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
    Knowing that Wilson is evil this could mean a few things: Traitor!phattmer placed his vote on Shallan early on in the turn knowing that at least one of his teammates would later instigate a bandwagon on her. I think this is very unlikely given the fact that Wilson's vote against Shallan was reactionary. Phattmer would have had to violate the fair game rules by using his real life relationship with Shallan to get her to post, which I am not willing to assume. Chances are he is good but just in case I think he warrants a scan. Of the two players who were up for the lynch before Shallan's post (Adavantos and Bridge Boy) it is possible that one of them is a Traitor. Considering that momentum was building up against Bridge Boy it is possible that Wilson cast her vote on Shallan to save his life (also might be why she chose her as Shallan already had a vote against her and did something that warranted suspicion). For this reason I think it's essential that he and I get scanned ASAP. Just because we now know that Wilson was a traitor, that does not mean any of the other players that were aware of Mail's role are not evil too, however personally I think it is very likely the rest of us are good. Given her pursuing STINK immediately afterwards I would consider him soft cleared. Also given the fact that Kipper came to the same conclusions as me about her being evil around the same time, I also consider him soft cleared. When asked the question "If you could have the Mistborn kill one player, who would it be" in a PM Wilson replied Bort. It is possible that she was trying to throw a teammate under a bus to make her look better, but I am more inclined to believe that a fellow traitor would not risk implicating themselves by being the fourth vote on a bandwagon that was instigated by one of their teammates. For this reason I think he is soft cleared as well. EDITED FOR CLARIFICATION AND Also, for you lurkers out there, if you think that because you've posted once or twice you're safe from the Mistborn, you are wrong. In killing polking (a loyal Forger) I think my point has been proven that targeting inactive players is a terrible idea, especially since they can come back later on and make a positive impact on the game. With that being said, I am going to advise the Mistborn that he begin attacking players who are still present on the forums but are not contributing (at all or significantly) to the game, as it is more likely that the traitors are hiding among them rather than those who simply can't make it online at all. So if you are loyal and have been guilty of lurking so far this game, I advise that you please begin voicing your opinions and ideas more or may end up dying to friendly fire. Thank you.
  2. Amanuensis
    Sorry Alvron. I was assuming you were going to keep your connection to the Kandra on the down low as I am already a high priority target for the traitors. But yes, the Kandra told Alvron then Alvron told me
  3. Amanuensis
    She was actually scanned by a Kandra, but on Night 1. Kas was scanned last night so unfortunately that was wasted. I told the Mistborn to kill Wilson last night when I found but unfortunately he did not change the order from polking to her. With that being said it is really unfortunate we took our one of our loyal forgers now, and it's possible that Wilson is a Voidbringer or has an Elantrian in her team so it is best that we just lynch her. For everyone's awareness, the Mistborn has decided to kill off inactive players until they have better suggestions. The list consisted of Zed, dowanx, the Honey Badger and polking. I encouraged him to get polking first because Zed is brand new so I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, dowanx has been active in PMs and has given me a lot of useful information, and Honey has been AFK in both this game and MR9 so I reasoned his absence was a result of being busy in real life and not intentionally hiding. With that being said, Honey is next on the list, followed by Zed, unless we uncover another traitor
  4. Amanuensis
    I'm curious what you mean by a Unifying Theory xD I feel like I should understand this term but sadly I don't
  5. Amanuensis
    @Kas, unfortunately I don't have the time to dedicate right now to gather the exact time but will try to do so before the cycle ends. Basically the implication comes from his claims of being certain he could not die N1, which he did in our PM towards the end of the first night and I believe said again in thread. EDIT: Also! @Kandra, as a reminder, if you have scanned a player and they came back loyal, make sure you let them know.
  6. Amanuensis
    Didn't mean to read it that way, was just offering my own alternative explanations for what happened. But given a few of the people who know what I am are on my list of suspicions I would not be surprised if this was premeditated and that they plan on getting rid of me tonight. It'd actually be a decent (and dangerous strategy) if they decided to roleblock every player they were going to kill to make sure it goes through; except if an Elantrian catches on and starts healing the targets, in which case they'll start roleblocking randoms and attack someone else to waste the Elantrians ability... and then it becomes a muddled mess of what ifs, so really I doubt they'd attempt such a strategy beyond tonight, especially as it would give their plans away for certain. EDIT: I may or may not be mentioning this to discourage them from attacking me when I'm vulnerable, as it's very possible I know an Elantrian who is willing to protect me; whether that is true or not, well... they better hope they figure it out, or they might end up not killing anyone tonight if they attack and one saves me, or miss out on taking me out of the game when I really don't have one to keep me from dying, which puts them at risk of me making even more connections and banding us together to weed them out; so really, my goal in leaving this message is to force them into making a hard choice of their own as I was forced to do last turn with Creccio. #ComeAtMe
  7. Amanuensis
    While the thought crossed my mind earlier (before the lynching of Creccio / his admittance of being a BioChromancer), I should give credit to Lopen as he had mentioned this in much more depth in a PM that I still haven't responded to recently. Anyway. As someone who was the Traitor Feruchemist for the last run of this game, I should mention that Wyrm expressed in our doc that he was excited to see what we'd do with it. With that being said it's possible he gave it to them again, but it wouldn't necessarily harm the traitors if they were left without a vote manipulation this time. Due to the crew's inability to use it effectively without trust being established first, and the general stigma that such a power would benefit the traitors more than the loyalists, its possible we only have two of them among us (the two who had admitted it to me). Unfortunately I am unable to prove if either of them are loyal, however, until a Kandra scans them or relays the information my way / reveals it through some other means. I should say though, even if the traitors didn’t roleblock me, they now know and will likely try to kill me tonight anyway. So whether Creccio decided to strip me of my protection or a loyalist who is suspicious of me decided to try and stop me from using any abilities tonight, it won’t necessarily mean that they for sure have them. If I end up dead tomorrow, you guys are going to have to still consider other options, especially since we’ve already lost one of our roleblockers.
  8. Amanuensis
    Given that there are a total of three claimed Voidbringers so far, I think it is very likely that the traitors were given a BioChromancer, especially if all three of those are telling the truth and loyal. Otherwise those players would be untouchable to the traitors unless a vote could swing their way, which would be very unfair for them if any of those three ended up in a position of leadership / a hub of information and was working to undermine them EDITED FOR JUSTIFICATION
  9. Amanuensis
    Based on the last two day turn's results, I'd reason no. If you look at the vote tally's, the players names remain, but the number in paranthesis is lessened. A perfect example is that Wilson is marked as having been the only person to vote for Ripple but it says (0). In D1 there were four names that were next to Bridge Boy but only the number (3). Therefore, I think this was just a mistake on the GMs part, but nothing critical given it wouldn't have affected the outcome anyway. With that said, it's nearly 1am and I have work in 5 hours so I will be heading to bed. Have a good day / night, ladies, gentlemen. EDITED FOR PLURALIZATION AND TO SAY THAT KAS NINJA'D ME BUT I don't know if I agree with the idea so much, given that I am in contact with a lot of "claimed" critical roles and it probably wouldn't be too hard for the traitors to narrow down their identities from knowing that information, hence why I misled Orlok when he asked for the same information from me via PM last night turn
  10. Amanuensis
    So, a few game relevant facts I have to share, for everyone's interest: I have apparently been roleblocked, so come at me traitors The person I had been informed was being Forged the previous night did not receive a new role, so either the "Loyalist Forger" who said they'd do it is a liar or the Kandra is now in the traitor's hands. One of the Feruchemists I know claimed they did not use their ability yesterday, the other one claims that they did as I asked them to confirm it for me Phattmer's vote on Wilson was not accounted for in the write-ups vote tally
  11. Amanuensis
    My kanji is rusty but I distinctly see stupid in there EDIT: Correction, the character I recognized was fool, not stupid. Also, color
  12. Amanuensis
    I dare say, I was thrust into this position by fate; I by no means asked for it, and would gladly give it up if I had the chance. Sadly it seems that the only way that will happen is if I die. Given recent circumstances, its likely that will happen tonight
  13. Amanuensis
    English, please...
  14. Amanuensis
    Hello stonetwotwo! I'm an American myself, but have been working in South Africa (and a few of its neighbouring countries) for around six months now! I've only really seen Pretoria, Johannesburg and Cape Town so far. Anwyay, I think it's awesome that Mr. Sanderson's work has reached so many people around the world. Just excited to find out another fan exists in southern Africa, even though I'm not from here xD either way, welcome to the 17th Shard and I hope you enjoy your stay!
  15. Amanuensis
    You know, I would have saved you if you didn't mislead me to begin with. You started off hinting to not just me, but several players, that you were a Mistborn and that you were frightened for your death. Then all of a sudden at the end of the night turn you're suddenly implying you are an Elantrian and are 100% certain you won't die that night. That was a huge identifier to me that you were pretending to be concerned and already knew the real target. Then you begin implying you're a Mistborn again, then an Elantrian again, and now an Awakener. If you kept with either of the first two stories I would have tied it by voting for Wilson just in case you weren't bullchulling me, but you know what? Now I'm committed. I can accept losing a loyal Awakener, if necessary. An Elantrian or a Mistborn I wouldn't risk. But an Awakener? We can just hire Stink to be our janitor from now on. So, Creccio.
  16. Amanuensis
    I swear, if there's not a single traitor involved and they're just sitting back and laughing to themselves...
  17. Amanuensis
    That makes a hint of being an Elantrian, a Mistborn and an Awakener in what? 3 pages? The trollness is real.
  18. Amanuensis
    You have repeatedly contradicted yourself this turn, so no, I think you're continuing to feed me chull.
  19. Amanuensis
    @Kipper: I thought I did, but apparently the color didn't stick. My apologies.
  20. Amanuensis
    You do realize I retracted my vote awhile ago, right? I am not tunneling, and I have advocated players being verified before death repeatedly this turn. Unfortunately we have players that voted and left, parting that they would not return in time to retract, which invites Feruchemists to sway them whichever way they want. Also, you threatening to reveal your information to everyone, which any sane individual would realize is a terrible idea, is not going to scare people away from keeping you alive. Braize, it makes me want to have you killed for the sheer principle of the matter. Besides, since you're this close to death, why don't you just admit your role to everyone? Or at least the one you've now heavily implied to me? That would have been a much more efficient tactic at getting people to back off, as if its true you could have used it to keep you safe from both the loyalists and the traitors.
  21. Amanuensis
    I don't want people to obtain information from a venue that anyone has access to, because then every traitor is guaranteed to gain it. Anything you have to say can be obtained again by someone else. Keep in mind that I made a suggestion that more active members of the community did not agree with. I believe in majority decisions not minority, which is consistent with how I have been playing this game. I do not believe players should vote for someone just because other people are doing it. I want people to vote for someone because they honestly can see they're evil from their own perspective, not because another player is convincing. That just leaves people open for manipulation and makes it harder for us to root out the traitors. In this particular situation Creccio is claiming a crucial role. EDITED OUT SPELLING/GRAMMAR ERRORS
  22. Amanuensis
    Honestly I would rather the information you have die with you before it leaks out to the traitors, depending on how much you actually know, which is presumably a lot since you made a ton of effort to communicate with people. If you are a true loyal you would not out everything you know to everyone, as it only harms the crew in the long run.
  23. Amanuensis
    Anyway, the sibling bit is not relevant to the game and should not be factored into any decisions. I tried to avoid saying which specific roles Creccio said, but he just did it anyway so. Now everyone knows. >.>
  24. Amanuensis
    @Phatt: Creccio told me you claimed two roles, one in white text, the other black. The two roles claimed are a part of the reason I'm wary of you, in addition to the explanation that was provided for me about you two being related, as the specifics of it seems very traitor like. However that is another reason why I think he may be evil; he may be trying to implicate you because I had explained to him the bit about you two being siblings. @Stink: He told me you claimed roleless to him, but also that he did not believe you. He later told me he found a Forger.
  25. Amanuensis
    If you're referring to me that's not what I meant. I meant that a lot of people role claimed to me and that if I was a traitor all that info would be used against us very quickly. I have no proof of being innocent, that's for the town to decide. I just know I am. Also, @Stink, why the vote retraction? EDIT BECAUSE WORDS GOT JUMBLED UP
×
×
  • Create New...