Jump to content

Amanuensis

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5932

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Amanuensis

  1. Amanuensis
    Hmm... yup, that's basically it I mean, we both know that I have no real claim on anyone in there. Just an amusing circumstance, imo Yeah, this is a part of the reason why I think Straw is innocent. It's basically just been accepted that he's going to be lynched and no one's really made an effort to stop it from happening. I'm mainly not interfering because of my Merchant plan, and that I don't like to lynch someone without me having a serious reason to think they're evil. I'd rather use my vote in a way that can help the village without killing someone. I don't think there is. I've done a little research into it since that's a huge thing in one of my worlds, and have yet to find an answer. Could probably just call it a Merah.
  2. Amanuensis
    You literally just ninja'd me editing my post to tag you and @TheSilverDragon to help. Thank you. Plus, the PM clearly says "Aman's Harem" and you're in it, soooo.... Also, here's a countdown timer again. I think it's right. And to finish, a friendly reminder to the local Legionnaire to Arrest me.
  3. Amanuensis
    What do you mean by behind the scenes stuff? This is the current vote tally. Would still really like more people not participating to vote for random players for my Merchant plan. (5) Straw: TheMightyLopen, Elenion, Ecthellion III, Magestar, The Young Bard (3) Elenion: Kipper, Sart, Straw, (1) Elbereth: Amanuensis, (1) Master Elodin: jaimeleecee, (1) The Young Bard: Mailliw73, (1) Mailliw73: Arraenae, (1) Emerald101: Stink, (1) Ecthellion III: Renegade
  4. Amanuensis
    To remind any Nobles, please PM Joe that you want to vote for me. I would feel a lot better knowing if there are actually Vanillas in this game or not. To determine who is the most suspicious I would have to go through the last 17 pages and analyze everything. It'd probably be easier for me to tell you who I think is likely not evil. Stink is most likely a Neutral role, and I'm leaning towards Elenion being a villager. I could see him being evil (which if it's true, I wouldn't be surprised if Magestar is too) but nothing that he's done immediately stands out to me as "I'm evil". I personally am not very suspicious of Straw, but he hasn't done anything that makes me want to make an effort to save him. All of the players that have done something I think is weird are either brand new or just returning after a long hiatus so I'm not sure if the vibes I'm getting from them are just a product of me not knowing how they play. Now that I think about it, I'm considerably suspicious of Ecth, but I'd need to look through all of his posts and do a thorough analysis to determine why, which I really don't have the time for right now (I honestly shouldn't even be on the site right now). I'm also somewhat suspicious of Burnt and Wilson , but I'm willing to chalk that up to the fact that they're talking to me in PMs a LOT more than I'm used to with them, plus some other small things that I can't really say because it would involve hinting at information that I'd prefer to keep the eliminators in the dark about in this case they're both actually villagers. I would ask that if you don't want to make an informed vote, just place it on someone who has no votes already so that the Merchants have more votes to choose from to show us. I am trying to get everyone an as-accurate-as-possible count of how many vote manipulators there are. Mailliw's already got a vote on him and he's kind of pointless to lynch this turn unless we want to do his ceremonial send off now, which given the extension, might be best. That's also something we should discuss. @Mailliw73, with the extension, are you going to be around for the end of D2 / to see the N2 write up?
  5. Amanuensis
    Ask and you shall receive: (3) Straw: TheMightyLopen, Elenion, Ecthellion III, (3) Elenion: Kipper, Sart, Straw, (1) Silverblade5: The Young Bard, (1) Elbereth: Amanuensis, (1) Master Elodin: jaimeleecee, (1) The Young Bard: Mailliw73, (1) Mailliw73: Arraenae, (1) Emerald101: Stink,
  6. Amanuensis
    I was actually tempted to make a group PM with the entire roster in it, earlier but either way, I don't think that's entirely necessary, Stink. People should just save most of the off-topic discussions for their PMs.
  7. Amanuensis
    Yeah, there's been some pretty interesting games in your absence Off topic, but I'm so hyped for KH3.
  8. Amanuensis
    Just saying, but, generally killing the GM is a terrible idea. First time it happened the eliminators won on the very first day. Second time it happened EVERYBODY lost. Trust me, not in our best interests. And this is coming from the guy who took part in both of those scenarios.
  9. Amanuensis
    Uhh... can you quote it, cause I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't see him responding to it.
  10. Amanuensis
    Jeskeri? What makes you think there are Jeskeri in this game?
  11. Amanuensis
    Well, I would recommend that they don't use something like that to decide what vote they cancel. I would say they should put every single vote into a random list generator and then mix them up repeatedly until the same person appears on the top of the list twice. By having more "going for them" I mean Elenion's been a lot more active, so I have a bigger picture regarding him than I do Straw, and for the most part what Elenion has done is either non-alignment indicative or villagery. Granted there's a couple things I don't necessarily approve of, but I don't think he's evil for those reasons.
  12. Amanuensis
    This. I was about to talk a little about this. (3) Straw: TheMightyLopen, Elenion, Ecthellion III, (3) Elenion: Kipper, Sart, Straw, (1) Silverblade5: The Young Bard, (1) Elbereth: Amanuensis, (1) Master Elodin: jaimeleecee, (1) The Young Bard: Mailliw73, (1) Arraenae: Stink, This is the current vote tally. I would like to see more single votes on players so that the Merchants have less of a chance of using their power on the same person. Also, between Straw and Elenion, I'd rather lynch Straw. I don't really have an evil read on either of them, but Elenion has more going for him right now, I think.
  13. Amanuensis
    I feel like you just claim that it's gut, and you're really saying your suspicious of me because my rate of being evil is like, 50% or something like that, so there's always a good chance you're right
  14. Amanuensis
    Since Joe never got around to it, here's a countdown, accompanied by a vote tally. (3) Elenion: Kipper, Emerald101, Sart, (1) antgrgmn: Ecthellion III, (1) Elbereth: Amanuensis, (1) Master Elodin: jaimeleecee, (1) The Young Bard: Mailliw73, (1) Stink: Elenion,
  15. Amanuensis
    Actually you missed quite a few players. I don't see votes for Lopen, Sart, Emerald or Renegade.
  16. Amanuensis
    I don't necessarily agree that it's a cause-and-effect (unless the Neutral in question is really petty). It doesn't have so much to do with being aligned Neutral, but how the player goes about playing it. If Stink never claimed to begin with, the eliminators would continue to think he's a villager and pay him equal mind. Meanwhile the village would have no more reason to look at Stink anymore than any other player. But because he claimed the eliminators know who to contact if they get desperate for some assistance. Plus they have leverage because they can say "if you don't help us we'll kill you ourselves," which gives the Neutral two choices: help them or sacrifice themselves so that the village can win. Most players are going to go for their win before they announce "this player just revealed himself to me as an eliminator" and thus risk being attacked. Now, if a Neutral player were to do that and ask for protection right after, I would respect that immensely. I've just never seen that happen, and I'm not going to just trust a known Neutral to do that if the situation arises. Besides, I'm pretty sure I didn't once threaten Stink. All I did is state my opinion on Neutrals. Emphasis mine. Prefer to see die is not the same thing as saying "I'm going to kill you." Emphasis mine. I don't even see me saying anything in here remotely threatening. Just stating how I feel about Neutrals. Emphasis mine. If anything that's a non-threat right there. I'm saying I'm not going to try to get him killed for Neutral claiming alone. Besides preventing a future betrayal, pursuing something like that is just generally unproductive. I'm not going to condemn a player for something they could do. I'm just going to make it clear that I don't think that player should be trusted until he gives me a real reason to (like any other player), let alone ignored simply because they're Neutral. Also, I'm going to get offline now to do course work again. Gotta be somewhat productive today.
  17. Amanuensis
    For the record, I do believe you're Neutral. I don't necessarily believe that you have no powers, though, or that your win con is just to survive. It's possible but I doubt that both of those things are true. Either way, like I said in our PM, the paranoia is always going to be there for me that you're not being completely honest about something. I'm not a Dula so I can't scan you to see if you're truly not an eliminator. Plus, Dulas can't even tell the difference between Village, Neutral or Neutral-Evil, which means you could very well be the third, which means for you to win the village needs to lose, and as for Neutral you can go either way. Since you keep saying you're not a villager, that means I have no really reason to care if you live or die. Hence why I would prefer it get rid of you, simply because the risk is much higher than the reward of leaving you be. Main reason why I'm not voting for you is because I don't think that a Neutral claim should be the focus of the lynch, especially on day one.
  18. Amanuensis
    I do understand that it could be done as as either a villager or eliminator hoping to get ignored by the other side. But the thing is, it doesn't really make sense for Village!Stink to lie about being a Survivor on D1 because... well... what's the point? Did you think you were going to get attacked tonight or anytime soon? It would make sense for a player with a high probability of being attacked first to claim a role like that so that they would hopefully be left alone by the eliminators. But for a player like you, who I don't think has ever been killed by eliminators earlier than C5, to do it makes me think that you have a different agenda. I could see you claiming it because you want to make the villagers doubt you or the eliminators attack you for having a super serious role when you're actually got some form of protection or even have a Veteran-esque ability. Either way, it makes me uncomfortable, because instead of you doing what's normal for you and just making jokes and pretty much being uninvolved in the game, it puts you right smack dab in the middle of it, and in a way that there's so much guess work involved that it's impossible for me to make heads or tails of it. As for the working towards my win con comment, I'll go ahead and cite the fact that I've never really seen a Neutral role work against the eliminators except when it's clear they're going to lose. More often than not, they either help them out or remain completely neutral and hold onto the identities of the eliminators they know. I don't trust that if you're telling the truth and approached by an eliminator that you won't work with them. A lot of the reason why my team won LG21 at all was because we got Mark (Survival) and Mailliw (the Troll) to occasionally work with, or at least not oppose, us. What do you mean by look at my elim team at the start of the game and predict a loss? Do you mean a village loss or elim loss? And I don't really recall ever doing something like that, except maybe MR15, but that's just because I realized how insanely village-balanced it was once I started considering the game tactically from an eliminators perspective. As for your predictions on the eliminator team... I think making predictions with no other information other than my own role is unwise. And though I've heard some vague claims already, I don't believe claims for a second. I need hard evidence of somethings existence before I start making assumptions about things. Which is why I'm trying to set up plans that generate hard evidence for everyone in the game. I only recommended stacking those votes on Elenion at the time because he had 5 votes whereas the second player had one. I do not want to incite a tie as that just doubles the number of villagers who die when we have absolutely no information to work with. My goal is to see how many provable roles we have in these games so that I can put that information on a table and as we see more players die and get more evidence of a particular roles existence, we can collectively figure out distribution, and hopefully pinpoint how many neutral, neutral-evil and eliminator roles there are. As for why I think it's likely Elenion will die, once again, I don't; I was just basing that post off of where the game is right now. We have under 12 hours until the turn changes and at the time of that post he had 5 of 6 votes that are currently casted on him. My point isn't to ensure Elenion dies, it's that I think whoever is in the lead might as well accumulate the extra votes to prevent eliminator vote manipulators from potentially getting two villagers killed at once. The only con is that I can't talk in the thread for the next night turn. If that guarantees me that I'll survive another cycle, that's a fair trade for me. It'll also allow me to establish a one-on-one repertoire with a player. After enough talking I'll probably be able to figure out if they're good or evil, which means I'll either find myself an ally or an enemy to out. I could ask for a Bodyguard but I'll then spend the entire night being paranoid about whether or not I'm going to survive another turn. I'd rather have the guarantee so I don't have to worry about it.
  19. Amanuensis
    Emphasis mine. Doc, mate? You mean thread, yeah? *jots down in my handy, dandy notebook* Tangent aside, I'm not very happy with the number of votes right now. Aside from the five on Elenion (Mailliw, Kipper, Stink, Emerald and Sart) there's only one on antgrgmn (Ecth) for what pretty much boils down to inactivity. I personally don't think Elenion is an eliminator and believe people are taking things he's said / done too far, but I said the exact same thing about Sart a couple games ago and he was the head-Darkfriend so, my D1 judgment is pretty much useless. I was going to analyze someone else and vote for them, but I've gone through all of the posts three or four times now and very little stands out to me. What little I have seen is either on players who I'm uncomfortable killing because they're new (Magestar), because this is their first game in a long time (Emerald and Renegade), or because they die early on enough as it is (Orlok). I've got some weird reads on Wilson and Alvron but nothing conclusive enough to get a player like them lynched on the first day, some mixed feelings about Lopen, and pretty much utter discontent about Stink. At this point Stink is the only player I would prefer to see die, and that's only because A: I don't trust anyone who claims a Neutral role in a game where everything about the eliminators is a secret and B: I don't trust Neutral roles to work towards my win con consistently. Unfortunately I don't feel comfortable about testing his claim myself because given the nature of his reveal, I can only logically fathom that he wants to be lynched. Except it's storming Stink, so you can't apply logic to anything he does, and just ugh... yeah, I'm pretty frustrated with him right now. I'm lost and confused enough this game to have to worry about nonsense like that. Now, since no one has really commented on some of my ideas regarding what the vote manipulators this round should do, I'm going to bring it up again because I think it is extremely important for us to get some idea of the role distribution, given how little we know. I'd rather be proactive in gathering that information than reactive, and I'd also rather do it in a way that doesn't force individuals to claim, while simultaneously preventing the eliminators from manipulating the lynch (though at this point it looks like they don't even need to get involved anyway). So, once again... There are three known roles that interact with votes. The Merchant, who can remove a vote, the Duke, who has a second vote, and the Nobles, who all vote on a player to receive an extra vote. Vote manipulation roles are very powerful for eliminators (LG21 was pretty much won by the bad guys because of vote manipulation alone). Since one can only remove and the other can only add, as opposed to the usual vote mover, I feel it's more likely that the eliminators have at least one, if not both, than neither at all. So, this is what I would like to see happen. If you do not plan on voting for Elenion this turn, vote for someone random that doesn't have a vote already. I, personally, am going to vote for Elbereth. Now, if everyone who doesn't want to get involved in the lynch votes for another player, the village Merchants have a long list of single votes to randomly choose to remove. While it will be possible for a pair of Merchants to remove the same vote, the variety and randomness of it should help make sure we see a maximum amount of participation. As for the village Dukes who can add an extra vote, I would say stack them all on Elenion if the gap remains as wide as it is. If another candidate gets presented and gains enough momentum that the lynch gets close, just choose a random player that has 0 or 1 votes. Since your power can stack with others we don't need to worry about not every Duke being accounted for. As for the Nobles, the reason I want to check if a Noble role exists at all is because in LG22 Gamma ruled that the Vanilla (powerless) roles could do the exact same thing (vote anonymously for a player to get an extra vote). Well, it turned out that there were no Vanillas, which meant the game had been role madness from the start. That would have been very good information to have, as it could have been used to argue that there was only one Viewer (scanner), as one of the two main bad guys would always show up as Vanilla in scans, and thus help us catch an eliminator earlier than we did. So, I propose that all Nobles vote for me. I don't mind accumulating the extra vote so long as it's the only one I receive, and the numbers don't decrease enough that an eliminator Duke can get me killed with a tie. If we get an as-close-to-accurate count on the number of Merchants and Dukes, as well as assurance that Nobles do exist in this game, we can begin to make some (more) accurate guesses on role distribution, which is a lot better than all of us remaining completely in the dark, in my opinion. Also, for any Legionnaire's out there, I'll say again that I would appreciate being Arrested tonight. I would also recommend Arresting Wilson if you don't want to Arrest me.
  20. Amanuensis
    On that note I'm going to bed. Will probably post again in 9 or 10 hours.
  21. Amanuensis
    Or no Citenzry at all.
  22. Amanuensis
    And this is exactly why I find it scary, haha. Anything that tilts the balance one way or another is concerning, to say the least in my opinion (is what I meant to say). Given that tidbit of information, I wouldn't be surprised if there was at least one eliminator!Beggar out there.
  23. Amanuensis
    Okay, so I don't have to worry about avoiding my PMs at night. Cool. Oh, wow. Okay. So like, if we lynch a Bodyguard today, all the Beggars could become a Bodyguard immediately. Kinda scary. Alright in that case how does everyone feel about all of the Nobles casting their extra vote on either a random player or the player who's in the lead to be lynched, just to prove that there are vanillas out there?
  24. Amanuensis
    Nine times out of ten, if a player claims an action that they didn't make, they're going to get called out by the player who actually did it, and the player who lied about making that action is going to end up lynched one way or another. In my opinion there is never a good reason for a villager to take credit for what someone else did (except in the case that they have the consent of the true manipulator, which will most likely happen only to draw fire). Now, the main purpose of that suggestion is to keep the village vote manipulators away from the lynch. Eliminators are automatically more knowledgeable than villagers (they know who is on their team and who isn't) which makes vote manipulation powers a lot more useful for them. If a villager blindly tries to take the lynch into their own hands, it will usually end up doing more harm than good. If all of the village vote manipulators vow to not affect the lynch, at least for a little while, the eliminators are either forced to avoid using the power or reveal what they are capable of, which tells us all a role that we need to look out for. Additionally, in the event that the eliminators can manipulate votes and use it to affect the lynch, there's evidence we can actually analyze. We can ask ourselves if they only used that power to prolong the death of their players, for example. Is that confusing? If there are any dead Merchants/Dukes, then all you need to ask is the claimer to prove it again by choosing a vote for them to change. Same thing if you think that the Merchant/Duke is inactive, afraid to counter-claim, or unaware of the claim. I don't believe I said trust a Merchant / Duke because they said "Oh hey, you know that one vote change two cycles ago? That was me. Give me all your info." I was only saying that they could use what they did in the past to help prove themselves innocent, because if they used their power to make it clear they exist without affecting the lynch they are most likely a villager.
  25. Amanuensis
    Pretty much agree with everything except for the bit about Emerald. It was Magestar that suggested he poke the Lurkers with @s, technically. And I think he did bring up some pretty good points (or at least that first article he linked aligns pretty well with my thoughts, so naturally I'm like, okay, cool). Now, technically he was just adding a third party's thoughts to the game rather than directly putting himself out there, but it at least shows us where his head is at. Not discounting the fact that he could be evil, but I'm really that suspicious of him for that. Then again, I do tend to be super misguided when it comes to new / returning players, so... /shrug I can see that, and think it's totally note worthy, but I dunno if it's lynchable, per say (mostly because this is his first game, too). Stink / Alvron's interpretation is correct; at least, according to the definition I know.
×
×
  • Create New...