necromancy and Daedra-worship! His hand was reaching to the hilt of his claymore, to give that stuck-up high elf a boot to the rear in Stendarr's name, when Mus squeaked urgently. "You are not saying--" Another squeak. Kjartan sighed heavily, squeezed the hilt of his sword, and let go. "Kjartan understands," he said, reluctantly, The Altmer would have to be given the Boot of Stendarr another time. There was more, urgent evil to be found and vanquished in this Manor! "We will go then, Mus." With surprising gentleness, he scooped up the well-fed mouse, and stalked away from the gathering, back into the corridors of the Manor. Let the others gabber on about the stabby stabby assassins in their midst. Kjartan and Mus stood ready to vanquish the forces of evil!

I don't really see the point in responding to a statement that's more speculation than any real charge, but sure, if you want me to. It's interesting that you're reading it as a 'desperation' to lynch Ecthelion: for one, if it is in fact desperation (however does that evidence arise?), then one would have to ask for your basis of such an assessment. Was it, perhaps, the fact I voted twice on Ecthelion? I was a bit more reticent at first, but simply decided to put all my cards on the table. And since I've noticed players these days don't seem keen to really read back on the cycle, I wanted a single post that made it clear A. why I was suspicious of Ecthelion, and B. that I actually have an outstanding vote on Ecthelion. While I don't think plausibility is all that strong, I do think it's stronger than mere possibility. (And I suspect this is a distinction between plausibility and possibility that most would agree with: it is possible, but not plausible, that there is a vigilante in this game. It's always possible the M'Hael is messing with us, but that's certainly not a plausible interpretation.) So that being said: to put it another way, being selective with our evidential standards demonstrates a rational failing - or at the very least, bias. If you can at least concede it is plausible that the Eliminators have no reason to be deeply involved in this lynch, then you should also exercise the same standards of evidence and probabilistic evaluation with regard to the claim that the Eliminators are deeply involved in this lynch, at this point in time. Since I'm dealing with questions already, might as well tackle this one. Being 'eager' to lynch Ecth is a (value) judgement. In fact, it's an interpretation you're imposing on my actions. And that's fine: a lot of this game is about us interpreting actions and utterances within a given framework and trying to convince other players to go with our framework. But this means that since I start by distrusting everyone, I'm going to ask you what reason you have to ground your framework - why should I 'buy in' to your framework? Why should I be convinced by one that adds the value judgement of 'eagerness' to my vote on Ecthelion? One could just as easily say I was being aggressive - which is hardly new for my playstyle in QFs and in vanilla games in general. So, what reason do you have to prefer this assessment to aggression, hmm? "It was illogical of you." Okay, them's fighting words. Now, I will concede this: I speed-read the M'Hael's clarification about items being allocated prior to alignment and would have voted someone else if I'd been more careful about reading those, or if I'd come back on in time to see Lopen's flagging that component. But illogical? Against existing evidence, sure. But don't come riding in on a high horse and talk to me about logic - for one, logic is the business of validity. Logic is about making statements that, given the premises, insure a conclusion that cannot be false. You want logic? Sure. One of you show me a deductive argument: otherwise, all of you are illogical. Show me a Day One lynch - or any lynch based on reasoning that relies strictly on modus ponens, or any other logical form that is neither inferential nor inductive. Then you have the right to tell me something is illogical. So, clearly you're thinking about soundness, which goes beyond validity to look at whether the premises are true. And I concede soundness, as I've already mentioned - I should have been more careful and not speed-read. But okay, even then: show me a Day One lynch that was thoroughly, unassailably sound, and I'll think about conceding it. Do you think it any more logical, then, to throw three to four votes on someone just for not showing up on the first day? (This has nothing to do with Arinian's guilt or lack thereof: strictly the reasoning/inference that it's suspicious if he hadn't said anything on Cycle One. Do you seriously consider that any more 'logical'?) Try not to stay on high horses, friend. We're all companions in guilt here, and none of us thus far are going to be winning gold stars for logic. Edit: Oh, in case you're wondering? This is not eagerness. It's investment. It's the investment of teaching basic logic for a living. Good night to all for real.

So noted I'm not sure how much I buy that since it reads more as a passive-aggressive way of decrying the lynch, but I'll accept this for now and ask others who've played with you before to comment if this is consistent with your known parameters. I'd actually like to keep my vote on Joe just because I get worried about him fading into the background, but I guess I should put my money (vote?) where my mouth is and go for JUQ instead. I'd like to hear a bit more about why he thinks there ought to be an Eliminator on the Ecthelion vote - it's not as if we haven't had past games where the Eliminators simply sit by the side and laugh at us, fools all, as we lynch someone they know to be innocent. Why think there is Eliminator involvement in this case? I'll give you one obvious reason to believe so: if you think Arinian is an Eliminator, and the push on Ecthelion was to keep him safe. Because quite frankly, otherwise, an Eliminator surely has much less suspicion-invoking targets: it's ridiculously easy to just slap a poke vote down and disappear for the rest of the cycle or keep 'poking' people and retracting at the vaguest hint of activity, no matter how constructive. So here's one caveat: perhaps they thought a Cycle One lynch was unlikely. But despite Ecthelion, Straw (at least ambiguously so) and JUQ claiming to be against Cycle One lynches, with cloudjumper as a more sulky "do it just don't lynch me", they were not pushing strongly for a no-lynch result. It doesn't seem obvious the Eliminators would have to work hard to actively force a lynch today: votes were still being thrown. We now know Ecthelion was Village, but then if both Arinian and Ecthelion are Villagers, then it's absolutely pointless for the Eliminators to get involved in the bandwagon since they literally have no reason to favour Arinian's death over Ecthelion's, apart from casting suspicion on Arinian as an Eliminator to be saved. But even that seems slightly flimsy. Even if you do think Arinian was an Eliminator, it's unclear what pushing for Ecthelion would have done for them. All the votes on Arinian were ostensible 'poke votes', to be retracted the moment Arinian showed up. (And my impression thus far is that it's still the norm that poke votes are lightly placed and easily retracted.) That being said, it's thus not clear he was in any active danger to begin with. Is that it, then? Do you think Arinian is an Eliminator? (I'll admit, I think I've outlined a plausible line of reasoning, but plausibility does not entail truth. I'd be fine with an Arinian lynch, if only to get some information on how the Eliminator team is playing this, but my current sense is that I don't see a reason for them to have dipped in deep.) And, good night! More pointing. More tongue-wagging. Kjartan sighed, quietly despairing. Truly, Stendarr sent the greatest trials to the devout. Was it so difficult for the god to simply point his Boot in the direction of evil and demand a proper kicking? Mus, for the moment, had opted for an unhelpful silence, burrowing down into his makeshift nest in Kjartan's pocket. He longed for the cold forests of Skyrim: the towering pines framing the moon; where there were plenty of nasty stinking dens of bloodsuckers and lycanthropes and smelly necromancers to be punished with Stendarr's Boot! Instead, here he was, twirling the god's toothpick about idly, itching for some action. And his cuirass was starting to chafe. And it seemed they would never stop talking, and he wasn't allowed to kick or smite them, so Mus had said. He wasn't afraid of the evil-doers coming after him. Bring on the knives and poison! It was what cowardly evil did, when squirming in its dens. And he would soon bring the merciful Boot of Stendarr to their rears! Let them try their pretty handprints when the Boot of Stendarr was stomping on their faces! But there was Mus, and so Kjartan marched over to where the Argonian was sitting by himself in the shadows, playing with his dagger. "Your name is Stub-Tail, no?" At least Kjartan paid attention sometimes. It was hard to tell if the lizard-man was acknowledging him, but Kjartan did his best. He pulled Mus out from his nest, with Mus letting out an irate squeak, and plunked the fluffy Voice of Stendarr down before the Argonian. "This is Mus. Also known as the Voice of Stendarr. Mus always guides Kjartan in curbstomps of justice for Stendarr!" He looked at the Argonian. "Hard to kill Kjartan. I eat iron plates for breakfast in the name of Stendarr! But Kjartan is only so strong, and he must carry all these things, and protect Mus. If I die, will you accept Mus?"

Hmm, fair enough. Thanks, Arinian. I'm torn between placing a vote on Stick, or poking Joe. One thought is that it just seems pretty strange to me, to place a second poke-vote on Arinian. It's less about who he is than the fact that at that point in the cycle, there were other inactives: if you're really just about promoting discussion, then why Arinian in particular? Why not anyone else? And why not poke people who showed up but failed to say anything substantive? And their comment that, "Cycle one lynches always victimise villagers. Which is why it's fun to vote. You can vote on whoever you suspect without rising suspicions on yourself later on when that suspect turns out to be a villager bc 'it was just C1 and no-one had any solid reads'. Well, I suspect that's fun when you're an elim anyway... " rings a little weird to me. If you think Cycle One lynches 'always victimise villagers', then why even bother voting, e.g. for Arinian? Why especially stack a second vote and possibly contribute to lynching a villager (as per your view that Cycle One lynches always target villagers) if you seem to be implying that Cycle One lynches are problematic? It's just a really odd statement that seems more poised than anything to discourage active voting under the suspicion that those must be Eliminators. And while this might be true, active discussion also helps the Village. As promised, I've also gone back over Lopen's observations, and he's correct: JUQ ostensibly placed a vote on Arinian to "even things out", but really just ended up making Arinian first target for the lynch. This was the state of play as of JUQ's vote: Doc (1): Arraenae Arinian (4): Sart, Stick, cloudjumper, JUQ cloudjumper (2): Doc, Lopen<2> Joe (1): Oookthelion III Ookthelion III (3): Elenion, Kasimir<2>, Kynedath<2> Assassin (1): Nyali Kynedath (0): Kasimir<1> Burnt (0): Lopen<1> Lopen (0): Kynedath<1> The relevant competing lynch candidates have been bolded for ease of reference. That's certainly fairly odd; at the very least, it certainly seems to indicate that JUQ wasn't terribly bothered about which way the votes were falling. That's fair, given we don't have any power roles to worry about this time around, but even so. I've noted his views on the lynch appear rather passive, but that being said, as previously mentioned, I'm not really fond of considering that to be particularly damning in any way, since Villagers have also been lynched for disapproving of Day One lynches. It would be good if people who played with JUQ can confirm if that tends to be his view, though. For now, I'll settle for poking Joe, I guess. If I have the time, I'll come back and see what else I can make of this. What's up, A Joe in the Bush? Is A Joe in the Hand better? What is a Joe, even?

In the recesses of the Manor, Kjartan had found and punished the thoroughly evil painting! He drew back his claymore, let out a fierce yell and slashed at it. Soon enough, the evil, evil painting had been cast onto the flooring in tattered shreds. Just to make sure, Kjartan stomped all over them in his leather boots and rapped the fragments with the Toothpick of Stendarr. (Someone had asked him about this once, but as far as Kjartan was concerned, surely the god used a silver-capped toothpick, and it had saved him before from werewolves! When in doubt, bashing a werewolf in the eyes with the Toothpick of Stendarr seemed to work wonders! And then there was Mus's ferocious teeth, gnawing at that evil creature in all sorts of unspeakable places!) Mus squeaked when the grim, necessary work of vanquishing the painting was done. "I know, Mus," Kjartan said, proudly, feeding the mouse a piece of cheese. "The work of Stendarr is never finished! Soon, we will find more evil rears in this Manor to kick!" Some thoughts about the general format, first: 1. The M'Hael has a sort of 'free hammer' card for the Eliminators, allowing them to put in all their votes at once via the GM. But they can only do so once. The way I see it, it's essentially going to be the tool they use at the end-game, because concerted last minute voting is just going to be super-suspicious, for one, and for another, it's also going to be super-suspicious if they're not putting the votes in themselves but are doing so by Hael. So I'm not sure this is a possibility worth worrying too much about, but maybe I'm overlooking something. 2. I'm not sure it's worth poke-voting anyone who A. has yet to post, and B. has used up their free chance, because barring any special dispensations, if they don't show up, they'll die anyway. That's got to be a lot more scary than having a lone poke-vote on them. Of course, the question is if we know if anyone has any special dispensations - my impression of what the M'Hael said is that Kipper gets an extra free chance, so he still hasn't used up his free chance. Meaning the only person in the 'Ticking Death Clock' territory would be Magestar. Still, best to check: M'Hael, would it be possible to check who currently has dispensation/ a bonus free waiver on their non-posting for this cycle? [Separate from the freebie we already get.] For now: Arinian. You mentioned that if you were lynched, Odium would have to give up his Shard to you, which is a pretty poetic way of saying you'd hate everyone for doing that. That seems like a pretty strong reaction: care to offer some context to it? Edited to add: I think the poke-vote does have its uses in terms of forcing people to actually say something substantive instead of presenting substantial RP or a vote as a way of 'gaming' the M'Hael's filter, though. Just that it's worth noting that the inactivity filter might take care of some issues for us.

Rule Clarifications: 1. Do we literally stab the Heart? Is that what the [Brittle] Knife is for? No. You will need something more 'conceptual' to kill the Heart. Or maybe a nuclear bomb, or a Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. E... 2. Can we give away items during the Day? Finally someone asks this. No, you may not. All Actions, as a default, take place at Night, if and unless the rules tell you otherwise. 3. Are conversions possible on the Night the Heart is chunked? Yes - the death of the Heart happens last, so it is certainly possible someone gets converted and then the Heart becomes an ex-Heart, pushes up the daisies...

Kjartan make vote twice. Once for Kjartan. Once for Mus. Mus matters So, if Alv says he's voting for no reason, isn't that a reason? *philosoraptor face* If Lopen is correct, then I would find it strange that JUQ pushed a lynch under the guise of tying it off. (I will check this, just not right now as I need sleep.) While I'm wary of Stick's views as they do seem to discourage bold Village discussion, I'm very much aware this view can be held by Village players. Still, it's worth flagging.

If you die early...

And the cycle's over - no more posting in thread, PMs have to shut down now, ladies and gentlemen, which means you get to wait in silence to figure out who lives and who dies since we'll be slightly delayed in posting the write-up due to a technical error. Please hang in there, and here's some nice soothing music to tide you over.

Let me be a bit more pointed: 1. It's Cycle One. Like it or not, we tend to get suspicious over really tiny things, more or less at the drop of a hat. (I'm going to decline to offer the specifics of my view on lynches and discussion, in part because they are wont to shift contextually (i.e. based on the game's rules and format) and in part because I understand they've been linked to quite a bit... And finally, because I've actually shifted a little in my views and I'm still trying to articulate what the nuances are with others OOG. For the purposes of this game, it will suffice that since this is a QF, I am generally in favour of us lynching someone today, as compared to not doing so.) This is a bit of a caveat; a prelude, if you will. 2. For those of you who don't Elder Scrolls or who are not up to date on your Elder Scrolls lore - let's set the context. This game essentially uses the setting of a quest in Oblivion, entitled Whodunit? (Incidentally, the name of the cycle!) In that quest, you play as a member of the Dark Brotherhood, tasked with killing everyone in Summitmist Manor - essentially, Assassins, or the flavour Eliminator in this game. As Elenion has helpfully added, the Five Tenets are those of the Dark Brotherhood. 3. Most of us have started, as per the M'Hael's clarification, with flavour items in their inventory. (I've got lots of cheese, which is great for Mus! Mus needs his cheese, and Kjartan would be nothing without his Mus! ) Those seem to be somewhat appropriate to character. So, Ookthelion III, why would you have reason to wonder about what the Five Tenets are, hmm?

No, Kynedath, it's the first cycle, but I have a dossier full of reasoning which supports my claim of your illicit, ahem, activities! If you'll step this way... You know what? Ookthelion III. Why mention the Five Tenets?

Kjartan and Mus tramped over the Manor, searching for any sign of malign activity. Occasionally, Mus would squeak; when he did, Kjartan drew to a halt and inspected the area. Some of the paintings were strange, Kjartan decided. Mus seemed to take a dislike to them, but why, Kjartan was not sure. The Voice of Stendarr had spoken, however, and he drew himself back, ready to give the painting the punishment of its canvas life, when-- Screams. Kjartan ran - away from the evil painting - towards the landing of the first floor, where a body lay, spread-eagled, obviously dead because of the protruding knife. There was a note, too, however: one with a red handprint on it. Mus squeaked emphatically, wriggling about his perch on Kjartan's pauldrons. "I see it too, Mus!" Kjartan declared. "The evil is among us!" He glanced suspiciously at the others. Surely there must be a sign, something that would set them apart - that would set Mus off, and then the Boot of Stendarr could get to work, meeting evil - hard - in the rear. Most of them were speaking, pointing fingers at each other. Kjartan snorted contemptuously. They were speaking, thinking. The Boot of Stendarr did not trust in such things, for surely evil had a silver tongue, and they barely knew each other. "What do you think, Mus?" he whispered. Mus was silent for the moment, burrowing into the hollow between pauldron and cuirass. Kjartan was, for the moment then, alone and bereft of guidance. Still, the Boot of Stendarr shouldered on the best he could. "You point them, Mus," he murmured. "And I will kick them in the rear!" There! Was that a squeak? Kjartan shouldered through the crowd, eyes narrowing. In Stendarr's name, he was going to put the Dunmer to the boot. I'm placing a vote on Kynedath. Edited to add: Before any confusion ensues, I should note that I tend to keep my RP and gameplay separate. Don't expect me to be voicing views in my RP - I RP because I enjoy RPing, that's all there is to it.

Rule clarifications: 1. Which comes first, item-passing or kills? Kills precede item-passing.

Because I lost a coin toss... I guess I'm supposed to sign up as Kjartan, as Nord who calls himself the Boot of Stendarr, hunting Daedra-worshippers, vampires, etcetera, in the name of Stendarr. Kjartan, of course, would be nothing without his Mus - a seemingly ordinary, grey-furred mouse, excellent at secreting itself about Kjartan's person, even while he's wearing armour. Kjartan defers to Mus's judgement, going so far to call Mus the Voice of Stendarr... I play too much Baldur's Gate, so sue me I'll be on holiday mode for the course of this game, though. You've been warned. One of the letters had found its way to a strange place: a heavily-armoured Nord, standing at an intersection, with a two-handed sword strapped prominently across his back. Kjartan crumpled the letter in his gauntleted hand. A soft, quivering nose poked out of his sleeve - a few moments later, the rest of Mus made an appearance. "Well, what do you think?" he asked the mouse. Mus gave a loud, emphatic squeak. Kjartan nodded, solemnly. "You are right, my friend," he declared; his voice both loud and cheerful. "Indeed, there is a stink of evil about this letter! No doubt about it, Stendarr has spoken! We must investigate this party, at once! And when we find a den of stinking evil...it will meet our boot! We will kick it hard, in the name of Stendarr!" Mus squeaked again, as Kjartan tossed the letter aside, without a second glance, and went to make all necessary preparations.