DeTess

If you guys want to vote drought out instead, I'll add my vote to the pile. Edit: sorry for the double-post. I hadn't realized that Yitzi's post had ninja'd mine.

I understand what you're trying to say. However, unless I'm mistaken, we don't have a solid lead on anyone right now, so the chances of hitting the inquisitor are not good. In that case I'd prefer to lynch someone who is unlikely to contribute anything to the discussion. I believe that's what the crusade is for, right? Lynching an inactive when no other leads present themselves? If it was the start of the cycle, I'd agree, but there's less than three hours left, so setting up this lynch is unlikely to kill any important discussion either.

If you've got a good lead to go after instead, I'm all ears. Otherwise, I'll keep supporting killing someone who will do the village no good. Regarding vote manipulation, there was a 2:2 tie, with a bunch of lone votes on other people. If the inquisitor has some kind of uber-emotional allomancy, he might have been able to pick any of those people with 1 vote to move them up to being lynched instead.

What they meant is that he could also use the person we lynch today, if he is a misting.

It was a post similar to the one you mentioned, and similar reasoning by me, that made me really tunnel on Jondesu in QF22. I was wrong about him in that game, so I'm not as suspicious of similar posts by him this time around. Edit: also, unless I miscounted, Lopen's vote has resulted in a draw between Drought and IamSpartacus. If at all possible, I'd prefer not to leave it to vote manipulation who ends up getting lynched.

And there's the motivation I needed for some analysis. Let's dig right in with Meta (He's been pinged enough already). So, Meta has posted a grand total of one time. In this post, he stresses that he village should not sit back and bide their time, and that everyone should practice PM-safety. Though this could be the words of an inquisitor trying to goad us into lynching someone cycle 1 and trying to get us paranoid about PM's while he doesn't actually have a way to read them, it does sound like some pretty genuine recommendations. I've got a Neutral read on meta for now. @Jondesu is next. Jondesu started out by voting on Elenion. His stated reason was Elenion's question about the inquisitor's powers. I find this a poor reason at best (inquisitor would try to keep GM confirmation on his capabilities as low as possible). However, Jondesu admits himself that he might be tunneling, and moves his vote off Elenion once a better target presents himself. Jondesu hasn't been too active in the planning department in cycle 1, and mostly stuck with short questions. Given the somewhat unusual start conditions of this game, I think it is not unreasonable to try and get a full picture of what's going on first. All in all, Jondesu has made quite a few post, but hasn't said too much useful or alignment indicative yet. I'm leaning slightly village on him for now, as the elim would probably fill his posts with some other kind of filler than questions with potentially useful answers for the village. Next up is @Aonar Faileas. Aonar's first substantial post involved him suggesting that he would make a good arbitrary D1 lynch candidate. The fact that he survived that suggestion makes me slightly suspicious of him, but that's paranoia speaking, not reason. His first post on this day is slightly more interesting, in which he points out that we should have all seen Aman's death by elim coming. Given that there's actually been some discussion about whether it was the elim or a trigger-happy coinshot his certainty that it was the elim is somewhat noteworthy. He also explained why the elim would definitely take that kill. This might be an extreme example of refugee in audacity, however, he wasn't alone in immediately assuming it was the elim who offed Aman, so that assumptions isn't really alignment indicative. He also once again dares us to lynch him this cycle. This leaves me with a bit of an information gap. I've never played with Aonar before, but his behavior doesn't trike me as particularly elimmy. However, if he is actually known to regularly take refugee in audacity, than this would actually be quite alignment indicative. Is there anyone who can shed some light on this matter? For now, I've got him as Neutral. Luckily, Lopen listed 4 people as candidates for suspicion, so by process of elimination the inquisitor has to be...wait. *checks GM PM*. Nope, Randuir is definitely village. In all seriousness though, I'm not going to prove that I've been super helpful this game (I'm not even sure if I have been), or how I'm definitely not an elim. I'll leave that for someone impartial to do. It wouldn't help my case much anyway as I think I did a pretty good job of appearing helpful in LG30, and I was an elim that game. This is the link to the master doc from LG2, which is also posted on page 49 of the LG2 thread. Page 3 details the inquisitors powers.

I've picked the particular parts of Kipper's post that I disagree with. anything not quoted here are things I can't find faulty logic in (there's TL;DR at the end for those in a hurry). You are right that Aman is unlikely to pick the eliminator out of a crowd. However, he is more likely to do so than many other players, so why run the risk of getting caught by him. The village would be more likely to lynch more villagers without him than with him. I've had somewhat limited experience with Aman as a player, but he hasn't really proven to be a sneaky villager in that time (I remember him also saying something along those lines in LG31 when I accused him of trying to sneakily get people focused on Joe, but I can't find the exact quote). He has of course been quite good at analysis, but he generally hasn't been in the business of willful misdirection. This might just be a wrong impression by a rather new player though. I agree with your points about the coinshots. Why exactly do you think an inexperienced inquisitor wouldn't have killed Aman? A read through previous games he played in would probably show that he could be a possible threat, and if Inexperienced!elim assumed Amanuensis would honor his word, there would be no reason for him not to take the shot if he/she wasn't willing to play game. I'd say most inquisitors would want to recruit at least 1 or 2 fellow elims. If the elim still had the option to attack someone during the night, he'd certainly take it to increase his chances of having a misting corpse to use to convert someone the next night. Which brings me to the one major weakpoint in your reasoning, which relates to what the inquisitor has done instead of killing someone. Possibly, he used some kind of uber-vote-manip to make sure the lynch would go through. This is unlikely though, as the lynch already looked likely, but there was no guarantee it targeted a misting. Therefore, keeping an action in reserve for a night kill almost guaranteed at least 1 kill, with the possibility of two kills, while manipulating the votes would almost guarantee one kill, with no chance of a second. In other words, saving the action for a kill is the more efficient thing to do. According to the LG2 master-doc, neither uber-copper nor uber-petwer needed to be activated. Though that might have changed for this game, I do not think that too likely. that leaves uber-versions of iron, steel, bronze and tin (and possibly atium). I've seen people warn against including the obvious use of uber-tin (spy on everything) in games because of the incredible amount of extra workload, though if it is included, this might be a distinct possibility. Some uber-vatiant of iron (maybe redirect the attack to someone else?) probably doesn't make much sense at this early stage. Depending on what uber-bronze does, it might be useful, but if it's the same as it was in LG2 (one target scanned, pierce copperclouds), an attack would be more efficient, as it procures the same information and also procures a corpse for conversion. So, in conclusion, the only uber-metal that I can see a use for, apart from the kill-metal right now would be uber-tin. There could be some really out-there effects that the inquisitor could use (uber-atium, anyone?) but I don't think that is very likely. All in all, I can't really think of something the inquisitor would do instead of killing someone. TL;DR Kipper makes some good points, but I'm not convinced. I'll hopefully have some time tomorrow to do a full reread of the previous cycle to check if anyone truly stands out to me as suspicious. For now, have this vote tally: Day 2 Vote Tally Elenion(1): Araris, Yitzi2 Mark IV(1): Herowannabe Drake(1): Dalinar Yitzi2(2): Arraenae, Silverblade5, Elenion Dalinar(0): Silverblade5 Iamspartacus(1): Randuir Aonar(1): arinian Droughtbringer(1): Jondesu

(emphasis mine) The GM confirmation regarding that that I quoted earlier is on page 7 of the combined thread, if you want to see it for yourself. It could of course be that some uber-metals get as bonus that they are a free action, but I don't think the GM's would mess with our ability to estimate the inquisitor's power quite this badly. Plus, having an Uber-metal be a free action would discourage giving it away to convert someone, as it is an actual loss of power, rather than just a loss of versatility.

I mostly agree, and unless @Kipper posts his reasoning, or someone steps forward to claim coinshotting Aman, I'm going to take the logical (according to Occam's razor) conclusion, being that the elim killed Aman. I would like to point out that, If Aman had survived this night, I'd have been somewhat suspicious of him, as his grand challenge could have just been cover. If the coinshot had followed my reasoning, and was particularly trigger-happy, it might explain him killing Aman. I'm not so sure. If the inquisitor still had an action, he was almost guaranteed to take a shot at someone. I personally think Aman was genuine in his challenge. and was just unlucky in dealing with an inquisitor who didn't share his flair for the dramatic.

The magister had properly regained his composure when he returned to the common room the next morning. He’d used the previous day productively, exploring the mansion they were all locked up in. He had encountered a number of interesting rooms, including a room one floor down that felt like a crypt. It was remarkably colder than the rest of the building, and it contained 29 man-shaped stone slabs. Now, he let his gaze wander around the room, taking in the chaos. Several people had started arguing loudly among themselves, accusations of murder flying across the room. The reason for the heated debate became clear rather quickly. The body of a noblewoman was lying in one corner, the Terrisman stood next to it, obliviously lecturing to an absent audience. Agemtsar quickly crossed the room and walked up to the Terrisman. “Ah, my good steward. Though your knowledge of 5th century ciphers is no doubt incredibly interesting, I’m sure we have more need of your knowledge regarding contemporary funeral rites right now.” The Magister bend down, then lifted the woman’s body up in his arms. Luckily for him, her blood had already dried and did not stain his clothing. “Follow me. We might have been denied basic human liberties, but that doesn't mean we have to descend to the level of animals and show no respect for the dead." @Herowannabe, and everyone else that wants to join the funeral procession. I'm not sure how soon I can post a follow up RP, but the Magister's intention is to bring the body down to the crypt (where Sart's body has also been laid to rest at this point).

One of the possible reasons he hit Aman was that Aman had asked for seekers to keep an eye on him, so converting him could quite easily have ended up as being a waste of a conversion. Kipper's comment that he thinks it wasn't the elim that killed Aman did get me thinking. In a 30-man game, there probably is at least one coinshot, so if the coin shot killed Aman isntead of the inquisitor it would explain why Aman got killed while he made for an interesting conversion target. This would also mean the inquisitor could have been part of the vote maniuplation we've seen. So if it was in fact a coinshot who did it, I'd like it if he could get that information mentioned in the thread. I don't want a public roleclaim or anything (so just PM someone you trust to keep your role secret), but we're making a number of assumptions based on the Aman kill that could result in us looking into the wrong actions if Aman's death wasn't actually an elim kill. Regarding Sart, I don't think many people had spotted the claim in his RP. I'd seen it, but interpreted it as a thug claim, so I don't think we can draw any conclusions about those who voted on him one way or another. I'll try to get a bigger post up sometime this cycle in which I do some analysis. However, I've been rather busy with my study, so It probably will only be put up near the end of the day turn or at the start of the night turn if no one decides to lynch me.

Okay, thank you. This makes a lot more sense.

Here, you're stating, without providing a reason, that Elenion is the "number one candidate culprit". Here, you're stating that your opinion is based on the reasoning of others, without paraphrasing or quoting said reasoning. Also, you provide an ad Hominem as if it was reasoning. And again, you're making it sound like somehow you've been providing solid reasoning for a vote on Elenion, while actually you have done nothing of the sort (if someone has done poor reasoning, quote said reasoning and explain why it is poor). Elenion, on the other hand, has been calling you out constantly to actually provide reasoning, to state on whose opinion you're basing your vote and you've yet to properly answer those questions. If this game had started with an elim team, I would be voting on you right now, as this kind of deflecting questions and pretending to be providing reasoning is pretty suspicious. I don't expect the inquisitor to play this aggressive this early, though. Edit: Also, Iamspartacus ( @Iamspartacus) I'd appreciate it if you could make your intention to participate in this game known.

Could you maybe repeat that reasoning? Looking back through the night-thread I can only find you mentioning a theory regarding a rather specific possible functioning of uber-brass, and a tenuous link with Mark IV. As I pointed out, however, the attack on Aman was most likely done by the inquisitor, and given that the elim only gets 1 standard action this would make his involvement in the vote manipulation incredibly unlikely.

I'm pretty sure Aman got taken out by the inquisitor, which means last cycle's vote manipulation wasn't the inquisitors work. That means we have at least 1 rioter and 1 soother. I suspect we have two soothers, given that it is unlikely someone would risk getting identified as a rioter this early in the game.

Might I ask why? I'm sure you have some good reason for this vote, and it would help the village if you share it. Also, whoever wrote that tineye message is an evil genius. I'm probably going to waste way too much time trying to find a hidden message in it or something like that.

I have seen role advice being given in other games that suggested vote manipulators announce their presence in cycle 1 by adjusting some unimportant votes. This might have been a case of that. edit: I've looked it up, and that advice was given in LG31 by Elenion, who was an elim in that game. I can also see why doing so would be a bad idea, as it gives the elim an idea regarding the amount of vote adjustment there is. If they can figure out who has the vote manipulation, they would be able to use that knowledge for some targeted manipulation, or even just for predicting how a vote will turn out after manipulation has gone through.

Might I ask what led you to this deduction? Has Sart told you anything in a PM that would suggest he might be singled out by an inquisitor? It most certainly wasn't because of his role that Sart could earn the undivided attention of an inquisitor. Furthermore, I'd think the last thing an inquisitor would do at this stage is manipulating a vote he himself supports. If the inquisitor has been using emotional allomancy, then I suspect he voted for someone else, or hasn't voted at all.

Since there still seem to be some questions about the inquisitors actions, I've asked Orlok during the day cycle how many actions the inquisitor got: I don't think the inquisitor messed with the vote here. It looked like there was going to be a lynch, but there was no guarantee the lynchee would be a misting, so I doubt the inquisitor would risk wasting his action on that. I expect we'll instead see him using a kill-action this night.

How exactly would that help us track conversions? I assume we get told the role of whoever we lynch, and I don't think there's a rule restricting who can or can't be converted.

Expect more RP from cycle 2 onwards, at least from those participating for RP. Right now, most people want to properly grasp the rules first.

Silverblade cast suspicion at both arin and aonar. I asked about both suspicions.

Could you maybe elaborate a bit more on this suspicion, as well as what about asking questions has made you suspicious of Arinian? As right now, you're just throwing around accusations without really explaining them, which is something I'm not overly fond of, as it influences the progress of the game without providing the village anything to work with to determine your alignment or the alignment of those you are accusing. SilverBlade5.

Amanuensis, if you have time, could you elaborate a bit on what makes you think Ecth is village? I've got him as neutral based on the posts he's made. I'd just like to give a warning regrading the current vote distribution. From the talk on uber-metals, I concluded that these basically function as normal metals, but better? Uber-pewter and uber-copper seem to be taken for granted, but something we should consider right now is the possibility of uber-zinc (2 soothings, possibly) or uber-brass (2 vote-moves, possible, but pretty powerful I think), or a combination uber-emotional allomancy (1 vote-move, 1 soothing). Based on that, I think we should do one of three things: Make sure one person has enough votes that it can't be easily manipulated away. Drop all votes and go for a no-lynch. all votes need to be dropped to prevent some crafty rioting from creating a lynch where there was none. Leave things as they are, and use it as an information gathering tool on the presence or absence of emotional allomancy powers from the inquisitor. If we decide to not go for option 2, I'll make sure to put a vote in later today. I'm not convinced about anyone's guilt yet, though I'm somewhat suspicious of Mark at this point. I'll do a reread of the thread to see if anyone else stands out to me before placing that vote.

If you list 5 or 6 people in a 22 player game, and half of them are elims, I consider it a correct gut read. That he then went after one of the innocents on the list was just (un)fortunate .