Amanuensis

I don't think counterproductive is the right word. We still got two hours left in the turn to discuss an alternate target. That being said, I have to go out and celebrate my roommates birthday now, so I'm going to place my vote on Conquestor as well. I don't have the time to debate who would be a better target for the lynch, so I'd rather make sure an inactive dies rather than a potential village Duelist. Since cloud has the second number of votes, I honestly believe it would be best if he were the one targeted for Investigation. But that's up for my fellow senators to decide. See you all on the other side of turnover.

I kinda mentioned that earlier, I think. If there is only one Jeskeri on the Senate right now, that means the chances of that occurring is 20%. Not very high, but if cloud really is Jeskeri then I suppose those are better odds than a 100% lynch. One solution to that problem is to investigate the Senator who receives the result next cycle to confirm its authenticity. Also, I wouldn't necessarily argue that the monk gets locked down the rest of the game. It would just turn into an IKYK, where the Monk might risk protecting someone else or the Derethi / Jeskeri might risk attacking a potentially protected player. Which, from my experience, can be a good thing, as it forces the eliminators to second guess themselves. Before I decide if I want to vote for either @Conquestor or @Master Elodin, I would like to see one of them respond to defend themselves. I'm leaning towards Elodin because we'd gain more information since he's actually posted so far (particularly in the shenanigans targeting Bard), but I also am not a fan of lurkers, especially when the lurker in question rarely does it. If neither of them get on in time and no one else is willing to vote for Elodin, then I will likely place my vote on Conquestor to break the tie.

I don't necessarily agree. Derethi can't kill until tonight, and if we scan cloud now, we can confirm for the anonymous Kesegan Monk that he should the target of his protection so that cloud can protect one of us. So, I'm probably going to vote that we scan cloud and lynch either Elodin or Conq. Haven't decided which yet. Also, for everyone's reference, this is how long we have left in the turn.

I am not opposed. I would continue to use the doc to organize my thoughts into tables and take notes, though, in addition to placing my votes. I'm not sure who brought it up first, but I know I supported the plan in the doc already. Ultimately I agree. I kinda wish you didn't claim Duelist, but I guess it's not the end of the world. If we scan you and it's true then we can make sure the Kesegan Monk protects you from the Derethi kill while you protect one of the Senators. I personally don't find you very suspicious (hence why I haven't voted for you quite yet), but think your alignment is worth knowing considering how many people have talked about you. I still doubt the Derethi or the Jeskeri have much control of the Senate right now. At most I'd guess one from either faction. Since the Derethi win con has nothing to do with controlling the senate, I really don't mind leaving one of them in there, at least until we have more information to work with. The Jeskeri are going to want to free up slots in the Senate so if we're lucky they'll end up killing the Derethi in pursuit of that goal. As for the Jeskeri, as I've stated before, I doubt they began with more than one member in there, so as long as we keep the Senate filled, that shouldn't be an issue. I brought this up earlier, and suggested that if we ever appoint another player to the Senate, it needs to be after they are scanned. There is a weakness to the plan, however. As I brought up in the doc while talking to Elbereth about the danger of public scans, doing so is bound to draw the attention of the Derethi / Jeskeri kills. While placing a Duelist in the Senate is a good idea (albeit slightly game breaking) here's a danger I see with your idea, even if it is highly unlikely. Let's say the Senate votes to scan a Jeskeri, and the player who receives the result happens to be a Jeskeri as well. That Jeskeri can then lie about the results to convince us to elect them. So in order for that to work the entire Senate as it is now needs to be scanned first to prevent that from happening. Given that I suspect a majority of the current Senate are Dulas, I believe it's something worth discussing. I don't think it's the best plan of attack, let alone the most fun, and depends a lot on luck / whether or not we have enough protective roles in the game to cover the Senators / that the protective roles don't get picked off by the eliminators.

That's twice now you've posted something I was going to point out I even prepared this screenshot and everything. Speak of the Svrakiss and he shall appear, amiright?

I was literally about to post and comment on this... good on you for paying attention Name Last Online Straw 3 Hours Ago Conquestor 5 Hours Ago Eolhondras 8 Hours Ago Kipper 22 Hours Ago This isn't particularly indicative of alignment in @Straw's case, as his lack of activity is a reoccurring instance across games. @Conquestor normally is fairly active, but I'm relatively certain he's been lurking in LG23 too. That being said, I don't think I've even seen him viewing either of the relevant threads. @Eolhondras was definitely on when the PMs got sent out, but very likely could have gone straight to bed after seeing the results. I might go check the SE Stats doc to see if his time zone is in there to confirm that theory, unless someone else cares to do it for me. Not really much point in discussing @Kipper since he hasn't been online in a nearly a full day already, but I'll poke him anyway. Hopefully these tags will encourage them to come and play. From the Senate Doc: That means it is 0644 for him right now, so that guess of mine lines up pretty well. Can probably expect him to post in the next few hours.

Well, to be fair to Orlok, the reason everyone died was because of me and my decision to take the concept of an Anarchist way too far so I wouldn't really hold that against him. Can you elaborate on the "placing myself above the rest of the players" portion of your explanation a bit? That's the only part I'm really confused on. As for the "us Dulas" thing, I completely understand that interpretation, and really have no solid ground to argue on. While I can promise that was not my intent, I know that words are just wind, so that'll do nothing to sway your opinion. All I can say is I hope you consider my actions as much as you consider one example of phrasing. Now, in regards to the bit about trust, in my opinion, I was only stating a solid fact about this game that normally doesn't apply to others. Plus, with all of the brand new players and the chance that one of them started out with a role like Kesegan Monk, it just seemed like something worthy of mentioning. The point I was trying to make is that if I help lynch a Derethi today, that doesn't mean I'm a Dula. I could very well be Jeskeri myself, and therefore I, and no one else, should gain absolute trust without first being investigated by the senate. In the case that a player was instrumental in killing both a Derethi and Jeskeri, I could see that being enough reason to trusting them completely, but until that happens I'm going to advise caution. Once again, I do not expect to live long. If we keep the Senate stagnate as it is, it should be impossible for the Jeskeri to win without removing us themselves, and considering I was the one who proposed the idea I fully expect to be their first target. I doubt the Derethi will want to keep me alive for very long either, so all I'm trying to do is put all of my thoughts on paper (or in this case, in data?) so that people have things to reference when I'm no longer around.

Same for me! Eyes even watered up a bit towards the end

Personally, I am willing to cast my votes in the interests of the whole as opposed as the interests of the few. That being said, I am of the opinion that investigating the players within the Senate isn't wise, as if the Jeskeri want to win they are going to have to kill / get us repealed. In forcing them to do that, they end up providing the information we would receive from Investigations. The investigations can then be used to target those outside the Senate to effectively double what we learn as a collective every cycle. Of course, they could respond by simply leaving the Senate alone, but unless three of the starting Senators are Jeskeri (which is extremely unlikely) then we have nothing to fear in that regard.

Well, it's not like I asked to start a Senator that being said, I don't personally think someone remaining a member of the Senate for long is a good reason to suspect them on its own. If their Senatemates are being attacked while they alone are left unscathed, that would be a very good reason to believe they are evil. We will have to see who the Derethi and Jeskeri use their kills on before we can make any informed guesses on who, if any, of the current Senators are our enemies. I also want to take note that you only mention the Jeskeri and not the Derethi. I suppose I could interpret that as you believing the Derethi would not be interested in becoming Senators, which I can understand and believe is likely what happened, but I don't know you well enough to determine the likelihood of you boarding that train of thought so quickly. My knee jerk reaction is that you might be a Derethi trying to subtly focus people on the other evil faction, but for now I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. For curiosity's sake, what was your intent in asking this? Usually I ask a question if the answer has an impact on a genuine strategy but, I can't really see the benefit on repealing and electing a Senator simultaneously. Let's see, what else... Minor conflict between Mailliw and Bard about the rules of the Senate. Seems to have been resolved, and honestly I didn't see anything in the exchange that might be indicative of alignment. Bandwagon occurs on Bard, which I've already commented on in the Senator doc. Guess I'll put it in a quote here for easy reference. Guess this where I preach why it's important to explain the reasoning for your votes as much as possible. Barring information received through role interactions which are too sensitive to share at the risk of your own life, I believe that every villager should make it a priority to voice their thoughts and thoroughly consider / express why you vote for someone. It's relatively rare to catch an eliminator early on, both due to the fact that villagers tend to make up the majority and eliminators can coordinate their votes to ensure a villager is lynched over them. Knowing this, if we force everyone to apply genuine logic to their votes, it gives the eliminators less wiggle room to manipulate the lynch in their favor. Also, when one is eventually killed, we have more content of theirs to sift through for potential hints at who might be innocent and who else might be on their side. I understand that this is the first day and that none of us have access to enough information to do this effectively, however, there are tricks to encourage discussion or pressure players into reacting hastily, to be analyzed at a later date. One such technique is what Bard has been doing, except in my opinion poke votes aren't particularly helpful. I appreciate what he's doing - trying to get players who have yet to post to respond - but without any real bite to a vote, most players aren't going to take it seriously. You'll see them do things like Orlok and Seonid did, where they get on just to provide a reason for their absence, then disappear again. Keep in mind that in a lot of these cases there's genuine reason for them to be away, but if it's truly going to be effective a player needs to feel like they're in genuine danger. This post, by Meta, is a great example of a first day vote. It might just be because we have very similar mindsets / play styles, but I agree with the reasoning for his vote 100%. Although what Lime did is not very indicative of alignment, he effectively took a recent example of what's going wrong with the lynch so far and made an example of her. That being said, I'm going to comment on a couple other things, first. I agree with his assessment that Mailliw was only trying to clarify the rules (even though he was wrong), not attempting to play mind games with Bard. No one is perfect and we all make mistakes. While what Bard suggested could very well be an interpretation of his intent, I don't think it's very likely. While I like to encourage people to look at each action and reaction from every angle, I believe rationality should take precedence over paranoia. Likewise, Bard's reaction to Mailliw is very reminiscent of his reaction to him a couple turns ago in LG23. Unless Bard is evil in both of these games, I think that's more of a result of Bard's perspective being skewed by Mailliw's reputation than anything else. I've been a victim of the same exact thing recently, much to my chagrin, so can vouch that it is a serious issue. Ultimately, I disagree with Meta about Bard in this regard. That being said, I can at least understand where he's coming from. No point in reiterating what El and Meta have said about the length of these turns and the importance of acting fastidiously. I've pretty much already covered it this post. Okay, so, @Korathi Acolyte(s): not revealing your name is certainly an option, if you want to bring players into your doc without them first being confirmed Dulan by the Senate. I don't know if I would take that risk, as I think that's a great opportunity to get some villagers to collaborate without a chance of their plans being revealed to the Derethi / Jeskeri, but ultimately that'll be up to you. @Kesegan Monk(s): I still think that protecting players is more important thank screening players, as if you decide to use that and hit an unprotected villager you're ultimately making the eliminators job easier. But once again, that risk is for you to take. I can only tell you what I would do in your shoes. Can you articulate for me why you placed a vote on Kipper, as well as why you're suspicious of Meta? My notes require context. Otherwise that vote tally looks accurate to me. I'm keeping one constantly updated in the Senator doc, in case you weren't aware. I was going to copy it over but you pretty much did the work for me. That being said, I don't currently feel strong enough about any one player to vote for them to be lynched, either in thread or in the Senator doc. However, I am very tempted to nullify the Senate vote on Kipper for two reasons: A, like me, he was killed rather early in LG23 (which was his first game back in a rather long time) and B, I'm not very fond of players being killed before they have the opportunity to respond, especially when there's no real accusation accompanying the votes. If I were to apply pressure on anyone, it would likely be Cloudjumper, Lime or Eramit, as they all appear to be present enough to respond.

Because the rules are fairly complicated, I'm going to comment on those first before I begin analyzing this thread and the senate doc. I don't imagine this post taking that long, but then again this is me we're talking about, and I tend to be pretty long winded. Alas, here we go. So we've got three factions. Both the Derethi and Jeskeri qualify as eliminators, while the Dulas fulfill the role of villagers. Whereas the Derethi can kill a player every night, the Jeskeri can only sacrifice a player every other cycle. My initial reaction was "the Derethi are obviously the larger threat, due to them having a more frequently occuring kill" but then I read over the win conditions for the Jeskeri and realized that's an inaccurate deduction. If we assume there are 4 Derethi (and, in my opinion, that's being generous), that means they could theoretically win the game in 4 cycles if 3 kills occur every cycle on non-Derethi alone (would require the Kesegan Monk to kill villagers). That is extremely unlikely. Whereas in the case of the Jeskeri, all they need to do is make sure the Derethi die and convince the village to elect enough of them. While the latter portion of that is complicated, I believe that's a lot easier to pull off, especially given the fact that the Jeskeri - like the Dulas - are going to invest almost all of their efforts into finding and killing the Derethi, which is normally something that is perceived as good. My best advice I can provide to combat this is: treat both the Derethi and the Jeskeri with equal weight. So long as I am alive, I will do my best to remind players of where each faction is in terms of winning, to the best of the knowledge we have, so that no one loses perspective on the situation. While us Dulas need to kill the Derethi to win, we also need to make sure that the Senate is not compromised. Additionally, make sure that if a player is instrumental in killing a Derethi OR a Jeskeri, that does not mean they are on the same side as you. They want each other dead just as much as we want them dead. If you're going to give someone your absolute trust, make sure it's for sure reasons. That being said, I am going to encourage players to invest some trust in each other, because a cooperative, truly democratic village is going win more often than not. As for ensuring that the Jeskeri don't overrun the Senate, I would recommend we leave it as it is. I highly doubt that the Senate started with a Jeskeri majority. so as long as we preserve it in its current state we should be fine. Now, both the Derethi and the Jeskeri are going to want to get in there, the first for the power to control the investigations, the second for their win condition. As a result, if we decide not to recall any Senators, they are more likely going to use their kills to open up slots. This is good because due to the fact there's only five of us, it'll allow the village to be able to quickly narrow down which of them are evil (based on who are targeted and who are not). This also allows us to focus our protective roles on a smaller group of targets, making it more likely that a kill will be blocked, and therefore giving the village more time to gather information. In the case a kill slips through our defenses, it is important that we investigate any potential replacement first, which should not be hard to coordinate. Now, for the roles. Gyorn: You're evil. Not going to give you tips on how to use your Dakhor Spies. But I will use this as an opportunity to let you know that I'll be seeing you to the grave soon. Korathi Acolyte: You're basically confirmed good, yes? I would hold off on adding a player to your doc until they've been investigated, that way you don't risk handing your identity to the Derethi or the Jeskeri. Couple questions about this though. @Mckeedee123, does the Korathi Acolyte have to reveal their name in their doc? Also, is it possible to expel a player from their doc (or create a new one that they don't want a specific player to have access to)? I believe the answer to the first question is yes and the second is no, but I just want to make sure, as they both have strategic implications. Kesegan Monk: You're the only role that can protect literally anyone. Personally I think that should be your priority; while going vigilante and killing your suspicions might be tempting, I think it's best if you defend players you think are likely to be attacked, instead. At least until you have some very strong reasoning to get rid of someone. That being said, @Mckeedee123; does protection from a Kesegan Monk / Duelist differentiate from a failed kill due to the target being a Derethi / Jeskeri? The text suggests to me that it'll be clear if a player was saved because they're evil or because they're saved by someone else. That being said, if a Derethi / Jeskeri is saved by a Kesegan Monk and attacked by a Kesegan Monk at once, which message will the attacker receive? Merchant: Not having any real epiphanies regarding your power. Your power can only be used once so... mostly going to depend on luck, I think. Hope you're as good a gambler as you are a salesman. Duelist: Do not hesitate to use your ability. Seriously consider which Senator you believe is likely to be attacked. It helps if you ask yourself who you would attack if you were a Derethi / Jeskeri, or what the benefits and drawbacks would be of killing each player. @Mckeedee123 again... if a Senator is a Duelist can they protect themselves? Landlord: Personally I see a lot more benefits to this role in the hands of the Derethi / Jeskeri than the Dulas. If you're a Dula Landlord I have no good advice except to just use your power wisely. If you manage to get in a doc with a Korathi Acolyte, I would bounce some ideas off of them (and the other members of the doc, but only if they've been investigated already). Think that covers all of my thoughts so far. Can expand on the ones that I have questions for once they're answered. Otherwise I'm going to take a break and then tackle analyzing everybody. Feel free to counter any ideas or points I've made and I'll respond when I can, as well. I am rather fond of discussion.

I'm on mobile now. Not sure how to change the color of my text but this should be all blue. It's 0135 for me and I'm just now getting to bed after a rather long date. I've got work in five hours so I will get on then to compose and post my thoughts. Sorry that I have nothing else to say right now. Have a good / night all.

As it's likely I'm going to die I might as well get my faction one last boxing on the way out. Burnt.

If an extra body is needed, I'll sign up again as Opalin.

I want to formally apologize for anyone I upset in earlier posts. It is clear that I was only considering my thoughts and feelings towards the game and no one else's. I'm not going to make excuses for anything I said or did, just ask that you forgive me. That being said, this will be my final post. I do not expect to survive the night, but if I do I will talk to Renegade about replacing me. Best of luck all (except the Spiked. I hope you all die painful deaths ).

I'm sorry to do this, Mckeedee, but I'm going to have to resign as well.

Everyone who bandwagon'd on me forced me into this situation. I did what I had to survive, all because players found it more important to lynch me because there's this false notion that I am a threat to them rather than players who are actually suspicious. Orlok was the only person who accumulated votes for genuine reasons, and whether or not I lied about Seeking him does not change the fact that between him and I he was the only one who deserved it. Also, what the rusts does LG17 have anything to do with this? Oh right, it doesn't. Stop bringing it up, please and thank you.

Clearly not Spiked? Please illustrate to me how that was clear. Because from my perspective he was one of four players that have openly said something that was anti village this entire game. Do I need to quote my entire post where I called him out for what his plan was and what effect it would have on the village? Apparently I do, since you obviously didn't read it or simply forgot. What was my alternative, Stink? Let myself die when I heavily suspect the Spiked are actively trying to drive lynch discussion away from anything useful and get me killed in the process? Yeah, no. Not going to happen. I can trust myself. Unless I have a reason to trust someone else, I will not hesitate to put my life before theirs unless I have reason to believe they will be more helpful to the game or are without a doubt not evil.

The alternative was my death for absolutely no reason but the fact that this is a faction game! I am not going to put someone else's life before mine when I know I am innocent and have reason to believe they are evil, regardless of whether my suspicions were right or wrong. That's just idiotic, and honestly the amount of hypocrisy I've seen this game is irksome at best, frustrating at worst. How dare any of you instigate bandwagons on me for no other reason than a faction game, then you accuse me of doing the same thing when all I want to do is find the Spiked. The fact of the matter is I am useless early game. I need information to find the eliminators. And this notion that I'm the one person who's going to come up with a strategy that will miraculously win the game for my faction alone, or that I'm going to manipulate the village into exactly what I want, whenever I want, is absolute chulldung. Alv is by far a better strategist than I, Mailliw a far better information gatherer and manipulator. The fact that people are focusing on me screams that one of the players in my faction is Spiked, knows that I'm a Seeker, and is having their Spiked friends in the other two factions pushing for a lynch on me because they are afraid of me finding them. Also, you people think killing me to confirm my role is going to help this situation? I already proved I was telling the truth about scanning Alvron, loathe as he is to admit it. There are two ways for me to prove that I am beyond a shadow a doubt telling the truth. I just offered to scan players at the command of the village rather than my own faction's gain alone, the results of which can be confirmed by any and every member of their House if not the player themselves. Also, I am completely open to being scanned myself, which will prove that killing me is an absolute waste of time and exactly what the Spiked want. Let them waste a turn killing me. Don't do their dirty work for them by lynching me, when there's absolutely no reason to believe I am evil and a ton of evidence to suggest otherwise. Once again, to reiterate, I cannot be the Inquisitor because I used a provable action last night. I could be Spiked but why waste a village Seeker trying to prove that when you have a safer option? Unless Bronze has some unknown perk that'll help the Spiked more than the village it just makes no strategic sense. This is two games in a row now where I'm being targeted by the village for both false and unfair reasons, and frankly it's getting exhausting. Emphasis mine. This isn't even a valid argument. A player has been Spiked every night so far because the Inquisitor is clearly making planting spies their priority. Unless the Inquisitor is brand new or daff, choosing me to be a spy for him is one of the worst ideas imaginable. Yes, I could be telling the truth about being a Seeker AND have been Spiked N0, but the likelihood of that happening is so low, it's ridiculous. Plus there's the fact that I didn't even choose to scan Alvron; my House did. I wanted to scan Orlok or Joe, but my vote was overruled. And either way, what's even the point of getting a specific role on his team when every House is going to be privy to the information gained and vote on how powers are used? Given that this is a faction game, any smart Inquisitor would be choosing players who are unlikely to get targeted by lynches and Coinshots from the start; doing anything else would result in them losing a number with little return benefit. I'm pretty sure everyone here has played enough games to realize that besides me.

First, I didn't want everyone to attack Penrod. I suggested it. Where was there ever a want, let alone a determination to see it through? I wasn't even the player in my faction that came up with the idea, just the one that was decided to bring it up because I had already taken enough flak as it is. It's another reason to support why I haven't been Spiked. On D1 a lot of players were making it clear they didn't want me around. I've also been stressing repeatedly how there's little chance I'd even survive N2. Also, besides killing more players quicker, I don't see how having all factions gang up on one faction helps the Spiked more. Every single faction wants the same thing, and you yourself even said that it is a good idea, but only if implemented through the use of PMs. The only real flaw you pointed out was that Penrod could just retaliate by going all out on another faction. You're right. If I were the Inquisitor, that would make sense. But I just proved myself to every Penrod alive, unless one of you wants to admit that you're Spiked with me, as there is no other way I could have gathered that information at the start of D2. I could not have scanned a player at the same time of spiking another. I am proven not to be the Inquisitor by this fact alone, at least. I have no argument against not being Spiked other than the fact that I am free to scan yourselves. Granted, there's no guarantee that there is another Seeker in this game, though I'd hazard a guess that there is due to Smoking. You'll be able to tell instantly if I'm Smoked because I'm claiming a role, so if I appear roleless than you'd know that's a lie, too, that information can be revealed in the day and ya'll can feel free to lynch me. In killing me for this, however, you deprive yourself of an actual chance at finding a Spiked. Also, I want you all to ask yourselves, what would you do in my shoes? You know you're not an eliminator and you know you're a very useful role for the village. People are trying to kill you for no other reason then they are afraid of you. You have an opportunity to tell a half lie to preserve yourself long enough to explain yourself more, and at the same time might be able to take a Spiked with you. Would you just accept your death? Or would you do everything you can to stay alive? Yes, I get it, a Spiked could be doing that to help themselves. But for the Love of Lady Vedel, that is not alignment indicative, so do not use that as a reason to condemn me. I have never used that card on you. I have brought it up in relevant conversations, but never to get you killed. Which I don't really understand. You did it in the very same game and were innocent, right? Were you even up for the lynch that turn, or just bored? Either way I stand by the fact that I did the right thing. Killing a Regular over a Seeker regardless of the faction is a better trade, any day of any game. Once again, how? How does this say I'm playing the faction game more than I say? Also, how can you even use that against me, Mr. War Propaganda? So far I don't think I've seen a single player making any serious efforts towards finding the Spiked. Not like I have, at least. Well, your non-answer just about proves I'm telling the truth and you don't want people to figure that out immediately. I false claimed to you in AG2 and you did not hesitate to call me out on my lies then. That being said, Peter Baelish is one of my favorite characters (in the books, especially), so I don't particularly mind that comparison.

No, I'm not saying you're the Inquisitor. I scanned you the previous cycle and it said you were Unspiked and that you burned Tin. Also, I'm playing purely for my faction and not to find the Spiked? Everyone who voted for me before only voted for me because I was a different faction. Only a handful of players have actually voted for players for genuine reasons so far this game, and of them I am the only one who composed a post longer than a paragraph or two explaining my reasoning. Whether or not Orlok was a member of my House, the reason for my actions was nothing more complicated than I was suspicious of him and know without a doubt that I am Spikeless.

That's a lot of false assumptions. While I did lie about scanning Orlok last night to save my own skin (because why would any sane player let themselves get lynched over a player in another faction who actually said suspicious things?), I did actually Seek a player: Alvron. Given that Spiking is an action that means it's impossible for me to know what metal he burned, otherwise (if Alvron wants me to reveal it to everyone I will, but I'm assuming with as many hits Penrod has taken already he would want to keep that card close to his chest). I could be Spiked and another member of Penrod could be as well, but I promise you that the former is not true. That being said, now that it is out in the open that I am a Seeker, I think it would be a good idea for us to propose a vote on who I scan. Consider it like a secondary lynch. Players we actually think are suspicious can be nominated to make sure they are not Spiked, and another Seeker can scan me to confirm I am not as well. This way we force the Inquisitor to attack me if they want to keep my results from becoming public knowledge. It'll also be impossible for the Inquisitor to smoke a player that we vote to scan on during the night because Smoker's have to put their orders in during the day.

@STINK @TheMightyLopen @TheSilverDragon I see ya'll on the forums. Any of you care to kill a Spiked instead of a Seeker? Or are you Spiked too? And thank you Nyali. You made the right choice.

Of course you're a Penrod too. Why couldn't my team be online before turnover instead of the Spiked's.

@Alvron You should know as well as anyone that I'm right. If I'm lying and Orlok is innocent, what does the village lose? If I'm telling the truth that means Orlok might very well be the Inquisitor and not killing him would result in another Spiking. This is exactly what happened with me being right about Padan Fain in LG22 and because the village decided to lynch me instead he got another conversion off. I beg that the same mistake is not made two games in a row.