Dalinar Kholin

First, I'd like to comment that Lopen managed to survive my attack by shard blade, in fact he did it so thoroughly it wasn't even mentioned in the writeup. Does anyone know how this is possible? He also did it while managing too steal multiple items. So either people are protecting him or he has enormously powerful protective abilities. Regardless, my vote is going on Lopen. Either he is a ghost blood, and one of my win conditions is to stop him, or he's a GOH using a ghost blood claim as an excuse to avoid being targeted. Also he mentioned he'd given up on his objective on Roshar when he clearly hasn't.

I've got a couple of items which might have high trade value, I just don't know what there trade value is so I can't say for certain. Also, apparently the sickness might get worse and start taking investiture/killing me if it isn't resolved soon, so I'd be greatly obliged if you helped. Anyone willing to lay claim to this assault?

What does 5 TV mean? Also I would tend to agree, but at the moment I have no other solutions other then having 1 less action every night for the rest of the game... I might be able to help you achieve you're goal if you're willing to do that.

If anyone can cure sickness, please come to Roshar. I will be glad to help you out in return.

what does it do/why do you want to destroy it?

I was not attacked (as far as I'm aware).

okay, I have no idea about the ratios, but let's say 1/2 village versus 1/2 independent, as a conservative estimate of the ratio, and a rough ratio of 2 and 1/2 actions:1 single kill action (thats not counting some investiture gain is time dependent). 1st: Regardless, taking one kill action is at t.he very least going to take up roughly one night at least to replenish, likely more. So killing is a signifigant investment, and weakens you temporarilly investiture wise. 2nd: It encourages reprisal and independents to "circle the wagons" with villagers. If independent faction, ghost bloods or others get attacked, they'd be inclined to respond to defend their interests. This would mean potentially allying with villagers, creating more enemies and problems ecetera. Potentially, the elim;s would be doubling the number of people they have to kill. Thats a lot of time, effort, and more room for failure. 3rd: Individual goals. Everyone's individual goals make this a lot more complicated as well. Some of GOH probably need to interact with Independents in order to win. Killing indiscriminately won't allow them to achieve those goals. To much attacking of independents could cause internal strife between those who needed to interact to win and those who didn't. Sure, eventually indiscriminate killing might help them mop the children up and stop independents from achieving win con's, but right now?

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. Additionally, why would PK say that if it wasn't true? If Joe turns out to be good, it would make PK incredibly suspicious. As an independent, making a fallacious claim would be incredibly dangerous and not gain anything. So he's probably children or GOH, and as GOH it would be contradicted by the real victim. And no one would make an attack on the first turn unless they're evil b/c no information. I'm not going to vote Joe yet b/c I want to see his response, but thats where my vote will go unless I become convinced of a different argument by the end of the day. Side note: this is exactly what I was attempting to argue earlier, we create an "isolated"ish system here. Either PK is tricking us and evil, or telling the truth, and good (with a small chance of being evil and betraying evil to gain trust, but that seems unlikely), either way, its based on a claim which can be analyzed and allow us to make process.

Hmmmm, that's mostly true. I'm just not familiar enough with how effective our actions are/how much we're informed about. How many kill actions are there? How many of these inform people in the world when you use them? How much investiture do most people have and how effectively can they get more? My thought wasn't so much to stop using the lynch totally, as stop using it as a speculative/informational weapon. If we make it an isolated system based off of information from a singular or multiple people, then we can potentially isolate variables when we find out someone was a ind/elim/village, but that plan has flaws as well. Also, I do think that the self-interest rational for not attacking indiscriminately holds true, it's just not good business to kill indiscriminately, it turns a 1:2 disadvantage numerically to a 1:4 or 1:5 if they declare war on all independents. But I'll maybe make another argument (or give it up), once I read through all of the abilities.

I think so. As I argued before, open knowledge seems more likely to help villagers then eliminators, (with the exception of things such as defensive abilities which could stop elim attacks). Additionally, although I'm not going to reveal specifics specifics, I have a reasonable village read on Amanuensis. Final note, on the power dynamic, this game seems to be much less "kill" friendly then lg 25, the only other game I've played. Only one kill was attempted during the night, and it was successfully blocked. I'm still reading through all of the abilities for the different abilities, but it certainly seems like their are a variety of defensive mechanism to kills, in addition to a limited number of effective and especially secretive ways to kill during the night. This is compounded by the number of independents. The God's Own Hate can't kill indiscriminately b/c the'll start hitting a lot of independents, which means they have to gather information first. Hitting independents has a lot of downsides. 1st: it's a complete waste of an action. 2nd: it likely cost investiture/preparation in order to have no net benefit. 3rd: It could cause reprisal. If unsuccessful, it could easilly be mistaken for an independent vs: independent goal. Ie: with vasher wanted to kill the maker of nightblood (I think thats right? I don't know her name). But, the point still stands, after you make an attack, it's a declaration of war per se on a smaller scale. It incites counter-reprisal or at the very least the possibility. Each member of the elim's also will have personal objectives to achieve. This means that they don't want the game to end until they achieve all of those objectives (right?), so an even stronger reasoning for them to be cautious. Essentially, my argument is that we have time, and also against the logic I saw in lynching Magestar. Killing independents as the Children doesn't help, it hurts. They act as a buffer between the elim's and the villagers. The villagers have more people with a lot of powerful actions, the longer the game goes on with us using our abilities effectively, whether to gain info or strength, the stronger the relative position of the villagers. This means I disagree with that logic. We should agree to only lynch if we have specific knowledge or specific suspicious to do so. General argument is good, the more information to sort through the more analysis which can be eventually cross referenced against the elim's. However, throwing something out for the sake of getting someone to post seems like a distraction from figuring out a game plan as a whole. Hmmmmm. That was very mismashed logic, which is a testament to why I should have resisted the temptation to find out what happened and post, but I think the core of it is valid. At the very least, the argument of minizing the role of the lynch/even not using it at all until we have more info should generate discussion.

First of all, I'd like to soundly agree with the "not having a clue" theory. This makes it very difficult for me to analyze posts. However, I would disagree with your assumption. Why does there need to be a clear incentive? The eliminators have a private doc (right?), thus they have more information. The villagers don't. The more information available will thus more probably aid the villagers (who will be unaware of said information), then the eliminators (who will generally be aware of that information through likely having a person on each wordl). Is there a reason that general rule of thumb would be not beneficial in this place or in general? Also, if The Only Joe was an elim, he would not need to share such information publically, when he could just do so in private.

I will join as Reginald Canuck.

If anyone had any doubts about Luckat, they should be cleared by now. He caused the downfall of two Returned. The Bad News: The rabbits still out there, and with the exception of lucky guesses or lifeless we're still gonna be losing two villagers per night. Additionally, we don't know who's been garnering the breath for the Returned, its possible they'll have another rabbit awakened by tonight or next cycle. Additionally: Meta's partially cleared, he pushed for Lopen, its pretty unlikely both were eliminators. Bard did switch to Lopen late, and distracted the vote to Mage, but for somewhat legitimate reasons. The Power of the Returned is waneing in terms of vote manip's. With two Elim's down who didn't have a rabbit (the rabbit person will only be able to have 1 potential vote stop), they're down four vote changes probably. We need to figure out a new strategy now that we've reduced there number and undoubtedly made them more cautious about messing with the lynch, ideas?

Meta: We're a little too suspicious of Meta right now, Meta, argued hard against Ecth, when there were already four people voting for Ecth, and half of the cycle had passed by. It wasn't subtle in the least, and he had to know that if Mark was a villager, or if Ecth was a returned, it would look very bad for him (being the only one who had argued so powerfully). It could have been a play where he'd just fall back on his current position if it failed, sure, but just think about how dangerous that would be. Lopen: I'm a little more suspicious of, he switched a vote 40 min before the close, and even mentioned in the post that he'd be leaving people less time and wished they'd have more time to respond. That enough of the Returned would have gathered in forty minutes is definitely possible, but not highly probable. He voted somewhat late/didn't talk much in the Ecth lynch/bandwagoned a little late, but the same logic for Meta goes for him. Being the obvious gamechanger in the vote will be pretty clearly hard marks against him as potentially a returned. Why would the returned risk that when we were lynching a villager? I think we need to have a wider net of examination but right now I just don't have enough informaton to comfortably point fingers at anyone else. I'm suspicious of Magestar, who has repeatedly attacked Frozen Mint for reasons which don't seem adequate to me, including on a vote which could have distracted against Ecth. Additionally, Araris was a proven villager, and was suspicious of Magestar. All I have is that and my gut suspicious, which is too based on paranoia to make a vote. Also, Doctor is on my suspicious list, for aformentioned reasons and the strange statement that Bard is a villager.

I agree completely. The riddle by nature causes confusion, confusion aids the returned not the villagers. Does anyone have a good reason to believe the riddle is true or helpful? If so please tell me, because otherwise why would we anlalyze it? I agree this should be a priority. The most likely person to have the rabbit would either be someone they have defended vigorously (Mark, is the only subject there), or someone who has been off of the radar and thus less likely to be lynched (thus Lopen?), but those are both total guesses. Anyone got theories who could have the rabbit? (also, it could have been Ecth?)

Also, think I realized why the elim's are going after inactive people. They receive the full amount of breath because the people will never have put their breathe into objects. Do we know the average starting breath count? We could figure out how much breath the returned probably have and get a rough estimate of their capabilities. And thank you for explaining doctor.

Why on earth are we examining the riddle of a returned? What incentive would he have to make a riddle which led to one of his companions death? (and if he had, why purposefully make it confusing, we should examine the logic, not get distracted by riddles) And Doctor, did you not say after the last lynch that you also had awakened clothing? I'm just pointed that out as a confused side not, but more importantly, we have evidence to be gained from looking back at previous posts now that we know for certain we have gotten a returned. 1st: Luckat has been more or less cleared in my mind. He was the one who started the push for Ecth, if it wasn't for his post I probably would have voted for Mark, and it was his push which made Ecth the ultimate target. The only reason a elim would do that would be to sack a member in order to get him a trusted position (which should definitely be considered possible, but highly unlikely until corroborated). 2nd: Notice who fought against Ecth/bandwagoned later once it was inevitable: Doctor switched his vote twice before settling on Ecth. Metacognition made a powerful argument against Lucat and for Mark, Bard voted late, and Lopen also voted late. Lopen was already mentioned as switching from Mark to Araris last lynch as noted by Luckat (would you care to explain why when you get a chance?). I'm not saying these people are Returned, but I'm saying that we need to keep an eye out. Also, we shouldn't forget about Mark.

You claim that you won't join the majority because they;re after you, but the majority is after Ecth right now. Why are you voting for Meta (yes, you make some good points, but you're vote won't make a difference). We've already seen the power of the elim's and the need to work together, why not vote for Ecth?

Its fine if they keep there votes on Mark, if the returned stop us voting for Ecth, then we'll kill Mark (who we were highly suspicious of) instead. I will argue, however, that Meta is working hard for Mark, and Luckat for Ecthilleon. We should keep an eye out for which one ends up being returned.

Well, as it is we have three leads: Lopen, Ecthileon, and Mark. I'd agree that Mark is the obvious one, but Ecthileon could be just as much a distraction as Mark. They could just be leading us in circles. I'll add my vote for to Ecthileon for now, but only because we need to keep our votes together.

Either way, we need to coordinate quickly, they're only going to become stronger over time. My theory is we use awakened clothing on everyone who votes for someone other than Mark. That way if the returned want to get someone lynched they'll have to do it last minute (which would be horridly obvious). Additionally, we watch everyone who's been active who doesn't vote for Mark, because they'll be encouraged to not back off otherwise they'll be suspicious, but if they join an overwhelming vote they won't have enough awakened clothing to prevent his death.

Well, I think it's time to make a couple of comments, though my knowledge is limited and feel free to both fact check and give me some pointers in my analysis. First off, sorry for taking so long to reply, but between business and trying to comprehend my first game without blundering into the middle of everything was rather tricky. 1st Premise: Sheep and Araris are not at odds. I went back through all of their posts from today (and read the ones from the last lynch as well), and never found a post where they refuted or disagreed with on another persons claim. sheep said Specifically, look at him defending himself as NOT allied with Araris. Despite this, Sheep has spent the majority of his points pointing suspicion at Magestar (refering to early comments about "villagerianess,"), who according Luckat Araris is currently voting for. Essentially, they haven't colluded, and in many ways have almost specifically backed off from the idea that they are working together. If anything, this desire to not be seen as colluding makes me be suspicious, especially when Araris made no response to the idea of them working together. Essentially, the purposeful lack of evidence makes me suspicious when they generally seem to agree. 2nd Premise: Sheep defends Mark with that seem quote (against which people seem to have some legitimate concerns, though I'm not positive, I will vote for Mark IV). Conclusions: However, if Mark IS returned, we should watch out for Araris and Sheep. However, if he is not, it would make me very suspicious of Magestar, who has already been suspicious and jumped on the Mark train. I was having a little trouble navigating and quoting past forums so there are some holes that I might try to fill in with later posts. Please help me correct my logic if I'm missing conversations and info! P:S Would not all the villagers want the amount of overall pool of breath to be reduced over time because the Returned consume breathe? Or is the rate of consumption so minimal it doesn;t make an important difference?

I'm joining as Varg!