Amanuensis

Ah, yeah, that was an unintentional side effect. I even said I don't classify Stink or you as a problem in this regard. You're Chaotic in that you're hard to predict. You do lie now and then and cause chaos in doing so (I think in QF14 you claimed you scanned Elbereth as an eliminator when she wasn't, just because you thought she was evil?) but it's not that often you do things like that.

I'd put the fault on the people that voted for you all I did was encourage the numbers to grow on the two of you. Ah, that's no fun. Now I'll need to find someone to put an 8th vote on you. @TheSilverDragon, maybe? I don't think popularity is much of a factor. I'll be straight up with this, I'm trying to see who's on teams with who, and do it in a way that everyone is free to analyze. By forcing a tie between you two, we'll see who is willing to get involved and who plans to just sit in the background and let it happen. The more people involved, the more information we can gain.

It will be when PK votes for Mailliw to preserve himself

Awww, Nyali! You ruined my plan. I was trying to get PK to vote for Mailliw so I could retract my vote again to make it a tie and force more players to get involved. Now I have to vote for PK and retract from Mailliw to make my dream come true. (7) Paranoid King: Sart, Conquestor, Master Elodin, Mckeedee123, The Only Joe, Mailliw73, Amanuensis, (6) Mailliw73: Cloudjumper, OrlokTsubodai, The Young Bard, phattemer, Bugsy6912, Nyali, (3) The Only Joe: Kipper, Strawman, Araris Valerian, (2) Kipper: Jaimeleecee, Arraenae, (1) Master Elodin: Paranoid King, (1) Amanuensis: STINK (1) Stink: The Mighty Lopen, (1) dowanx: zas678, (1) OrlokTsubodai: Elbereth, (1) Strawman: Burnt Spaghetti,

I'm not saying that the play style itself should be punished (though I can see where that may have been implied). When I was reading through the dead doc I was intrigued by the subject and it left an impression on me. Later, when I was attempting to keep up with the thread and saw it devolving into a chaotic mess, I realized how incredibly dangerous that would be for us in the end, and due to having a lot of strong opinions on these games, I figured I could use it to easily illustrate my point. I agree that there is nothing inherently wrong with a specific play style. It's how it's used that matters to me, so I'm going to speak up if someone is doing something that hurts the village. I suppose I was kinda telling people how to play, wasn't I? That wasn't necessarily my intent, but I can see how it came off that way. As I said earlier in a response to Elodin, I want him and everyone else to have fun. I would just very much prefer it if they had fun in a way that didn't make it harder for us to win. Since I think in Elodin's case - and a few other players who were doing similar things to him earlier - that he wasn't considering the long term repercussions of it, my only goal was to get him, and everyone, to think a little further than they would normally. If there was a guarantee I could live until the end and see things through, I probably wouldn't be so aggressive about it, but since more often than not I die within the first three cycles of these games, I feel it's important that I give others the tools they'll need to root our the evil ones without me. As for the business with mods, it's because I see a player willingly going against their win con as destructive and worthy of addressing. Like I said, I don't know if in that scenario Strawman was intentionally sabotaging the village despite being village, but that sorta thing, I thought, is generally thought of us game breaking / against the rules. If Elodin, or any player, causing chaos is a plan from their House that means they know the reason and the truth of it. Unless he is in the faction of 6, 19 other players in addition to me are all suffering from said chaos. When you throw the Spiked in there who want chaos to keep us from organizing against them, those of us remaining villagers should definitely want to see it end. I am definitely not saying we need to kill lower threat players because they're not useful. I'm saying that, in the case of the lynch, we should not be using it to posture our Houses but to execute suspicious people and maximize information game. I also wanted to bring up the dangers of killing players off just because they are a threat to your faction; I am willing to bet that Renegade balanced the player composition of every faction as well as the roles and starting resources. If every House makes a serious effort to kill other Houses "high threat players" then the Spiked are going to be much better off. As I've said before, I don't want that to happen because if my House is going to have any chance of winning the Spiked need to die. I'm glad to see someone else agrees that outwitting people is more fun then simply killing them. You should be careful with agreeing with me about so much though. People might begin to suspect we're working together.

Very well then. It that case, Mailliw. (6) Paranoid King: Sart, Conquestor, Master Elodin, Mckeedee123, The Only Joe, Mailliw73, (6) Mailliw73: Cloudjumper, OrlokTsubodai, The Young Bard, phattemer, Bugsy6912, Amanuensis, (3) The Only Joe: Kipper, Nyali, Strawman (2) Kipper: Jaimeleecee, Arraenae, (1) Master Elodin: Paranoid King, (1) Amanuensis: STINK (1) Stink: Lopen, (1) Dowanx: Zas678, (1) Orlok: Elbereth, (1) Strawman: Burnt Spaghetti, As for my reasoning, I wanted to make the lynch a tie so that I can see who all is willing to make a move to break it. Ya'know, for science.

If you want that vote to count you need to retract on phattemer FYI

Oh, no. I'm sorry about that. The only real portion of the post that was directed specifically at you was the paragraph where I mentioned your name. Before that I was only defining what it meant to be an "unhealthy" Chaotic, and pointing out the damage it can deal. Like I said, I don't think you've had any malignant intent in aiding the chaos. I think you were just having fun. I hope I didn't ruin or discourage that, because that's not my intent at all. I want everyone to have fun; I just would prefer it to be carefully considered fun. As long as people do that then I am happy. I was just using that as an example; like, if something is an issue, we shouldn't ignore it, but at the very least talk about ways to fix it. I'm really sorry that analogy hurt you and I will make sure not to use something like it again. And okay, I'll retract my vote. Elodin. I was going to wait until I had a genuine reason to vote for someone else, but I can understand your concern. I don't like it when people vote for me, either. No hard feelings?

Ah, Braize Of course it was you that asked. I really thought that I was onto something there and I was excited to share it. Humph. Also, since I just saw this edit while I was doing a vote tally for my team, I'll respond to it now. Where did I imply you were a child? I only talked about you in one paragraph of that post. It was all statements of facts, and I even said you did something clever. I don't understand why you would respond so defensively, as if I attacked the quality of character or badmouthed you in any way. I'm sad to hear that you don't care about my opinion. I think that's a pretty harsh thing to say, and not just because it's directed at me. As a human being in general, not caring about other people's opinions is what causes the most problems within and between societies. I'm not sure where you're going with those numbers, but I think referring to me as "kid" in the context of this post is a bit rude. Either way, I'm sorry if I upset you. If you've calmed down enough to explain what I did exactly to trigger this response, I'd appreciate you did so I can make sure it doesn't happen again. Anyway, vote tally. (4? 3?) Paranoid King: Sart, Conquestor, Master Elodin? (Not sure if it counts because it’s in a spoiler), Mckeedee123, (3) The Only Joe: Kipper, Nyali, Strawman (2) Mailliw73: Cloudjumper, OrlokTsubodai, (2) Kipper: Jaimeleecee, Arraenae, (2) Master Elodin: Paranoid King, Amanuensis, (1) Amanuensis: phattemer, (1) Ada?: STINK, (1) Stink: Lopen, (1) Dowanx: Zas678, (1) Sart: The Only Joe,

Yes. I'm more so trying to make a point here, and you were just the best example at the time. I don't truly think you're the Inquisitor or Spiked. I just think you're trying to have fun (which is perfectly fine) but not considering the repercussions. I just I want everyone to realize just how incredibly dangerous this chaos we've allowed to happen today is and hopefully put a stop to it. I want my House to take the lead as much as anyone else, but I don't think that using the lynch to do it is worth the fallout. We've got a cornucopia resources strictly dedicated towards the House War. I firmly believe we cannot afford to let the lynch become just another tool to gain advantage over our rivals. Doing so just makes the Spiked's job easier. That being said, I have something genuine to bring up for us to discuss. Empasis mine. If Ren gave us this clarification that means that someone asked him. I highly suspect the person that asked him was the Inquisitor. If it was the Inquisitor then we can infer a lot of useful information. Unless the Inquisitor is Alvron, this question would be purely reactive, rather than proactive. I don't think I know any other player in this game who thinks that thoroughly / far ahead. This means that the Inquisitor Spiked someone who's role they did not know. I take this as confirmation that the Inquisitor Spiked someone in another House, rather than one in their own. This also means that the Inquisitor Spiked a player not for their ability, but what they could offer strategically, and did it with a less useful Spike. For them to ask this question means that the player who they Spiked had a role that matched another one of his Spikes, and that it was a strong enough role that they would consider converting one less player in order to empower that ability. I can only think of a handful of roles an Inquisitor would want to empower. In my opinion they are most likely a Lurcher or a Coinshot, as I could see no other role's flaring ability more powerful than another teammate / potential ability. So, in conclusion, I believe that one high threat player was Spiked last night, and it's a high threat player with a more powerful role, most likely Coinshot or Lurcher. It's also likely a high threat player that does not have a tendency to die early or make enemies. Given that every high threat player has at least 20 players who want them dead because of it, it wouldn't make sense to Spike one of them, unless the Inquisitor could ensure protection. Even then that would be a dangerous move because if that player's House doesn't have protection of their own they would quickly figure out he was Spiked. If you have another interpretation of this, or think I'm onto something, please say so. Either way, I advise you scrutinize any player in your House that fits these criteria with a magnifying glass. @Renegade, do earlier voted need to be edited into green in order for future votes to count? Or only be retracted in a new post?

3 of 7, actually, and one of 6 (7, 14, 21, 27). I also wouldn't make any assumptions on whether or not the Inquisitor starting in a faction based around how many players they had; I don't see how the two correlate. Did I ever express doubts about knowing what you're doing? No, I know exactly what you're doing, and what you're doing is just plain bad. "Messing with all the other houses and the Spiked" helps no one but the Spiked. Unless the Inquisitor holds off from converting a single member of every faction or doesn't have three spikes to spare, our docs are ALL going to be compromised by N3. Once that happens they are going to have all of the information anyway, so why would they even care what you have to say in thread? As for anyone in any other House, who's going to take anything you say or do seriously? Who honestly is going to pay severe attention to any nonsense anyone spouts to obviously troll people? The only thing worth paying attention to are where people place their votes at the end of the day. You're literally doing nothing helpful for your faction and harming every House at the same time by helping encourage this chaos. You are doing exactly what the Spiked want, and it is very possible you yourself are Spiked. I've already laid down my reasoning, which so far is the closest thing to evidence presented by anyone so far. And you know what? If we kill you and it turns out you're a villager, three Houses benefit from your House losing a member and all Houses benefit from removing a villager intent on helping the Spiked. In my opinion lynching you is the best option right now. Also, this whole lynching players strictly because they're a threat to your House, thing? I am passionately against this. Take a step back and honestly consider how that makes a player feel; to be killed for no other reason than being good. I don't know about any of you, but I don't join this games because I want to die. I join because I want to play. If you want to kill me or any other "reoccuring player" because there's genuine evidence against us, we've done something suspicious, or like Elodin here they're doing something that's hurting us all, then feel free. But lynching someone because they might find a way to outmaneuver you? How is that fun, let alone fair? How about your House puts your heads together to figure out a way to outmaneuver the players you're so scared of. Look at it this way. If every faction actively kills "high threat players" what does that leave? No high threat players left to help find the Spiked. And if you're the one or two "high threat players" that survive that initial onslaught, guess what? The Spiked are just going to kill you, next. If we do not all take this seriously we will all lose. If you want to win you cannot let this happen.

Well, let's try this again... storming internet. Mailliw. Stink. Elodin. For any of those who have seen the LG22 dead doc, you may have read an exchange that took place between Elbereth and Wilson regarding categorizing players. For those of you who have not yet seen it, I will go ahead and post the relevant paragraph in here. And don't worry, I've already made sure there is nothing spoilery in it. For this post I am going to address the playstyle category that Elbereth titled "Chaotics." In the quote above, she lists Mailliw, Stink and Gamma; all three of which I have absolutely no qualms with. They are examples of players who are typically hard to read and and hard to predict, while still making efforts to aid the village (when they have the relevant win con). What I do have a qualms with is villagers that, intentionally or unintentionally, cause chaos amongst their ranks. It is these “unhealthy” Chaotics, who do what they want when they want without considering the repercussions and make no genuine contributions to the progression of the game, that I am going refer to for the remainder of this post. Disclaimer: This is by no means a personal attack on anyone. If you are mentioned or used as an example, I want you to know my intent is not to upset or insult you. I only wish to stop a minor problem before it grows into something worse. In most games Chaotics tend to either be unremarked or ignored entirely for most of the game. They’re behavior is rarely addressed, and when it is it's rarely more than an exclamation of frustration. In any scenario where they are punished for it, it's not until after they do something that directly harms the village. At its very essence, this is being reactive rather than proactive, and I am a firm believer that if you want to get far in anything you do you need to be the latter. Any decent parent will tell you that if you do not punish a child for doing something wrong, you might as well be teaching them that it’s right. Any modern court will tell you that knowing about a crime before it happens (or seeing it unfolding before you) and making no effort to stop while you have the ability to it is as good as being an accomplice. Aren’t we saying it’s okay for people to behave the way I described above, or even guilty of the problems it causes later down the line, by making no serious efforts to stop it? I firmly believe that this is exactly what we have been doing and argue that now is the time to put a stop to it, once and for all. To relate why I think these Chaotics are dangerous to these games I will cite a pretty recent example. For those that might not remember or were not here when it happened, there was an incident in QF14 where Strawman was lynched and confirmed a villager. In that game, a lynch wasn’t a kill, it was an arrest; the player would not be able to talk in thread or use actions on free players, but could communicate in PM. Strawman claimed to several people in contact with him that he scanned a player as evil right before they died. Because it made absolutely no sense for a villager to lie about that, we believed him and spent the day turn lynching that player. Needless to say many people were upset when it was revealed Strawman lied at the start of the next turn. And when asked why he did what he did, do you know what happened? He disappeared, leaving the village in the dark and several steps behind where they should have been. I do not know why Strawman did what he did. I also do not know if the Mods talked with him about it afterwards. But I do know is, besides posting that they were upset by the turn of events, no one really talked about why what he did was so wrong. Eliminators thrive on chaos; due to how powerful it is, they’ll often do whatever they can to instigate it. Anyone who played one of the two games where I was a living, revealed eliminator knows how dangerous chaos can be for the village. And you know what’s better than a living, revealed eliminator causing chaos? A living villager causing chaos without their influence, and being left free to do it. I am not saying that the Houses need to work together on everything. All I want is for each House to be organized effectively so they can catch the Spiked planted among them. I know for a fact that my House will have absolutely no issue finding and killing the Spiked among us. I also know for a fact that I am the least likely player, if not at the very bottom of the list, to be converted. If you want to know why I say that I can explain after, but since it isn’t really relevant to this post I won’t bother. What is important is that so long as I am still alive, I will do anything I can to make the Spiked’s job as hard as possible, and more importantly, convince other people to do the same. At this point in time, mitigating chaos is a huge part of that, but to do it I am going to need the help of everyone. As many people before me have so obviously repeated, this is primarily a faction game. That is not all it is though, and if any House wants to have any chance of winning, everyone is going to have to all do their best to find the Spiked. Looking at it from both angles I want you to ask yourself who benefits from chaos? In my opinion only two types of people do. Those who are a part of causing that chaos, and those who know enough to render it irrelevant. Since I belong to neither of these categories, I suffer for it instead. And I’m certain that there are at least 19 other players in this game who do too, and who should also wish to see it end. Without chaos, each House has the means to dismember each other. Encouraging chaos and standing idly by as it culminates might not harm us much at first, but in the end it will serve no one but the Spiked. And it needs to be stopped now. I am a firm believer that just because most of you are my enemies, that doesn’t mean we can’t be civil. Yes, I’m actively going to kill you, just like you will me. But for the sake of us all, I am going to fight to establish some semblance of order in these threads. Now, how does Elodin tie in to all of this? To answer that, take a look at what he’s said and done so far this game. He’s voted multiple times, each time without any genuine reason for why, and each time coupled with a joke. He’s openly claimed Coinshot explicitly to irk another player (lie or not, how is that anything but bad?). He’s posted propaganda (albeit cleverly done propaganda) against a player who so far has put the most visible effort into helping the village, claiming he’s done things that are “scummy” but never saying what those things are. And finally he’s generally propelled this notion that everyone needs to vote for players strictly on the fact that they aren’t part of their faction. How is any of this doing anything but hurt us? I’m not saying every player needs to analyze others or come with epic strategies in every post. What I am saying is that in any of these games, elimination or faction based, it’s every villager’s responsibility to help now and then, even if it’s something as simple as making their thoughts and opinions known. Even though I expected voting to go much like it has so far, I have to say that it bothers me how few people are actually taking this lynch seriously. I get it, you all want to use it to get your factions ahead in numbers and hopefully topple someone with a strong voice. But if that’s your intent then for the Love of Lady Vedel, just say that. I, for one, am not going to vote for a player just because they are dangerous to my House, whether it be because of their analysis, strategic mind, or ability to sway people. I am going to vote for players who are dangerous to the village as a whole, whether I suspect them to be Spiked or if their actions give the Spiked power. If any House is going to win the Spiked need to die, and that’s going to be much harder if we let this mayhem continue. If any House is going to win we need to use the lynch how it’s always been meant to be used; to gather information and kill eliminators. Save the posturing for your koloss, your kandra, your allomancers, and the many other resources provided for you strictly to do just that. If you’re going to vote, do it for a good reason, and don’t hide the reason why.

I would, but I don't seriously expect to get either of you lynched. I'm doing tallies of how many times players have posted so far and who's simply been lurking. After I finish that I'll do some analysis on a couple players I suspect might be the Inquisitor and vote for one of them. At that point, since I'll actually be taking it seriously, I'll remove these pointless votes.

Hey, Stink. Leave my shipmate alone :[

Yeah, I figured that was the cause as a rebuttal, however, I'd like to insist that I'm truly a threat to no one.

Any particular reason? Besides the fact that I'm obviously a villager and doing everything I can to make the Inquisitor's job more difficult, Mailliw?

We had a discussion about this in my doc too. My primary question is, what benefit do we get from this that we wouldn't be able to compensate for otherwise? I just don't really see the point, and feel it paints a target on the spokesperson's back. All an opposite faction member or the Inquisitor has to do is kill one of those players, whether it's tactically sound at the time or just because they want to cause chaos, and then if that faction wants to continue to have their voice heard they'll have to elect another member and so on, so forth. I just don't see that ending well, and am uncomfortable putting any member of my faction at unnecessary risk. I think each faction should be able to do fine at rooting out potential Spiked in their team by following the tips I provided earlier, while we can all play this game as it was meant to, earning money to buy koloss to dwindle other faction's numbers while employing kandra to gather info.

After weighing the advantages / disadvantages in my head, I believe that the latter far outweigh the former, and for that reason I'm going to say no. I don't think voting patterns are going to be the primary indicator of alignment this game. It's going to be general actions players make that contradict the plans and interests of their individual faction. Just knowing a player's faction's members doesn't give us any real context behind their votes, except when they come to defend one another, and I'm very concerned that if we allow such a thing to occur, a couple Houses might get the idea to gang up the one with the least number of players to increase the odds of them coming out victorious in the end. If this doesn't occur, I can foresee lynch standoffs occurring, where since every player is known anyway they all just vote together and as a result the lynch becomes pointless due to ties. In my opinion, something like that happening is exactly what the Inquisitors would want, as it would give players the means to focus on the four known factions as opposed to the one unknown.

Don't scare me like that! You're always hard for me to read. Please do refrain from making my job harder than it needs to be.

Uh. Did you even consult your team before claiming in thread? If not, I suspect they might extremely upset with you right now.

Oh, I know. Which is why I suggest that "Regulars" get scanned to prove they aren't an Inquisitor / aren't Spiked, as they have the greatest chance at being able to hide their actions for shady doing, which is ideal so long as the previously mentioned strategies are adhered to. The thing is Seeker roles can easily be compromised, or even lied about. An Inquisitor claiming Seeker isn't going to out a teammate unless they're crazy. If they scan someone in their own faction and that player said their role openly without lying, they can just support their claim. A way to catch this is if your House DOES have a Seeker, ya'll can make sure he confirms it by scanning unclaimed players and have them confirm its accuracy, but I don't believe this is an ideal strategy because A: He can just spike that player to falsely confirm them and B: because I believe that Housemates need to be cooperating with another sooner rather than later if they want to win. If you make the Seeker scan outside the group I already presented a plan to catch them in any lies. It only really helps early on, though, because by N3 it's very likely there will be a Spiked in each faction and therefore every role will be known by them. Thing is, that isn't really an issue so long as each House keeps their team accountable. Which is the entire thing I was arguing earlier. That's the only real merit; if a Seeker finds a Spiked. If that happens then awesome. Otherwise I wouldn't recommend trusting a Seeker more than you would a talking snake in Eden.

I'm pretty sure only Mistborn/Inquisitors/Spiked Mistings need to request vials, and that requesting a Vial isn't an action itself / is automatic otherwise. But let me clarify with the GM. @Renegade If a Mistborn/Inquisitor/Spiked Misting has a vial of Zinc, can they intercept a Kandra and request a vial of Steel at once? Or in other words, can a player burn a metal and get a new vial in a single night turn? I'm assuming that receiving Vials is not an action itself, but I could be wrong. If not, it would look like this. N0: Receive 1 Vial of Steel (1) N1: Receive 1 Vial of Steel (2) N2: Burn 2 Vials of Steel, Receive 1 Vial of Steel (1) N3: Receive 1 Vial of Steel (2) And so on, so forth.

To Catch an Inquisitor Greetings. I’m Micheal Hallowell with the 17th Shard and we’re doing an analysis of bloodthirsty Inquisitors and their Spiked compatriots. Besides giant metal nails sticking out of their eyes and / or various other parts of their bodies, there are other ways to tell when someone is dedicated to serving Ruin. If you are determined to end the Lord Ruler’s legacy once and for all, here are some great tips to help you along. No matter what House an Inquisitor is hiding within they must convince their colleagues that they are innocent. The best way to accomplish this is by claiming a role and offer consistent proof. Any incident where they are unable to do so should be considered suspicious. As it stands, there are several roles that simply do not make sense for an Inquisitor to claim. This is because these same roles are incredibly easy for their teammates to keep track of. However, this does not mean they will not choose to claim that role. Due to that reasoning alone they might decide to do so anyway, but in doing so severely limit their activity. Zinc is by far the easiest to be proven. Burning Zinc allows your faction to intercept a Kandra from another faction, or steal one entirely. In either case, everyone is informed. There is no potential for information manipulation here. Brass is a very close second, as its results can be seen by all. If a member of your House claims Brass all they need to do is consistently change a vote every cycle, or remove a vote completely every other. It is important for them to make clear which vote they are changing ahead of time, in order to keep them from claiming the action of another House’s Soother as their own. Steel is nearly as easy to prove as Brass, but only if players are willing to communicate that they were roleblocked in thread as soon as it happens. Once all roleblocks are announced in thread they can be cross-referenced with what the Coinshots told their House they would target. Flaring steel can be immediately confirmed by death, unless blocked by Iron or Pewter. In the case of Lurcher interference, that player would announce having been Roleblocked, which will confirm that the Coinshot did attempt a roleblock the previous cycle, at least. In the unlikely scenario that a target survives due to flaring Pewter, it may be critical to announce this information as well, but should be considered thoroughly first. Tin can be accounted for by making sure that every time it is burned, a random player from the same faction (never the same one twice) receives one of the two anonymous messages. If Flared the Tineye should not put themselves in a PM but one of their Housemates instead. PMs should be constantly used, and with a different player every time, to prevent an Inquisitor and Spiked teammate from faking the PMs existence. Iron can only be confirmed if a predetermined player is protected from an attack. Otherwise there will be no indication that they are doing anything. However, if they promise to protect a player and said player dies, it will heavily implicate them. A more likely claim than the ones prior but less likely than the ones ahead. Bronze is just as hard to prove unless you have a Tineye on your team to establish a PM with the scanee, but doing so ultimately puts your faction at risk of another. One option is to have a Seeker scan a player, or series of players, then kill one of those players to confirm that they are what the Seeker says. Pewter is impossible to prove without an allied Coinshot, and even then, there is the danger that they are an Inquisitor/Spiked combo. This makes Pewter one of the most ideal roles to claim. Copper has the exact same danger. If your faction has a Seeker they can scan this player to confirm they are Smoked, but doing so limits the effectiveness of the Seeker and they are liable to be an Inquisitor/Spiked combo. In the case of Mistborn claims, so long as their faction makes sure that they grab a different every cycle and prove it, should not be an issue. Use the specific tips for the various Mistings above to keep them accountable and you should be fine. Regulars are perhaps the most dangerous, and most likely, claim for an Inquisitor. Because stealing a vial is a one time use, an Inquisitor can easily claim to receive a Vial from a metal they’re team cannot use and actually Spike a player in their faction to claim they received it. If they claim to receive a metal that someone on their faction can use, all they need to do is Spike said player with the corresponding Spike to ensure they can flare the metal even when the vial counts don’t match up. In either of these cases, treat Regulars and the player they pass to with extreme caution. It is recommend that one of, if not both, of these players are scanned as soon as possible. Also, if you are a villager and a Regular proves to you that they can pass metal, don’t trust them with absolute certainty, at least not for long. They might not be the Inquisitor but they are a prime target for being Spiked, as they no longer have to worry about being accountable for their actions. If you can, make sure that this player is scanned later on as well, if lacking additional leads. In the case of Spiked, if a player is given a power more useful than their previous one, ensure that they keep proving it anyway, if possible. If they are Spiked with the same metal or continue to use their starting ability, make sure that it is being used to the benefit of the faction. Any attempt at the player going rogue should be interpreted as them admitting a change in their alignment. In the event you find the Inquisitor or a Spiked, it is recommended that you do not attempt to negotiate with them. Always expect a servant of Ruin to have more information than your faction and a way to make sure they come out on top. Whatever benefit they might provide in the short term will more-than-likely be outweighed to the damage they can do in the long-run. Any player that encourages working with the Inquisitor / Spiked should also be heavily scrutinized by his teammates. Remember that simply confirming a player once isn't enough. It is essential that everyone is consistently tested. So long as every House follows these tips and remains wary of those who they cannot confirm, the Inquisitor and his Spiked subordinates will be forced to work for us rather than against us.

No worries our posts happened right after one another's and discussed very similar things.

True. Since my entire intent of that suggestion was so that we can see how many Coinshots we have in this game total, Lurcher's interfering to keep their faction ahead would defeat the purpose. Conclusion: I think it's better for Coinshots to just claim in their groups and be scrutinized by them closely. I would hope that other factions would out them the second they do something to strongly suggest that they are Spiked, but I would not be surprised if a faction attempted to use that knowledge to gain advantage over another. Definitely think restricting village Coinshots to even numbered nights is beneficial to all. What are you not forgetting about me, here? I don't remember saying that teammates shouldn't claim their roles to each other in fact, I swear I just argued the opposite.