Dalinar Kholin

Well, conversations sort of dead... Not that I necessarilly disagree with the bandwagon, but what do people think about Jondesu? @Val @Walin @Rathmaskal @Fifth Scholar @Elandera

I think you're overthinking it a little bit. Drake was a confirmed good active village, what more could you ask for from a lynch target? As much as Walin couuuuld be an elim, I'm sceptical because of Bort's vote on Walin.

Woah! Such an amazing outcome leaves me flabergasted! Sure, I had hoped and dreamed that such a simple connection could have led us to our enemy, but my expectations have been surpassed! Sorry, I am tired beyond belief, my exhaustion only compounded by the sadness at (mostly) losing our dear pirate companion Drake. His (soon to be) loss (provided that Miracle Max doesn't save the day) loses us an essentially confirmed good comrade. Let us recap: Essentially confirmed good: (maybe 90%) Sart: Twice contributed to killing elims Dalinar Kholin: worked to get Rand lynched once, and started the lynch on Bort Fifth: Pushed hard for the lynch on Rand. Last voting cycle: Rand (7) Fifth, Headshot, Mr. Doc, Rath, Straw, Drake, Sart Straw (2): Rand, Jon Walin (1): Elandera It's worth reviewing how Jondesu put his vote on Straw when the vote count was tied 2-2 between Rand and Straw. Such an action could have saved Rand. Of course, it could be an accident, but it strikes me as highly suspicious.Mr. Doctor put the vote on Randuir changing it to 3-3. This makes me suspect Mr Doctor far less, leaving me 70% village read on him (the 30% elim comes from his defense of Randuir the previous day cycle). Rath's vote brings it to 4-3 and Straw's brings it to 5-3. Because there's a possibility that both Straw and Rand were evil I won't comment on how this affects my view of straw. Rath I would say 75% village read from that vote. It'd be a bold move to make as an elim. Elim Reads: Jondesu: Stayed on the counterlynch target and voted at a crucial time. Snipexe: Tunnelling on Sart for no particular reason (has he voted anywhere else?) This is my thoughts on the latest voting cycle given that Rand has flipped elim. Let's get good analysis out there! We have three elims flipped, we know have a minimum of two (probably a maximum of 3?) remaining. Edit 1: Also, sorry for the double post, but just realized something. HH is also probably good because of the early vote on Rand.

Sorry I didn't vote. Been really busy in real life, I'll probably be busy until Tuesday. Yeah, I'm hoping Rand's evil, buuut, as I mentioned in my post yesterday I think it's too simple. I think we should look closer at Straw and Snipexe, they're my strongest suspicions right now. People want to throw out some analysis on them for me to read when I get back?

Also, @Mr Doctor Seriously, Sart is cleared to a significant degree. I don't see how that could possibly be otherwise. I get why you could argue that the first time was a coincidence or elim versus elim situation, but not two. That's ridiculous odds.

First, yay for pinch hitters! Please be active! I suspect an elim is among you, so participating will help us root them out! I'm very confused at the elims right now. Bort kept his vote on Doc12 until the last moment, meaning he never came back on to check (even though he knew I had voted on him). That strikes me as sort of odd behavior for an elim. Did he think he would be saved by miracle max? That could explain it, after all, we've given credit to self defense behavior on the part of Randuir before, so it wouldn't be held against him necessarilly. Otherwise, it could just be lack of elim coordination (which could also explain the no vote manipulation). Also, I'm considering the lack of items. At first I thought it might mean the elims had used a dagger or rum in the past, buuuut, not everyone needs to have an item, so it's hard to so whether it means anything. I'm not sure what I think of the strong defense of Randuir by Bort. Bort didn't think that Bort was about to be lynched, so no reason to connect with a village (get a village lynched and put village of the elims tracks). Or Bort could have been trying to defend an elim friend (but why so openly?). The only reason I can think of is that the elims were desperate (perhaps a lot of inactives?). Or Bort could have been trying to appear village when Rand flipped village. Of these I'm not sure what I think is true at the moment, but I'm going to take a day to consider the Rand lynch. Other thoughts, I like the straw lynch if he doesn't show up. I don't like the Walin lynch at the moment (but @Walin Why would you want to be neutral if you're a village? Seriously, your playstyle will get you lynched eventually, just because that's not a good village precedent.) My theoretical analysis concludes consequentially that in all probability there would seem to appear an indication of there existing a possibility of appearing or being present evil! Snipexe. Either that or Mr. Doctor. I suspect one or the other is evil. Way to be active @Mr Doctor ! Your amount of content and analysis has been amazing.

In response to Mr Doctor, @Mr Doctor I don't understand why you consider being the final vote on an elim so non-important. You say Even if it is "sort of an accident," if he was an elim he would know he's putting the nail in the coffin of his fellow elim. So, if it was an accident he would have to be village, the only other possibility is that the elims decided to let Elenion die in order to clear Sart. That's not an accident, that's a plan (it could be forced out of necessity). If anything, the vote out of convenience (not planned) would be in his favor. It is only a matter of coincidence and convenience if he's a village, so how does this contribute or not affect your suspicions of him? I think he has a point that we should generally be cautious lynching active people. If we lynch active people we are doing the elims work for them. HOWEVER, although I understand Sart's claim and don't think it should contribute to suspicion of him, I disagree in that lynching active people can give us information, in addition to sometimes being necessary. It should be a consideration, but not that important of one Eh, what? Where are you getting 1/5 and 1/22 from? Technically, an elim should have a 5/27 chance of being hit and a village a 22/27. Maybe I'm missing something. Could you explain your math a little more? Also, I think that forgets the possibility of vote manipulation. A vote manipulation is worth to save an elim teammate, but it is also worth to cause a double lynch (pretending to save an elim teammate). Soooo, having a decisive vote stops vote manipulation from causing a double lynch or saving a teammate when only the elims know who their teammates are. Thus, it could also be a village thing even if your math is correct. First of all, regardless what happens, me defending Fifth is not the same thing as being on his team. I've openly defended him because I think the lynch on him was pretty weak and wasn't going to help us. You voted because he voted for you (I found and still find the reasons to lynch you pretty solid, and don't count that against him). Rath and Doc had weak suspicions, thus everyone with a vote on him (from my perspective) had poor reasons, it seemed like a mislynch waiting to happen. Second, the weirdness with the dagger. If I was providing a counterlynch to Fifth, I would have told him to put his dagger on Bort not Rand, that seems like pretty poor coordination. Not to mention a totally unnecessary waste of a valuable elim tool when we already suspect the elims have little or no vote manipulation. That said, there were some points made about Fifth and Elenion that caught my attention and may make me rethink my position. Could someone post them or point me to them? @Fifth Scholar What is your defense in thsi regard? If you've already commented on these I didn't see it. @Straw Why have you been so quiet? I can't make heads or tails of it, but it's beginning to become weird. @randuir If you Bort flips evil you forgot to include Randuir on the elim suspicion list. He defended you vigorously, certainly equally or more as I did fifth.

Bort. I want to offer a counter to the Fifth bandwagon. I don't like his activity this day cycle. I vote for Randuir, he proceeds to question my claim, places a vote on me. When I remove my vote on Rand he removes his (notably, not when I defended it, just when I removed it, which I find odd). If he truly had a problem with my logic, then why didn't he keep the vote on regardless of whether I removed my vote. Furthermore, he hasn't done any analysis and it appears he isn't going to put a vote on anyone this cycle. I find that odd for a village, it's possible he just doesn't suspect anyone or is busy. But, @Bort I would like an explanation. @randuir @Sart @Fifth @Rathmaskal @Jondesu @Drake Marshall Thoughts on Bort? I find straw's playstyle this game very odd, but I don't have a read on him either way. I agree that the nail in the coffin of Elenion is a strong mark in the favor of Sart. I'm still suspicious of Randuir, but perhaps the play on me is setting up a counterlynch when Rand turns village.

@Drake Marshall I strongly disagree with you reasoning for voting on Fifth. I think it's entirely understandable to want to lynch Randuir (I myself voted on him), and I think there is strong reasoning for it. The other argument brought up in the past (that he's was the final vote on Araris) I think is also bad. Putting the nail in the coffin of a lynch is not a terrible idea, because a single action (if they had it) would get them a second lynch. @Rathmaskal I understand your focus, but I think you're tunneling. I suspect at most one, maaaybe two was involved in the day one lynch. Why get involved unless Bugsy is an elim? I'm confused why you're so certain that those people are suspicious.. Both of you aren't very confident, yet nonetheless willing to vote for Fifth. This feels like a mislynch waiting to happen.

No, I corrected that statement because I realized it was false. Instead I asked, why would he lie in this situation if he was village? I can think of none. Can you think of any? As I noted, Road was a different situation entirely. I agree, there are situations where a village would lie to village, but I challenge you to find a scenario where Dev would have been doing that here. @Straw You've been pretty quiet. What are your thoughts on Rand? 1. Bringing it to four v four is dangerous. It allows for vote manipulation by the elims if they have it, thus could cause a doulbe lynch as Bort pointed out. To be fair, how much time was left after Randuir voted on Dev? Let me rephrase, I don't think it should be a simple decision of self preservation, I think it should require some thought. Is it, in this situation, better for me to die and will the village be better off than if I survive? Merely knowing you are good is not enough reason to want to kill the other person. Let's expand this principle with a hypothetical. Presume Rand has a dagger or rum. Now he knows that he is good, so according to the rule of self preservation that has been argued thus far, he should use the rum or dagger in order to survive and kill devotary. He knows he is good. He knows they may or may not be good. Thus the other person should die. However, this could cause a double myslynch by thinking he's being saved by fellow elims, thus it could be a bad idea. The rule of self preservation only extends so far, and defending an important village role that will in my opinion be immediately confirmed (either killed by elims or killed by spaniard, and yes I stand by that argument and I'll explain it in more detail in a moment). The moral of this argument is the rule of preservation has limited utility. The benefits of keeping a village spaniard alive to use his kill at least once before he dies is the equivilant to a lynch. So although we would lose a lynch and a village Rand if wrong, we would also gain the equivalent of a lynch through the Spaniards killl (which if revealed he mind as while use). The Spaniard Kill: The win condition of the Spaniard is to kill the six fingered man. There are two ways to do this. First, is to have the village win the game (and participate in all the lynches), or use your kill. However, you overemphasize the importance of saving the kill. If the Spaniard finds the count, he can simply announce it in thread and have the six fingered man lynched with his help. After all, he doesn't care if he dies once he's lynched the six fingered man, so being outed doesn't matter once he's finished his job. I think you underestimate that the Spaniard is happy if the village wins. One less elim gets the village closer to victory and also the Spaniard closer to lynching the sixth fingered man. 2. I disagree, the Spaniards win condition does align with mine (after all the six fingered man is an elim). However, fair point of being in the firing line. 3. Yes and no. I agree that the six fingered man is the weakest of the elims, but still would take a while to find him as the spaniard, and I doubt it'd be worth distancing yourself from day one (no more than any other elim anyways). After all, we got an elim before the six fingered count, and in all probabilities would have gotten another before the Spaniard identified him. 4. Refer to the argument above, I agree with the main point (you only know your good), but sometimes there are times to sacrifice yourself for the good of the cause. I suppose it isn't an easy argument that this was one of them though. 5. I sort of find that contradictory. This is a zero sum game after all. Anything that detracts from the elim helps the village. 6. Fair 7. Fair, I do think the lack of defense is odd, the time point could be a valid defense though. Sigh, I think I'm just tunelling at this point. I'm not sure. I'll rescind my vote for the moment, even though I don't love it, until I've looked through everyone. Also, @randuir I haven't forgotten the question you've asked me, I'll add it to my post tonight. Randuir.

Devotary's claim would be suicidal if not true. The real spaniard could claim, no village would have a reason to lie. One of them must be lying, either way we have a 50% shot of killing the right spaniard quickly. More likely he would have been attacked during the night because there aren't protect roles. Either way, he would have quickly been confirmed by either of those mechanisms. Thus, it is beneficial for devotary to remain alive and rand to die. If they both tell the truth, Dev dies by night or is confirmed village. Better than a double lynch. If Rand is good and Dev is bad, getting himself killed will result in a counterclaim (or even in that time period of Dev claiming could have resulted if he was lying, a notable risk to take), we eventually get a baddie. Furthermore, the evidence against Devotary wasn't great, furhter weakening this possibility. If Rand is bad and Dev is good, everything makes sense. Self preservation as opposed to the good of the village. In his final post on that night there wasn't even any statement saying sorry for killing the spaniard if he's telling the truth or laying out his logic of self preservation. Heck, he didn't even do that during the night. Don't you find that a little weird? No word of defense during the night for his previous actions? Even the tone during the final post sounds like a fingered elim making a last stand (:p I speak from experience, limited experience, but still experience). Until he read back and then realized that the evidence wasn't very strong and he could resume his role of getting people to contribute with a post aimed at everyone. Only when I come with a vote on him does he reluctantly take up the mantle of defending himself. Why do I find self preservation defense wrong? Because that's what I claimed in AG 3 when I was evil, it's more half true than anything else. Why would I expect him to sacrifice himself for a claim? Because that's an important role that could be verified through the mechanism I pointed out above. Consider This: If Devotary was evil. The real spaniard knows. The real spaniard has a kill, one kill, presumably to save for important tasks...like killing elims. This would be a basically 100% elim kill because no village would want to lie to everyone. The spaniard doesn't even need to claim in order to prove devotary is evil, he could just kill dev in the night, Problem solved, Randuir avenged or village role saved. @Bort @randuir So, what's wrong with my logic? Edit 1: Okay, sometimes villagers want to lie, but I don't see why any village would lie about being the spaniard, not in this scenario.

Randuir. Devotary has come up as the Spaniard as claimed. Randuir gave no comment to his being an important village role, and instead of sacrificing himself to the lynch decided to leave it to chance. Interestingly, if Randuir is evil, I would say it suggests the Elims do not have any vote manipulation. In response to Randuirs question, I will make a post on the subject tommorow (along with further analysis).

Randuir. I agree that it was odd he was suspicious of Elenion, yet ended up not voting for him and eventually came to the conclusion that Elenion wasn't evil. Also, @randuir , and anyone else in the thread. They've been very quiet this cycle, which seems a convenient time when they have some suspicion on them. Did they say they have irl stuff going on? If Randuir is good I think we should vote for Devotary, but my gut says Rand.

@randuir Finally read everything over, I'll admit I skimmed a little bit of the analysis. Village reads: HH: Just seemed too haphazard. No strong defense come back when suspicions been thrown at him, I think an elim would have little stake in Araris or Bugsy getting killed. Same with Fifth: Mainly, why? If he was an elim, he doesn't get anything throwing down another vote on Araris. I can understand why as a village though. Elim Reads: Devotary: Not even getting involved in an Araris vote seems like an easy decision when you know Araris is village. Furthermore, throwing it on a person without any votes already allows you to not argue why you don't like the Araris lynch. Eternum: He made some comment early that seemed to link Elenion and Araris (thus once Araris died, Elenion would seem good). Alas, I don't have the quote right now. I'm going to hold of voting until more discussion happens. @Devotary of Spontaneity . What are your reads on Eternum, Randuir, and Fifth Scholar?

Wow, okay, been really busy for the past couple of days and SE totally slipped my mind. I am officially back and ready to figure out what the heck has been going on. P.S. No idea right now.

Well, that was unexpected. 6 remain. Presumably two from Elariel, two from Hastings, one from Tekiel, one from Venture perhaps? The question is what happens now? I suppose it could be one from Hastings one from Lekal

On account of my upcoming death in LG 45, I mind as well join. Sign me up as Reginald Canuk!

I was calling myself powerless. Whoops... Good day to you all good sirs.

Power is dependent on others responding to it. Since none have, can you truly call it power? Yes, I can in my opinion

Also, Mark IV , Elandera. (So you can't take that vote off last minute to get us both killed). Of course I'm biased, but merely beause I'm biased doesn't make me wrong For the majority of the game oraters are strong, but at the end? Thugs, rioters, coinsots, misborns. All far stronger objectively. Coinshot kills and votes, mistborns are just misborns, rioters are a hard counter, thugs survive the coinshot barrages that end the game (mind as while save coinshots until the last minute).

Fair Enough It was worth a try though, I had to make you vote one way or another, although I disagree overall with your belief in the relative power of an orater.

@Mark IV @Steeldancer And don't think you can just leave it tied. Elandera and I could just work together against you instead to prevent both of us dying. Or I could hammer at the last minute out of vengeance.

I am the last member of Tekiel. Which is precisely why I'm so irritated right now, b/c me voting on a dead guy killed my remaining teammate... My incompetence in itself makes me deserve to lose, but I digress. Here's the thing, from Mraizes death, it seems like he's last one within Venture. He just sorta gave up (why would he do that with a solid chance of victory?) I suspect there's one more in Lekal, maybe two more in Hastings, and two or three more in Elariel. So, why weaken as house instead of finishing one off? A): Coordination. We have no team doc to secretly plot and plan. This leaves us fragmented and vulnerable. We don't know your guys house or who is alone or together, but you know mine. Thus my orater ability is minimized because I can't coordinate with anyone to use it effectively. Meanwhile, I'm presuming that there are kill abilities out there. It takes two kill abilities for two people, and one for me. B): Mathematically: I am one person, two votes plus seeker. Elariel has (at least) two people, two votes, plus abilities (yes plural, note how Elandera only said she didn't have allomantic abilities, but she does have a non-allomantic one). Thus I by myself am weaker than Elariel, thus less of a threat. C): Leveling the Playing Field A 2 v 1 v 1 is better than a 2 v 2. No matter the situation. The 2 on a team will never work against each other, no matter what, the 1 v 1 will. The orater ability is being overhyped, it can be soothed or rioted, and now that I'm know it becomes weak. Being known as an orater makes me incredibly innefective.

With all due respect your claim of having two left is empty, of course you would claim that if you had three people left. And no, there house stands a better chance lynching you than me because they will be left facing a fragmented opposition. Even if your claim is true and your team has two left, nonetheless, you would be able to coordinate with your teammate in order to plan lynches. Two players have two lives and two votes and abilities. I have two votes and one life. Not to mention I'm outed and vulnerable. What benefit do they gain from killing me they don't from killing you? What value does a lone orater pose with a night phase coming up and no team to defend me? What do you think of my argument? @Mark IV @ElephantEarwax What is solid about Elandera's logic?

I'll give you better logic, vote for the person who has two votes yet no allomantic abilities and takes one kill action to kill. Or vote for a team it takes to kill actions to kill (with maybe a third player), and has a kill ability. It's a smokescreen, kill the orater because they're 'scary' and then stomp on everyone else.