Haelbarde

Well, he made mention of it to me around the time you mentioned it in thread, not that he commented whether he celebrated it or not. So again, that was one of those details that gave me confidence to your Kasness.

Anyway, stuff about the game. Making Diagrams was fun! I have a 12 page document with various iterations of the diagrams, plotting the different possible outcomes of the game, at each stage, for the last few cycles. Cycle 10 Cycle 11: As demonstrated in the second one, for these diagrams, the best chance the village had, assuming everyone was active on both sides, was to lynch me without having a useful role, and then lynch croc (or visa versa). But even then, you would still have to double lynch Sage, and after the first Sage lynch, only Chameleon would be left. So you have a coin flip - if it lynches Sage, then the village would win, if it lynched Chameleon, well, Chameleon would lose their second life, but then the night kill would take them out. So a 50:50 of victory for either side. The only other situation would be ending with Chameleon and Sage both having their extra lives, but that would give you guys only a 25% chance of victory - Sage would have to have lost two tied votes in order for us to lose - you guys had a 50% chance of getting the first lynch on sage, and then you'd have to win the second 50% chance to actually win the game. All other paths were just straight out Sympathiser victories. The reason for the premature outing of most of our team came because of an unclear ruling of how actions work in the game. We had initially wanted to try leave a few players alive, if possible, including Heron and Dragonfly. When it turned out Dragonfly was the village bondsmith, and it was time for the end game play, there was disagreement over whether to kill Dragonfly or not. In the end, literally at the last minute, I changed the kill order from Scorpion to Dragonfly (I was flashing back to the various games where I've lost games due to sentimentality, or having players not turn up). The issue then was that apparently you only get one action across the whole day-night cycle, rather than one per turn. Action economy wasn't spelt out in rules anywhere, because it didn't really need to be. For the most part, anyone with an action only had one possible action, and it had very specific timing for either the day or the night turn. The only people with access to 2 actions were us eliminators, but even then, we assumed that you could only put in one action during the night turn, so when I had night actions, I wouldn't put in the kill, and say Seonid would always be scanning, so wouldn't put in the kill. Sage had been putting in the kills just because that was convenient, so the question of whether someone who had used a day action could also put in a night action hadn't come up. It just so happened that I'd been a vote manipulator that cycle, and had put a day action and night action in. When the ruling was made that that wasn't allowed, the decision was made to give the village back their Bondsmith, giving it to Scorpion, who would otherwise have been our night kill that turn. The problem was that messed with our ability to end the game. So, after killing Ivory, the numbers were at 6 villagers to 5 eliminators. Now, up to that point, we knew that there was definitely one village bondsmith, and while we hadn't quite finished scanning everyone, we were pretty sure there wasn't much left for us to find. And so for instance, the day before, the numbers were 8:5, but taking into account vote manipulation, it was 8(9):5(6). I was under pressure that cycle, but we were able to pull a hammer, and by taking out the bondsmith, that 6:5 would now be 6:5(6), rather than 7(8):4, had I been lynched, and Dragonfly left living. And at 6:5(6)? The worst case scenario is that the coin flip killed one of us. But there'd also be a 50% chance of a clean sweep victory. But even if we lost the coinflip, as long as Croc stayed alive, we would be able to tie every single lynch, forcing that coin flip every cycle, and giving us victory as soon as it went our favour. And as long as I survived, there'd be the chance I'd get a useful role to just overpower the lynch anyway. Or, if you decided to lynch Sage early, we'd immediately win too. And so because of all that, the play of pulling a hammer to save me from the lynch made sense, because it wouldn't matter if we were all revealed. We could tie very single cycle till the end of the game, and the worst case scenario was Sage being lynched last. But he would be untouched, versus Chameleon, giving the village only a 25% chance of victory, if and only if none of the other tied lynches had gone in our favour. Obviously then, when Ivory died, but the village bondsmith lived on through Scorpion, plans had to change. Rather than at the expected 6:5(6), we were at 6(7):5(6). We could no longer tie the lynch unless the village didn't all turn up, and only if the whole team was online to vote at last minute. And since we now knew that there was a village protect role, we weren't willing to risk going straight for Scorpion in case they claimed in thread, or were randomly protected anyway. So we had to wait two nights to take out the village protect and vote manipulation. That was why we were a little more subdued and not voting so brazenly. Anyway, that's a bit of context to what we were doing for those last few cycles, after randomly revealing ourselves in thread by saving me. Which reminds me - Sage shouldn't have been lynched when they were - After we soothed away one of the votes, there wasn't 2 votes on either Sage or whoever Sage was voting for. And the rule change about the 2 vote minimum was only changed for the instance where there were only 2 players left in the game, which wasn't yet the case. So you weren't as close to victory as you thought you may have been. The GMs were aware of the error, but didn't think it was worth fixing if the game was about to end in our favour anyway. If things had turned around though, he'd have got his extra life back. See, I was in contact with Kas at the time, chatting about other stuff. So details like posting when Kas was online, or posts that seemed to reference Kas being unwell or at least busy, meant that you could include details, intentionally or not, that fit with what I knew of Kas' current state, beyond the scope of purely a past game research based imitation. And that's what sold me on it, I think. Edit: The spoilers actually have pictures in them now. Also, I remembered - keteks! I still have a Tyrian Falls ketek to finish, but I wanted to add that the other nice thing with the potential cleansweep if killing Ivory meant no more village bondmsith was that that Day 14: 14 days ketek that I posted midway through the game would have come through. The ketek was posted on the start of the 15th day of the game running, I believe, and that lynch would have been at the start of the 14th day since the ketek was posted.

Pretty sure that's been a thing since before this game Well done Rae. Though, interviewing the people in question doesn't seem quite fair *goes and compares the player list to my random lists of notes

From the signup post:

Thanks heaps for running this game Orlok. Really appreciate it. And my apologies if my PMs or messages in the dead doc came off as demanding in any way. It was not the intent, and I'm sorry if I made anything harder for you than it already was. Going to have to go through the thread to pick out who to vote for. I already know a few players that I'd vote for, but not 5. Here's the wiki page on Single Transferable Voting if anyone is interested. Heh. At the start of the game, I thought that I'd be really into guessing who was playing the game, but after an initial attempt at taking down some notes and having some guesses, it didn't end up being something of concern. I'll be interested to find out who was playing the game. It was nice to actually be able to change one's play style without garnering suspicion for it. I didn't necessarily make great use of it, but I could see it being quite useful to experiment with a new style, and then once the game ends and all is revealed, you can then tell everyone that this is your new playstyle that you'll be taking back to play other games with. Edit: And thanks everyone for the very tense game!

I think they've only sent it out in one newsletter - the first time they did so was in the April 2017 newsletter, but there doesn't seem to be any links in the later ones. But if you have the April one, go back and have a look, and you should be able to still download it from the link.

Honestly, I don't have the time to play unfortunately.

But my character is dead... D:

I'll start you off with some of that RP parodying. Who is this man, Lord Tormander just there To have me dine at his table, and now this poison does share It was his hour at last to put a seal on our fate Wipe out the past and watch them clean off the slate All it would take was a flick of a knife. Instead of this, he has taken his own life.

Anyways, y'all better RP some Les Miserables parodies or I will be very disappointed in you.

I forget if the guidelines got changed, but all games are meant to have inactivity filters. Also, bans are very necessary. There are no consequences for inactivity currently, so there's no incentive to change. The reality is, a lot of the time, you could probably look ahead and work out that yeah, I've got lots of homework in the next 3 weeks, I won't sign up. But often people don't give it any thought, or if they do, they know there's no consequences if they go inactive so sign up anyway. We've been talking about "nice" ways to discourage inactivity for the last 2 years, to no real effect. An actual hard rule that is enforced, like a ban, is very much what we need. And yeah. You don't want to mess with distribution. Honestly, I'm sure that more often than not, GMs will naturally shy away from giving power roles to people who go inactive anyway, and giving them village vanilla roles is not going to stop them joining games and then going inactive. Edit: It's been awhile since I've complained about inactivity and measures against it. Feels good The other thought I had was yeah, the 48 hours threw me as I had assumed that the game, both as a quick fix, and due to the nature of the rules (having no ability to explain votes or make arguments) would have only 24 hour cycles. Wonders if that would have helped with peoples attention span.

Voting for Roadwalker.

Removing vote from Kynedath.

Removing vote from Jondesu. Voting for Kynedath.

Removing vote from Joe. Voting for Jondesu

Voting for Joe.

Voting for Haelbarde (to play this game)

Nope. So far the only thing I've got from fRR was that I'm village roleless. I've had no moments of clarity.

We'd both die - not because of the lynch, but the scapegoat killing Aman, which in turn kills me. Let's not do that.

I forget if Aman got back to me, but I was considering doing this before the weekend, but didn't (obviously). I'm apparently the other Lover - Hero just chose the first and last on the playerlist, apparently. And I forget if this came up in thread, but I say "apparently the other Lover" because fRR gave no indication of this. When asked, she did say that if I was hypothetically a Lover, there was a reason I wouldn't be told. So, yeah - I'd also rather not test the tied lynch thing

"There weren't any floors". I don't quite get what's been got at there. I'm back, btw, though I need to sleep. I'll make sure I'm all caught up in the morning.

Adding my voice to the number of village roleless. I can't help but wonder if this game has an arsonist.... Anyway I'm going to be at a camp for the next 2.5 days, with limited internet. I should be able to be on at least once a day though and keep up to date, and maybe post/PM if need be.[/colour]

Are you able to confirm if you would rule that no valid votes does not count as a tied vote (for purposes of a hypothetical scapegoat)?

I did actually PM her the question last cycle because I was curious about what would happen with a scapegoat if the doll votes weren't valid. I didn't get a response till this cycle, and she said it doesn't count as a tied vote. It'd be nice to get confirmation in thread though.

@firstRainbowRose does a no lynch where there were no valid votes count as a tied vote?