Haelbarde

Ookla the Raveness/Wizard claimed Watchman, getting Ookla the Resolute/Aeoyri as their (allegedly drunken) result. Ookla the Resolute/Aeoryi claimed Gossip, who last suggested they target Devo today to get their one truth and lie from the GMs. JNV claimed Apothecary, and that they chose not to use their ability last night. Ookla the Destined/Mat claimed Innkeeper, suggesting they scanned Ookla the Raveness/Wizard and Hael as Village last night, making the pair drunk. Ookla of Ravens claimed Veteran and has not used their ability yet. Devotary of Spontaneity claimed Gleeman, saying that they scanned Ookla the Paradigm/Archer as Village last night. Haelbarde claimed Elder, saying they learned that JNV and Ookla the Raveness/Wizard were not the Forsaken, although if drunk as a result of being targeted by Ookla the Destined/Mat, then the result means that one of JNV and Ookla the Raveness/Wizard has to be the Forsaken. Ookla the Paradigm claimed Wisdom and has not used their ability yet.

Exactly. The whole point of this game is the village trying to gather information, so if executing you now gets better information later, then that seems worthwhile. Or are you saying that executing you Day 2 gives us more info gathering time? Because as I said earlier, if we don't execute you know, there's the potential for village info gatherers wasting their time verifying you instead of immediately know that you and your scans are clean and can move on to verifying others. I guess I'm not understanding your point yet. He's only Forsaken in the world where you are a Village Innkeeper telling the truth. If you are any combination of a Villager who is lying about being an Innkeeper or your scans, or a Darkfriend who is or is not an Innkeeper, JNV is either 50/50 a Forsaken, or is village. If everyone is willing to trust you, and so by your scan trust me, then we can execute JNV and be done with it. Otherwise, we need to verify you to know which world we are in. Plus keep in mind, we do have the Veteran (in theory) waiting to try and kill the Forsaken. JNV could be their target tonight if they wanted to use it that way. Like I said, I talked to Kas about it (and Drake has since weighed in) and the indication is that the second interpretation is correct. Basically that one of my results is guaranteed to be incorrect. And so given "this player is not a Forsaken" is incorrect, that means one of my two results has to be a Forsaken. I claimed last because I was asleep while all of you were claiming (except JNV - I did have opportunity to claim before them I suppose). And are you suggesting that in fact you didn't scan me or otherwise have serious reason to doubt that your result was accurate?

There's incentive in that it lets other information gathering roles to operate on confidently on knowledge gained by your claims during the next cycle, rather than waiting until the last cycle, and having more chances of a bubble of evil messing things up. Now, that being said, thinking about my role further, and checking with Kas about the interpretation of rules, I do have interesting information to bring to the table now. My role is the that of Elder. At the end of Night 0 I was told that two players (JNV and Raveness/Wizard) are not the Forsaken. With Destined/Mat having claimed to make me drunk, I figured there was little point to sharing the information, as I had interpreted falsifying my information as meaning that "these players cannot be the Forsaken" would be turned into "these players might not be the Forsaken", which is effectively useless. Everyone knows that any collection of other players might not be the Forsaken. However, the other way of looking at it, and I think this is the correct way to interpret it, if I am drunk, and so my information has to be false, then the only way that my information is false is if one of the two indicated players (JNV and Raveness/Wizard) is the Forsaken. And that makes things interesting. The options are as follows, provided there was no interference from a bubble of evil: Destined/Mat is a Village Innkeeper. They scanned Raveness/Wizard and I as village, but made me drunk, meaning that one of JNV or Raveness/Wizard is the Forsaken. And with Mat scanning Raveness/Wizard as village, that means JNV is the Forsaken. Destined/Mat is the Forsaken. Then I was not drunk last night, and so I have an independent scan of JNV and Raveness/Wizard being village. Destined/Mat is a Darkfriend Innkeeper. In which case I am drunk, and one of Raveness/Wizard and JNV is the Forsaken, but we can no longer rely on Destined/Mat's scan of Raveness/Wizard being accurate. I need to work through what the best course of action is now though. Without thinking about it further, I'll keep on Destined/Mat as I would like to know how to interpret my information.

Vote Tally (0) Devotary: Resolute{1} (0) Ravens: Destined{1} (2) Destined/Mat: Ravens{1}, Pardigm{2}, Hael{2} (1) Hael: Destined{2} (0) JNV: Resolute{2} (0) Paradigm/Archer: Devotary{1} (1) Resolute/Aeoryi: Paradigm{1}, Raveness{1} (0) Raveness/Wizard: Devotary{2} (2) No Execution: Hael{1}, JNV{1}, Resolute{3} (2) Destined/Mat: Pardigm, Hael (2) No Execution: JNV, Resolute (1) Hael: Destined (1) Resolute/Aeoryi: Raveness

While I've not shifted my vote yet, flagging that someone probably needs to talk me out of this if they don't want me to move my vote to Mat before the end of cycle. New Post that will probably be Merged Actually I am going to shift my vote from No Vote to Ookla the Destined / Mat as I've realised that verifying them also lets us have more confidence in any future scans they make, if they turn out to indeed be a Village Innkeeper.

No, we lose if two villagers die to the execution (the day vote). The veteran dying at night, or someone with the same alignment as the fool dying at night, do not count towards the two village execution total.

Best case scenario, Ookla the Destined gets executed, and we verify 3 players as village. Night 1, Ravens tries to kill the Forsaken, gets it wrong, and dies. That verifies both Ravens and their target as not the Forsaken. That means that Day 2 we've good odds on knowing that 5 of the 8 players are not the Forsaken, without refering to any other scans. I don't claim without very good reason as a matter of policy. People who've played with me before probably can verify that. Kas would know best, but Kas is the GM and can't weigh in on things. But I can certainly go find links to the various posts I've made in the past about Op Sec if you'd like. I've not ruled out claiming yet, but I've not spent enough time considering the matter. I don't immediately see the value in doing so. Well, maybe. Give me a little longer to think. Vote Tally (0) Devotary: Resolute{1} (0) Ravens: Destined{1} (0-1) Destined/Mat: Ravens{1}, Pardigm{2}? (1) Hael: Destined{2} (1) JNV: Resolute{2} (0) Paradigm/Archer: Devotary{1} (1-2) Resolute/Aeoryi: Paradigm{1}, Raveness{1} (0) Raveness/Wizard: Devotary{2} (1) No Execution: Hael{1} (1?) Destined/Mat: Pardigm (1) Hael: Destined (1) JNV: Resolute (1?) Resolute/Aeoryi: Paradigm, Raveness (1) No Execution: Hael Well it agrees with mine provided we allow new votes without retracting the previous!

Seeing as we have a veteran claim and we've also had just about every possible way of interpreting how it works wrong, the veteran names a Forsaken in thread during the night. If they get the name correct, the game ends with a village victory. If they get it wrong, they die, presumably giving us a most likely trustworthy flip to be able to know whether they're village or not, but certainly prove themselves to not be the Forsaken without costing us a village execution. If nothing happens, it means they were poisoned/drunk, and any claimed apocatharies and innkeepers are suspect. I don't think it's useful at all. Forsaken only claims Dragon if they think the Dragon claim won't get executed. If we think a Dragon claimant is the Forsaken, then we execute them as that way the game ends. Personally, I'd be just as happy to get a safe flip of Raven to be able to rule them out as a Forsaken by them missing their attack. My interpretation of this is that normally: Night 0: GMs roll dice to choose a random category. Then they roll to choose a random player in that category. Night 1: Which ever category chosen N0 is excluded, so coin flip between the other two, then randomly choose a player from that category Night 2: Randomly choose a player from the last category. However, in our situation, if we choose to trust Ookla the Destined's claims, then Night 0: Random player on the player list chosen with no regard to categories. Night 1: As no categories have been chosen from yet, there's a chance at getting any of the 3 categories. Night 2: Assuming they weren't poisoned N1, then the category of player from N1 is removed from the list, and there's a coin flip on which category is used for this night. Then a player is chosen randomly from the chosen category. Which means, as long as we accept the claims of Innkeeper and Watchman, then we just disregard last night's result of Ookla the Resolute, and rather wait and see what results we get N1 and N2 as we will know that those two results will be players from different alignments. It's possible they could be darkfriend and forsaken but these scans aren't taken in isolation, there's other sources of information that can be used to cross check these. Going to pause here and vote for No Execution now while I think of it. It doesn't pay to leave votes on the table - we don't want darkfriends to hammer and waste an execution. More thoughts still to come. Merge 1: Actually, I am feeling inclined to execute Ookla the Destined. Either they are: Village Innkeeper, in which case we can get good odds on confirming that they are village along with myself and Wizard based on their scans, drastically narrowing down the options for Forsaken. Darkfriend Innkeeper, in which case we know to not trust anything Ookla the Destined has claimed (we can assume that Wiz and I were drunk for C1 if we otherwise verify that either of us are village, and certainly it means Wiz and I can know that we were drunk given we know our alignments, but it does open up the possibility of one of us being a Darkfriend and there's an unknown third person that was unknowingly drunk Forsaken, knowing that the Innkeeper isn't in the game, and using the claim to sow chaos and distrust of results throughout the game, in which case executing them wins the game.

Sigh. Y'all need to spend more time reading the rules. Give me a bit to reread thread to try and actually parse what was being said.

We don't actually have to execute the Fool to gain the benefit of one of their teammates flipping. If the leading train were "No Vote" and the runner up was the fool, then I reckon that'd trigger it, getting us a free night kill to probably learn which side both the fool and the random victim are on. Is there a reason for the Veteran to not do this? It safely lets them flip (although there's chances that information is conveyed wrong per the bubble of evil rules). And obviously there's a 16.67% chance of just immediately ending the game, if there's one present. Though I guess be cautious of evil innkeepers or apothecaries, and don't make such a claim too early. Although, I think it'd be obvious if they were the target of such an ability as: Their ability failing should mean that no one dies. Which sorta makes being told it has succeeded clearly wrong EDIT: Sorry, that should be 14.29% I think - 8 players, but excluding yourself means its a 1/7 shot at hitting the Forsaken blind, not 1/6.

Hmm. I don't care for it because it's also well possible there's only a false dragon in this game, and we don't want to execute them thinking them to be the Dragon Reborn.

I've concluded that Kas is the Dark One and his victory is inevitable... >> Or maybe I need to go watch some One Night Werewolf playthroughs.

Usually you have to wait until day 3 and see if he's executed, if I recall correctly.

Sigh. @Kasimir, why did you let me sign up to a game during Ookla season!? Agrees that now is probably not the time to share information and I'm almost certainly voting no vote for D1, but I need to read the rules some more, brb.

Mazrim Taim has entered the chat.

There's also an impending random thin one with a slightly less dramatically long fantasy title that has a higher chance of coming out this year than the 3rd one I think? But anyhow, not reading KKC didn't stop me playing the last three games. ... Not that I'm saying actually reading the books is stopping me playing this game. (They're good books) ((But to be clear, I'm not playing this game)) EDIT: I definitely endorse reading the rules before the game starts though

Sees a Kas game, is interested in playing. Reads the rules. Just look away, look away There's nothing but horror and inconvenience on the way Ask any stable person, "Should I [play]?", and they will say "Look away, look away, look away" Maybe I'll be a spectre.

Wonders about a game where the elims have the same incentive

The woes of the vastly different time zone (while keeping normal hours for said timezone. ) But heh, for all that stress, the thread didn't end up mattering Ah well. Was fun putting in the work. Been a moment since I've gotten as engaged in a game. EDIT: Out of curiosity, did the threatening droid avatar have any effect on your reads?

They may have been more dangerous if active I suppose, but then equally more vulnerable. I think an extra IC would have been valuable, though I think you'd still need some change to the spying to avoid having a silent IC doc.

Having people to analyse would have been preferable. Not that I relish the thought of going up against you all at the same time. Depends on how kind you were with night kills, as far as keeping the talky people alive.

@Szeth_Pancakes Thanks for the game. I actually had a lot of fun, and ended up more active and engaged than normal It was an interesting problem to attempt to solve if nothing else, if it maybe didn't run quite as you intended, based on the tags?

Regarding the balance of the game. It quickly turned out that the best strategy for everyone involved was to just not mention the IC and the Winzik in thread, and for the doc to not be active. Which is not at all ideal, because it's a cool idea. I think it's always going to be in the village's interest to not mention it in thread, and you're not likely going to change that. If PMs are allowed, that changes things. But it also opens up the potential for the IC to make contact with other villagers privately and grow the trust group, which runs into the issues with village trust groups. Fixing the ability for the IC to speak though would be a worthwhile first step. Looking at the docs, one of the biggest issues was the tracking timing of Shard activity versus doc activity. I would wonder about instead of elim access to the live doc, instead the elims get access to all of last cycles discussion in a separate doc at the start of each cycle. That way there is no timing information available to them, and they can't immediately react to things. This is sorta how PM spying works in KKC for example. It does open the potential the IC to ID each other based on timing information without the Elims knowing, but I think that's sort of interesting - they get to know who is safe in thread, but have to be careful to not show it, else the elims use that to ID each other.

RIP GG WP. I'm glad that Aman, Kas, and Stick were indeed all village. Well done TUN for always just hovering out of the most pressing person to go after. Feels like the whole game then, the village was just devouring itself with little guidance, given the low activity of all the elims. We just got unlucky and didn't go after the right low actives. Ah well. Time to read some docs EDIT: I approve of the plotting of potential outcomes based on who flips when Very me. Seems I was right then with the Xino kill being a matter of TUN missing the mark.

Seeing as this is presumably my last chance to do so, may as well update the vote trackers for you: Green = SDPS Member (Village Boring) Blue = Inner Circle Member (Village Trust Group) Red = Spy Vote Tallies Vote Tallies (Detailed) Last thing I'll say, if the Winzik or IC are not night killed, consider that with 6 players left, if the in-thread assumption of 2 IC and 2 elims is true, consider using the IC doc to verify each the remaining IC in thread. If elims try and pretend, based on being able to read the doc, the real IC should be able to ID them. While yes, claiming in thread does give the elims their target, there's a chance that depending on who the claimed ICs are, it may help to narrow down the uncertainties on who the last elims are. Maybe it's a little messier in a 1 elim world. Didn't get time to think that through fully. If it's a 1 IC/only the Winzik is alive still, then a claim probs does help. @Szeth_Pancakes What happens if the last IC/Winzik and the last Spy die simultaneously?