Anniversary Game 2: Return of the Koloss

[Wyrmhero he/him]

Dude, you're practically ignoring the guy who threw himself in front of the lynch bus for you... >>

 

Yeah, because I don't think it's fair to call for the cross-examination of a guy who's clearly insane >>.

 

More seriously, you're either a Villager who thinks an extra person to enable PMs/my survival is a lot more important than your own reasoning (which I would disagree with), or you're an Eliminator who intended to survive the lynch and use your willingness to be lynched as 'proof' of innocence (which is possible depending on timezones of other Eliminators, but I don't think the lynch ended up safe enough for them to have tried that).

 

Edit: I also disagree that your lynch would be more informative than mine, considering the number of people who weighed in on it.

 

At this point, I'm leaning towards you being legit, but we shall see.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Wyrmhero

[Kasimir he/him]

More seriously, you're either a Villager who thinks an extra person to enable PMs/my survival is a lot more important than your own reasoning (which I would disagree with), or you're an Eliminator who intended to survive the lynch and use your willingness to be lynched as 'proof' of innocence (which is possible depending on timezones of other Eliminators, but I don't think the lynch ended up safe enough for them to have tried that).

 

Edit: I also disagree that your lynch would be more informative than mine, considering the number of people who weighed in on it.

 

At this point, I'm leaning towards you being legit, but we shall see.

That's a misreading, I'm afraid. My claim was not that my lynch would be more informative than yours, which is why I distinguished between what caused me to vote for myself and what caused me to keep my vote on myself, i.e. post-El's retraction.

I do think your lynch would be maximally informative. But considering Tineye #2 isn't all that stealth and we don't even know if either of you is actually Mistborn, rather than a Tineye, the last thing we want is to off you and then find out belatedly that there's no Tineye tomorrow. It's not like we don't get a lynch every day: we do. We can always decide again tomorrow, but I don't like the idea of taking down a (claimed) Tineye this early and then finding out that the Mistborn hasn't drawn Tin so we don't get PMs anymore. I like planning for the worst-case scenario, and in this case, I didn't see the point in being all that hasty. Again: PMs aren't the be-all-end-all. But they're useful.

So, here is my reasoning in a nutshell: "Here is why I think, at least for Day 1, we should not be going after Wyrm as the lynch target. Who does that leave us with?"

I don't think I'm a more informative target than you, Boss. Clearly, as I've said, I do reject that claim. But I do think I was more informative than the targets remaining. That claim I do endorse.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on how much I would weigh up against you on a player trade, I'm afraid. As I see it, I'm swapping out a bishop for a pawn. Any chess player would do it in a heartbeat, excluding usual worries about controlling position.

 

[Mark IV he/him]

While we're on the topic of dead tineyes, GM, how will we know if (when all tineyes are dead) that the Mistborn, for the turn, is a tineye? Will it be announced? Will it be trial and error?

[RippleGylf she/her]

Wow. A spiked on the first lynch? I don't know if I've seen that happen before in SE. I guess the vote manipulators know what they're doing.

[STINK he/him]

I don't feel anything about that result.

[Amanuensis he/him]

I don't feel anything about that result.

 

This is why I'm not much a fan of eliminators dying this early. I would have rather Lopen lived long enough to implicate more of his team, but at least we don't have absolutely nothing to work with. I am in the process of analyzing everything that's happened so far with the knowledge of Lopen's alignment. Right now Haelbarde and Venture are my top two suspects when it comes to connections to Lopen. Will explain more in depth upon the completion of my Day 1 Post Summaries & Quick Links and Analysis.

 

A. I was informed by someone that there was a third Smoker who hadn't Smoked anyone at all on Night 1. (Given the presence of Smoker #3's not having Smoked, you can see why Smoker #2 and myself seem that bit more suspicious. I had thought that clearing the board a little by getting rid of myself would be helpful in that regard.)

 

Who informed you of a third non-burning Smoker? And if you know you're not evil and that reason dictates that a Smoker not burning has to be good then why not just reveal the one who claimed to Mashadar as of the three they're the most likely the one that's evil, if the Spiked were even given one this iteration at all.

[STINK he/him]

(Ada, that was a joke about how I was soothed)

[Mark IV he/him]

Okay, I'm not so sure I want this to be revealed publicly, so I'm putting it in code and will distribute it later to others.

CwP/u85SnEH4rASZSbRkVts3ke7A56fZJz6ggGJTgV2Z6TIojsK1GlUY/5T2wXUFIjNObnk2x3/q

bEZrm3PxOs/b1yFObJhtfdHN3V0rjm4i4LtvFo761ECWJ7vx0aXMCh7O133AxiTsbARyOss1ha68

RlX+vT1qUxmgWEx3+vs=

There.

I hope this is allowed.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Mark IV

[Kasimir he/him]

Who informed you of a third non-burning Smoker? And if you know you're not evil and that reason dictates that a Smoker not burning has to be good then why not just reveal the one who claimed to Mashadar as of the three they're the most likely the one that's evil, if the Spiked were even given one this iteration at all.

Hellscythe claimed the existence if this third Smoker; later, STINK claimed to have been in contact with Smoker #3 as well. I'm not confident that Smoker #3 is good. After all, there's just HS's word for it. We have, for one, no evidence that Smoker #3 did not, in fact, burn. STINK has not ventured an opinion on the matter.

Because isn't it obvious? I've given up playing this game. I don't think I can do anything and I've given up trying to say anything on the Smoker issue. And what grounds do I have? I burned last night. So did Smoker #2. I could try to push for their death but that reason implicates me equally and my own knowledge of my own allegiance will convince no-one. When I'm dead and my allegiance is known, then perhaps people can deal with this issue however the storms they want.

[Amanuensis he/him]

Hellscythe claimed the existence if this third Smoker; later, STINK claimed to have been in contact with Smoker #3 as well. I'm not confident that Smoker #3 is good. After all, there's just HS's word for it. We have, for one, no evidence that Smoker #3 did not, in fact, burn. STINK has not ventured an opinion on the matter.

 

Hellscythe? Where did you hear about this non-burning Smoker?

 

Because isn't it obvious? I've given up playing this game. I don't think I can do anything and I've given up trying to say anything on the Smoker issue. And what grounds do I have? I burned last night. So did Smoker #2. I could try to push for their death but that reason implicates me equally and my own knowledge of my own allegiance will convince no-one. When I'm dead and my allegiance is known, then perhaps people can deal with this issue however the storms they want.

 

I'm sorry if my questioning you is upsetting you, brother. I'm just trying to understand what's going on better. I would appreciate it if you sent me a PM so we can discuss why you've given up. You seem to be not giving yourself enough credit and naturally I don't think that's wise. 

[STINK he/him]

Reasoning > Roles.

[WeiryWriter he/him]

Riew was still recovering from his drunken binge the night before when the villagers started to assemble.  Leaning against one of the walls in the Ministry building he tried to focus on what the rest of the villagers were discussing, and not passing out of course.  If he was quite honest with himself he would much rather be curled up in some little ball hidden away from everything that was going on, but it had to be safer to be around people right now.  Or rather around a group as large as this one, individuals maybe not so much.  Riew still didn't know who he could trust right now.

 

When a conversation finally started, Riew tried to focus on it.  Then groaned as some person's stupid falsetto set off the pounding in his head.  He huddled in a ball and just wanted everything to stop after that, it didn't matter who killed Senn, everybody else would soon be joining him anyway so why bother...

 

Needless to say he was in a state of utter shock, and more than a little pain what with the dramatic uptick in noise, as Lippen revealed herself as one of them.  Afterwards all Riew could think was, Huh, definitely did not expect that...

 

---

 

Yeah, really didn't have to work too hard at putting myself in Riew's shoes for this rp, I certainly did not see this coming...

[Mashadar Mistborn he/him]

Okay. We got one of the spiked and a defensive role at that. Using the coinshot or the mist born as a vote sounds like a good idea for tonight. I f the mist born has steel,  they should go after the second person on the vote list. I still don't have a vote.

[Hellscythe he/him]

Hellscythe claimed the existence if this third Smoker; later, STINK claimed to have been in contact with Smoker #3 as well. I'm not confident that Smoker #3 is good. After all, there's just HS's word for it. We have, for one, no evidence that Smoker #3 did not, in fact, burn. STINK has not ventured an opinion on the matter.

That statement is ironic once you know the truth Kas. Also me and Stink are in contact with two completely different smokers. I asked mine and they said they haven't revealed to Stink at all. Of the 4 smokers I'm the most inclined to believe Stink's Smoker to be the evil one although it's possible multiple are evil.

 

Hellscythe? Where did you hear about this non-burning Smoker?

You can ask me in our PM or our group PM or our 2nd group PM. But I mean.... I don't think there's any other answer to this question other than through a PM........

 

 

I'd like to suggest that the Coinshots go after the inactives now that it's night two. The case for killing inactives is that, regardless of alignment they're hurting us. If they're not there in the later cycles they can't do anything to help us. Say we have 5 inactive on cycle 7 on the innocent team. If there's 15 of us total and 6 are Spike it'd normally be 6v9 and we'd be fine but since we have 5 inactives the vote tally is actually 6v4 and we've already lost even though we technically ountnumber the Spiked.

 

Now if you have better suspicions, by all means go for it. I'd rather kill a Spiked than an inactive any day. But inactives are good to kill if they're on our team, and even better to kill if they're not on our team.

Inactives (no read)

4. IrulelikeSTINK - STINK (Glitched AI in the Shape of a Horse) (inactive d2)

8. Bort - Bartholomew the Blind (Knight Awkward)

10. Ripplegylf - Clara Lepinceau (Former Noblewoman)

13. WeiryWriter - Riew (Skaa Courier)

17. Phattemer - Exisa (Small and Paranoid)

19. Creccio - Inor Haze (Mortician/Taxidermist)

20. Shallan - Citona Vinid (Bellringer)

21. Alvron - Vron (Alchemist and all around resurrected guy)

22. Lightsworn Panda - Jain (Panda, of course)

 

6. OrlokTsubodai - Locke Tekiel (Estranged Son of a Noble House)

 

This is my list of inactives. If you have a problem with it tell me. Our view on "inactive" might be different. For example if a player's only post is RP, I'd consider them inactive.

 

It's blue just because it's blue in my notes. It has no correlation with OOG information.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Amanuensis he/him]

AG2 Day One Post Summaries, Quick Links and Analysis

Key:  Black = Player Summary, Blue = GM Summary, Purple = Personal Comments

 

1. Haelbarde: Doesn’t know if he’ll keep up his Quick Links and Player Lists but posts them before reading the write up. “Well, at least we didn’t lose any roles to the eliminators.” An obvious comment to make; could be read thankful or bitter. Claims having two Tin Eyes is redundant, which I strongly disagree with. PMs are dangerous for eliminators so the more buffers we have between them being taken out of this game the better. Votes for Lopen (a now confirmed Spiked) for not posting Night One. Asks him if he’s busy and if he has any thoughts on how the village should use their roles. My theory is that this was him trying to reel in an inactive member of his team with a poke vote, either as a reminder for him to get in the doc or to open up an avenue for him to begin discussion as sometimes eliminators don’t want to seem inactive but have trouble coming up with anything to say. Given how fast Hael was to try to instigate discussion through poking a so-far-inactive instead of the messages left behind the Tin Eyes, for example, leads me to believe this is more likely.

2. Hellscythe: Asks if Wyrm is claiming Tin Eye and that we have two (second question is redundant - not necessarily suspicious, just something I noticed). Does not understand the contents of the encrypted message.

3. Haelbarde: Responds to Hellscythe’s question of if Wyrm is the first Tin Eye, claiming that it’s possible the banner was made and sent in by someone else. Wants Wyrm to weigh in on the matter.

4. Mailliw: Expresses suspicions of who the two Tin Eye are but is keeping it to himself for now. Claims that he will confront them to see where it goes. Edits in a vote on Venture in reference to his consistently minimal activity across SE.

5. Mark IV: Mentions that with this being his first game he is unsure of what to say. Thinks that Seonid as a target seems random. “If I would have been an eliminator, I would have been more likely to kill some one more of a threat to me.” I get the feeling this comments intent is to bend the situation to make him look good. Could mean he’s a self-conscious villager but could also mean he is Spiked and trying to redirect the true intent of the kill on Seonid. Brings up the possibility of Seonid being in contact with a Spiked via PM and saying something that might make him a target. “I don’t mean to cast suspicion on anyone (particularly myself), but I’m trying to give a bit of direction to the conversation.” Same as above, statements like these could come from either side. I’ve seen new players before express fear of getting on anyone’s bad side by accusing them from either team. That said more likely than not an eliminator will try to lay low - especially in the beginning of these games - to allow the village to turn on one another before getting too heavily invested and thusly analyzed / caught. Expresses dislike for poke votes. Edits in that he reread Night 1 and asks if anyone else finds it suspicious that Seonid we must not clear a path for the Seekers in case the Spiked have one (if evil, I think it’s more likely that the Spiked do not have a Seeker but would prefer it if we thought they did). Asks what the second message means.

6. Kasimir: Admits he was in a PM with Seonid and summarizes its contents for the thread (easier if you go read it again yourself). Wary of discussing Tin Eyes due to the usefulness of PMs, but supposes it’s worth talking about in thread because the Spiked are going to talk about it in their doc anyway. Has information about who the second Tin Eye might be but it involves the ongoing MR10. Considering that he is unsure if the Spiked have access to the same information he intends to keep it to himself for now. Point in favor of him being innocent. This is the same reason I avoided talking about Dowanx’s program in LG15. I did not want it to become common knowledge in case he was taken out by the Traitors for no reason as that would be a lead in favor of one of the eliminators from the previous iteration being evil again.

7. Mark IV: Attempts to get more information out of Kas about the second Tin Eye / MR10 (if evil, could be interpreted that they are not privy to this information. However I am starting to get the impression that he’s more likely just a very curious villager).

8. Kasimir: Points out that Seonid was a Villager and makes continues to refuse talking about the second Tin Eye.

9. Mark IV: Clarifies that him trying to devalue Seekers may have been the reason he was killed.

10. Kasimir: Argues that Seonid was among the players who thought it was best that Smokers refrained from using their power in order to help the Seekers find better targets. Reiterates points from the previous turn about the benefits of Smoking. Brings up role distribution from past games ran by Meta to further explain his paranoia in the situation. Brings up his N2 Curse.

11. Mark IV: Expresses thanks for a summary of what happened the previous turn and claims that he “never really read it fully” which directly contradicts Post 5 where he edits in that he “read through night one.” Asks for clarification that we have no leads on eliminators adding in parenthesis that he isn’t good at finding leads.

12. Mark IV: Says he agrees with Seonid’s points regarding Seekers and thinks it’s best if we concentrate on protecting ourselves. Expresses a theory that because no coinshots made a kill they might all be villagers, though points out it could be a long con from the Spiked to gain trust if they end up claiming later.

13. Wyrmhero: Confirms he is the Tin Eye. Explains that he revealed to generate discussion in addition to what’s typical of talks Day One. Mentions that Seonid was Spiked in the last AG so that may have been motivation for his death. Expresses that he could have been a target because of his activity throughout the turn. Talks briefly about the Seekers, Lurchers and Coinshots, once again requesting that the latter begin mopping up inactives. Votes for Mashadar Mistborn for doing nothing but RPing the previous day.

14. Kasimir: RP +1.

15. Mark IV: Asks Wyrm if his vote was to lure Mashadar out.

16. IrulelikeSTINK: “If I was an eliminator…” comment, casting suspicion on Wyrm. See Post 5 for how I feel about “if I were an eliminator” comments.

17. RippleGylf: Blue text regarding foreseeable reduced activity due to real life circumstances. Has no thoughts on Seonid’s death and asks if anyone figured out the encrypted message from the second Tin Eye.

18. Mark IV: Responds to Stink’s previous post (indirectly defending Wyrm’s claim?)

19. Venture: Responds to Mail’s confrontation. Places second vote on Lopen. Knowing that Lopen was evil, I am similarly suspicious of Venture as I am of Hael for voting for him. I do not think he is soft cleared for voting for him. If not for the Rioter Lopen would have never have been conceived in danger, hence why he would have not bothered retracting it. I just fail understand why he chose Lopen of all people to poke vote in response to a poke vote on him from an entirely unrelated player. Would like an explanation from Venture.

20. Mashadar Mistborn: Suggests that if Seonid had been making PM groups as Kas claimed his only thought is that there was a Spiked among them and that they didn’t want a group forming like that. Finds Wyrm’s “noisy proclamation of usefulness” as suspicious. Asks that anyone correct his thoughts.

21. IrulelikeSTINK: Questions the senseless voting and follows through with a senseless vote of his own on Panda.

22. Herowannabe: Adds his support to Coinshots killing inactives but suggests that they hold of a bit for the holidays. Votes for Kasimir for reasons but doesn’t explain why. Blue text about coming down with a sickness and that it’ll likely affect his participation in the game.

23. Kasimir: RP +1.

24. RippleGylf: Agrees that due to the holidays we should avoid punishing inactives for awhile.

25. Wyrmhero: Retracts his vote from Mashadar Mistborn for his response. Asks that anyone who was in a group PM with Seonid if they are willing to come out and announce all who were involved. Expresses confusion over Mashadar’s wording in Post 20 (see quotations) and attempts to explain a bit more. Asks Hero for clarification on his reasons if he actually has any and if he does but the information is too sensitive why even hint at them at all.

26. Creccio: Informs the thread that with his laptop’s screen breaking, the holidays and family matters he will be absent indefinitely.

27. Mark IV: RP +1.

28. Hellscythe: Expresses suspicious of Mashadar Mistborn and points out that Hero sounds like a Seeker.

29. Kasimir: Claims that he smoked himself (and no one else) last night so a Seeker would not have been able to see his alignment. Blames Hellscythe for ruining his plan to offer to Hero that he take his coppercloud off tonight so he could scan him, as by pointing out that Hero is a Seeker and Kasimir a Smoker they can just make sure to smoke him to make him look suspicious. Personally I am not fond of the fact that any Smoker has revealed as it kind of defeats the purpose of their abilities, much like the Voidbringer in LG15. I also think it’s odd that Kas would decide to roleclaim when in the past he always advocates that players do not claim roles (innocent!Kas in LG15b was paranoid to the point where he refused to ask or tell. @Kas, what’s changed?

30. Mashadar Mistborn: Responds to Hellscythe’s accusations.

31. Hellscythe: Asks Kasimir for clarifications on his plans. Responds to Mashadar, saying that he believes it’s more likely the kill on Seonid was random, or that he claimed he was a more powerful role to a Spiked.

32. Wyrmhero: Frustrated response to Hellscythe’s proclamation of Hero being a Seeker.

33. Kasimir: Explains that he had no plan, just that he revealed due to pre-game advice from Wilson to not die before he really has the chance to begin.

34. IrulelikeSTINK: Encourages that Kasimir dump all the information he has.

35. Kasimir: Clarifies he wouldn’t reveal anything (like roles) that the relevant player didn’t want revealed, in which case they can do it themselves.

36. Hellscythe: Argues that the Spiked are more likely to figure things like that out anyway due to their ability to communicate and debate among one another, so his proclamation really did not harm. Argues why he doesn’t think a Spiked Smoker would Smoke Kas and asks if him getting angry is a sign of him being evil, as he’s never played with an evil!Kas and it doesn’t seem very Kas-like.

37. IrulelikeSTINK: Confronts Hellscythe about being too aggressive and says it’s normal for any player to get annoyed when up for the lynch.

38. Hellscythe: Explains that he’s not very suspicious of Kas, just wanted to understand why he was reacting the way he was (to be fair, I don’t think I’ve ever even seen Kas be voted for to begin with. In LG15b I don’t think he was ever even considered evil by anyone, so this might be normal for him). Mentions interactions with Creccio the last few games that have caused him to wonder about Kas. Says that Stink asking to be tunneled on is slightly suspicious but that he still isn’t on his radar.

39. IrulelikeSTINK: Congratulates Hellscythe for being less aggressive than usual. Says he understands why Kas might be annoyed and that he’s being looked at closer than Wyrm who has acted similarly this same turn. Will not talking about the ongoing MR. Thinks it is fun when people tunnel on him.

40. Kasimir: Explains that getting angry about dying is a common occurrence for him and references LG15b (I can vouch with him that I had an OOG PM with him in which he discussed said anger immediately following his death that game).

41. Mailliw: Encourages Kasimir dump his information. Explains to Hellscythe Kasimir’s point about why a Spiked Smoker would cloud him. Also vouches for Kasimir’s and his own anger post their LG15b deaths. Asks Wyrm for information on why he claimed as it’s not something he usually does. Retracts his vote on Venture.

42. Kasimir: Follows up on Hellscythe’s thoughts about why the Spiked wouldn’t smoke him. Ends post with encrypted message “in case of death.”

43. Mailliw: Another “when I’m evil” statement, this time regarding assumptions and how he intentionally tries to break them.

44. Hellscythe: Thanks Kas for his response as he wasn’t sure how he was going to respond to Mailliw.

45. IrulelikeSTINK: Asks if anyone else suspects anyone else.

46. Hellscythe: Asks Kas how we are going to know the password to unencrypt his message when he dies. Adds a vote tally and comes to the defense of Lopen, claiming that he thinks he is innocent based on pure gut Pure gut? What? At this point Lopen hadn’t even posted yet. I had completely overlooked this until now. Hellscythe, please explain. Votes for Wyrm who while not being his number one suspicion the foundation against him is more solid.

47. Mailliw: Clarifies for Hellscythe that original votes do not need to be greened out so long as they are retracted in a future post.

48. Haelbarde: Retracts his vote on Lopen as it was only intended to encourage him to post but due to it being nearly a day he will begin looking for other candidates.

49. Metacognition: Quotes earlier decrees by himself and confirms Mailliw’s answer.

50. Araris: Votes for Hellscythe for his unexplained declaration of Lopen’s innocence. From this I am under the impression that either Hellscythe is Spiked, Araris is and saw it as an opportunity to make a villager look bad while distancing himself from someone he knows is evil along with him. Also possible that both are Spiked and Araris was trying to clean up a potential lead in a way that’d make him look better, but I think it’s more likely to be the first or second.

51. Hellscythe: Mentions that they have been PMing each other (has anyone been in an active PM with Lopen?) and that his opinion isn’t unfounded, so until he has a reason to believe otherwise he’ll stand by him being inactive.

52. Mark IV: Votes for Wyrm, agreeing with all points made by Hellscythe.

53. Mark IV: Vote tally.

54. Mailliw: Poke votes phattmer.

55. luckat: Responds to Kasimir’s opinions on the use of Smokers but explains more in depth why she thinks it’s best. Ask players to weigh in on her idea that innocent Soothers and Rioters should use their abilities early on to see who is being clouded. It’s not a bad idea so long as they do it in a way that does not interfere with the direction of the lynch, but I also think there are too many factors (such as if two Rioters target the same player thus canceling each other out). Posts more accurate vote tally and weighs in that maybe Spiked or not, lynching a claimed Tin Eye might not be the best move right now.

56. Mark IV: Believes that because of the fact we have two Tin Eye we still have a buffer to keep us from losing PMs. Hey so, just a thought, but what if the second “Tin Eye” is just a Spiked Mistborn who got Tin for the first night? Same could be said for Wyrm, but I think that it makes sense for a Spiked Mistborn burning Tin to post an anonymous message to give us buffer confidence for situations just like this. It’s possible that the Spiked knew Wyrm was going to reveal and by planting this idea in our heads that there are two Tin Eye it might end up encouraging us to kill him for making said move. Tries predicting roles but edits in that he’s been convinced via PMs that there’s no sense in trying to guess Meta.

57. luckat: Explains that in past games ran by Meta about a third of the players were vanilla so assuming there are two of each role is not exactly feasible here. Mentions the possibility of a third Tin Eye and a Mistborn who rolled Tin, however if the latter than she would hope a village Mistborn would clarify that they’re not permanently tin. Also, even if there are two and we kill one, that means we’re still that much closer to losing PMs out right. TLDR: we need to put a lot of thought into killing a claimed Tin Eye before we actually do.

58. IrulelikeSTINK: Asks why people are suspicious of Wyrm (contradicts post 16 where he tries to make Wyrm look bad for his claim?)

59. Mark IV: States that luckat made good points but even then his vote will remain on Wyrm if anything new comes up but until then he’s sticking with it.

60. IrulelikeSTINK: Asks again why Wyrm is suspicious.

61. luckat: Explains people are suspicious of Wyrm for publicly claiming Tin Eye and little else; advocates waiting to see how the Spiked react before making a move as a village.

62. Haelbarde: Presents a list of players who have yet to post in the game. Says the list would increase if he included players who posted but didn’t really contribute. Asks Hellscythe to clarify if Lopen has been active in PMs.

63. Mark IV: Thanks luckat for summing up why people think Wyrm is suspicious.

64. Elbereth: RP +1. Votes for Wyrm for saying “there’s not much point” in discussing why the Spiked killed Seonid. Asks for clarification on if anyone besides Kas was in contact with Seonid.

65. Mailliw: Says he neither got a group PM from Seonid or Kasimir. Informs Hael that Lopen responded to him in a PM, claiming that he is sick and not had much access to his laptop but should be expected to return soon. PM? Or doc?

66. Mark IV: Confirms that Lopen told him he had no internet access yesterday and that he is down health wise. PM? Or doc?

67. Haelbarde: Presents a list of role distribution for previous iterations of this game. Clarifies that Lopen, Weiry, phattmer (and his sister Shallan) are the only inactives to provide some reason, though phattmer/Shallan should be available now.

68. Mark IV: RP +1.

69. Hellscythe: Points out that the people who have posted without actually contributing should be more suspicious that straight inactives. Clarifies that Lopen wasn’t necessarily active in PMs with him, just that he’s PM’d him more than he’s posted.

70. Mighty Lopen: Reiterates in black text the same reasoning for his absence provided by Mailliw and Mark. Advocates against letting Wyrm live for the sake of PMs. Mentions to Hael that the advice provided by luckat the previous turn seemed sound but for the time being he has nothing to suggest to player’s with roles. Asks that if anyone wants someone to talk to they can PM him as he always prefers having them.

71. Wyrmhero: Comments on the three votes placed against him. Goes more in depth about his reasoning for revealing. Clarifies that his point on discussing the the Spiked’s kill due to a lack of information compared to what we might have later on.

72. Mark IV: Presents four points for why he think Wyrm openly claiming to be the Tin Eye is the actions of a Spiked.

73. OrlokTsubodai: Defends Wyrm, saying his defense is thorough and that his role is valuable enough that he won’t vote for him unless other reasons present themselves. Reminds us however of QF9 where he was an eliminator who put himself in a position of power among the villagers to lead them astray. Votes for Hael due to him being contributive in a way that doesn’t implicate himself.

74. Mark IV: Blue text asking if SE always feels this tense.

75. IrulelikeSTINK: “Yes.”

76. Mark IV: “I see.”

77. Kasimir: Explains his interactions with Wyrm and why he is suspicious of him, but due to this turn’s events is unsure how to feel. Mentions that his behavior this game is actually vey different than it is when he usually is an eliminator, though that doesn’t mean he isn’t doing it on purpose to throw us off. Retracts his vote from Araris and and votes for Sart do to him being both inactive and historically dangerous.

78. Mark IV: Laughs at the irony of a Wyrm trying to generate discussion only to have it make a lot of players suspicious of him as a result. Says the insight of Kasimir doesn’t make him less suspicious of Wyrm but more. References his inexperience with the player base so in case he is wrong he has an excuse to fall back on? “Has to comment on every post.”

79. Kasimir: Quotes Wyrm, asking how a statement of his might affect him later down the line.

80. Haelbarde: Responds to Orlok’s accusations, explaining that his actions reflect what he is interested in and some other players value. Otherwise he is still thinking about Wyrm, Kas among other things.

81. Wyrmhero: Answers Kasimir, once again reiterating that he doesn’t think there’s anything to learn from Seonid’s death. Responds to the four points presented by Mark IV in post 72.

82. Mark IV: Retracts his vote from Wyrm, adding “for now” and expresses consideration of who he should “point his finger at now.”

83. Haelbarde: Votes for Adavantos due to his lack of activity thus far.

84. Kasimir: Asks the GM what happens if two separate GMs Riot a player to different targets; explains to everyone that someone has claimed Smoker to him and that they used their ability on Mashadar Mistborn last night.

85. Adavantos: Finally confronted, Adavantos expresses gut suspicious of Wyrm, Kas, Araris and Orlok, but that he cannot provide any real explanation until he goes back and analyzes them in more depth. Claims he is not a fan of Smokers clouding anybody (I should add especially beyond themselves) this early in the game.

86. IrulelikeSTINK: “There are too many guts!”

87. Haelbarde: Retracts his vote from Adavantos for explaining. Reponds to Kas’ idea of using Soothers / Rioters to test Coppercloud claims. Asks if a Rioter can change a no-vote to a vote. Agrees that luckat’s ideas are good. Votes for Bort as he has been on the website but has not posted.

88. Kasimir: Adds on to his plan, asking village Soothers to sooth him and village Rioters to change Mashadar Mistborn’s vote to himself. Edits in a suggestion that he could smoke Hael to prove it, too.

89. IrulelikeSTINK: Asks for a vote tally.

90. Adavantos: Composes vote tally.

91. Herowannabe: Weighs in on Wyrm, providing points that could both imply he is innocent or Spiked, but agrees that nonetheless he should be kept alive so that we can continue to use PMs this game. Explains that if he is Spiked and we let him live than all the eliminators really gain is an extra vote, which can be taken care of using our emotional allomancy.

92. Hellscythe: Agrees with Hero’s assessment but wants more information for why Wyrm decided to reveal beyond “to generate discussion.” Says he agrees with Orlok’s accusation of Hael so far and references Adavantos in MR10 for another perceived example of it.

93. Elkanah: RP +1. Places a second vote on Panda for inactivity.

94. RippleGylf: Agrees with Hero’s points about Wyrm. Refrains from voting because her gut feelings have historically turned out to be inaccurate.

95. Adavantos: Reminds Hellscythe that he tries to do post summaries regardless of his alignment. Then proceeds to post one such summary of Night One. Ends post with a vote on Hero for his first post seeming exceptionally forced.

96. Mailliw: Encourages Wyrm for his reveal and agrees Wyrm should be kept alive. Claims he has talked with Kas a lot and just believes him to be good even if he doesn’t have a real reason for it. Votes for Orlok for seeming “stiff” and “off.”

97. Wyrmhero: Reminds Ripple that there’s mostly likely two Tin Eyes due to the odds of the second message belonging to a Mistborn. Realizes he has yet to vote and for that reason places his against Adavantos for expressing suspicion of Wyrm prior to his reveal without explaining it.

98. Elbereth: RP +1. Retracts her vote from Wyrm, suggesting a Seeker scan him. Believes the kill against Seonid was due to the reasoning presented by Kas involving group PMs.

99. Adavantos: In response to Wyrm quotes his first post Night One and what about it made him wary to begin with.

100. Kasimir: Retracts his vote on Sart in favor for himself, believing that it’d be better for him to die for the village rather than Wyrm on account of him being a Tin Eye. Thinks Mark is playing the noob card too strongly, that Hellscythe pointing out Hero being a Seeker forces the village Lurchers to debate which one they’d rather protect, to look closely at players (such as Adavantos) who have said they were suspicious of him without providing a reason or “misrepresenting his points,” Luckat for “distancing herself from the fallout of him smoking himself,” and Hero for being ambigious in his PM.

101. RippleGylf: Says she misinterpreted that the encryption was a part of Wyrm’s message as it was just on the other side of the paper. @Meta, can we have confirmation that these were from two separate sources?

102. Adavantos: Apologizes for unintentionally misrepresenting Kasimi’s posts and clarifies the purpose of his Post Summaries. Also explains why he did not bother to substantiate his suspicions of him. Tries to talk him down from “SE Suicide” pointing out other actions he could take than voting for himself, including Panda and Hero as alternate candidates. Edits in that two players had retracted their votes on Wyrm anyway and for good measure composes another vote tally.

103. Metacognition: Clarifies that if two Rioters pull a single player’s vote to different targets than they effectively cancel each other out, leaving the player’s original vote where it is.

104. Haelbarde: Assumes that if multiple Rioters change a player’s vote to the same target it will still work.

105. Metacognition: Confirms Hael’s assumption.

106. Sart: RP +1. Thinks everyone will die because his character is a pessimist or because he’s Spiked?

107. Hellscythe: “Glad you believe in us, Sart.”

108. Kasimir: Encrypted message addressed to the second claimed Smoker.

109. WeiryWriter: Informs the thread he is back and in the process of catching up. Also lets Adavantos know that he got his gender wrong in his post summary.

110. Adavantos: Acknowledges mistake and fixes it.

111. Metacognition: Informs the thread that there are only three hours left and provides us with an accurate vote tally.

112. Hellscythe: Retracts from Wyrmhero in favor of Panda who seems a better alternative to letting Kas suicide and because the majority doesn’t agree with the other player’s he’s suspicious of enough to get them killed instead (mentions Mashadar specifically).

113. Araris Valerian: RP +1, reminding Kas to green out his previous vote against him.

114. Sart: RP +1 asking what about Jain (Panda) was suspicious enough to be lynched.

115. Hellscythe: Asks Sart to look at his previous post for the answer.

116. Haelbarde: Asks why Hellscythe finds Mashadar suspicious. Said he was going to vote Jain but thinks adding another would be overkill. Also doesn’t like Kas or Wyrm as lynch candidates.

117. Hellscythe: Explains an extra vote on Jain wouldn’t be overkill in case the Spiked have a Soother or Rioter. Quotes a post from much earlier where he accused Mashadar.

118. Haelbarde: “But wouldn’t that be valuable? We’d force them to show their hand, and gain info from it?”

119. Hellscythe: “I’d rather have a dead Spiked, than a couple pieces of circumstantial evidence on a few Spiked roles and a dead innocent.”

120. Mashadar: Apologizes for inactivity, claiming the holidays / family are the reason. Says he trusts the Smoker who claimed to / clouded him because of the fact they also claimed to Kas (I personally don’t get how the two correlate; I think his action alone of clouding any player apart from himself is suspect as hell without more information). Refrains from voting as he doesn’t find anyone suspicious enough to get involed (if Spiked, Panda is likely good as she was already ahead in the lynch and I don’t believe they suspect her life was going to be saved). Says he will vote for Jain if votes become imbalanced as he would rather prevent a death than ensure it.

121. Herowannabe: Retracts his vote from Kasimir, explains his ambiguous vote against Kas and why he didn’t want to label it a poke vote nor provide too much reasoning. Chose to vote for Kas due to him being one of the more vocal players and he wanted to see how everyone would react to it in order to gain more information. Informs Hellscythe that he is not actually a Seeker but was intentionally hinting at it to see how people responded. Tells the Lurchers not to waste his powers on him but someone more valuable (themselves or Wyrm). Invites the Spiked to attack him tonight.

122. luckat: Asks Meta for more clarification on emotional allomancy.

123. Mashadar: Does not mind his vote being manipulated to prove the claim of him being clouded but asks that his vote be changed to an inactive instead of himself fearing death.

124. Metacognition: Answers luckat.

125. Mailliw: Asks if the cycle is over.

126. Metacognition: “14 minutes. Check the countdown in the OP.”

127. luckat: More discussion about emotional allomancy and what we can do with it to prove coppercloud claims and the like.

128. Mailliw: Retracts vote on Phatt. Thought turnover was an hour earlier than actually is.

129. Metacognition: Day One ends.

 

Thank the God Beyond that’s over with. Took me nearly five hours to sift through all of this. This is what happens when I don’t keep up with the threads as they go... anyway, vote on Hael still stands. I personally think using the village Coinshot as a secondary lynch is best. They, of course, can do whatever they want, but when it comes to gaining information I believe it’s the route with the most benefits for the village.

 

My head hurts.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Adavantos

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Hellscythe, I'd take Stink, Ripple, and Weiry off that inactive list. I still want to hear more from all of them, particularly the last two, but they're not inactive to the point they should be killed for it like the others.

[WeiryWriter he/him]

I'd like to suggest that the Coinshots go after the inactives now that it's night two. The case for killing inactives is that, regardless of alignment they're hurting us. If they're not there in the later cycles they can't do anything to help us. Say we have 5 inactive on cycle 7 on the innocent team. If there's 15 of us total and 6 are Spike it'd normally be 6v9 and we'd be fine but since we have 5 inactives the vote tally is actually 6v4 and we've already lost even though we technically ountnumber the Spiked.

Now if you have better suspicions, by all means go for it. I'd rather kill a Spiked than an inactive any day. But inactives are good to kill if they're on our team, and even better to kill if they're not on our team.

Inactives (no read)

4. IrulelikeSTINK - STINK (Glitched AI in the Shape of a Horse) (inactive d2)

8. Bort - Bartholomew the Blind (Knight Awkward)

10. Ripplegylf - Clara Lepinceau (Former Noblewoman)

13. WeiryWriter - Riew (Skaa Courier)

17. Phattemer - Exisa (Small and Paranoid)

19. Creccio - Inor Haze (Mortician/Taxidermist)

20. Shallan - Citona Vinid (Bellringer)

21. Alvron - Vron (Alchemist and all around resurrected guy)

22. Lightsworn Panda - Jain (Panda, of course)

6. OrlokTsubodai - Locke Tekiel (Estranged Son of a Noble House)

This is my list of inactives. If you have a problem with it tell me. Our view on "inactive" might be different. For example if a player's only post is RP, I'd consider them inactive.

To be honest I think that killing people willy-nilly just because they are inactive sounds a little odd, but I will fully admit that I'm largely inexperienced at this. (The only game, aside from this one, where I did not die first round I was an Eliminator which has likely skewed my perception of things, especially of stuff like this.)

That said if the coinshots/village mistborn want to do so that's their call, but I do think we should all agree on what constitutes an inactive. Declaring somebody inactive simply because they've only posted rp sounds utterly ridiculous to me (and that's only like half the result of being marked inactive up until this point). I think there should also be a distinction between true in actives and those who have been unable to act.

[Metacognition he/him]

While we're on the topic of dead tineyes, GM, how will we know if (when all tineyes are dead) that the Mistborn, for the turn, is a tineye? Will it be announced? Will it be trial and error?

 

I will let everyone know in the write up that PMs are open to be used for that Cycle. 

 

1. RippleGylf: Says she misinterpreted that the encryption was a part of Wyrm’s message as it was just on the other side of the paper. @Meta, can we have confirmation that these were from two separate sources?

 

Those were two different sources. If they had been the same source, I would not have separated them as distinctly as I did. 

[RippleGylf she/her]

 

That statement is ironic once you know the truth Kas. Also me and Stink are in contact with two completely different smokers. I asked mine and they said they haven't revealed to Stink at all. Of the 4 smokers I'm the most inclined to believe Stink's Smoker to be the evil one although it's possible multiple are evil.

 

You can ask me in our PM or our group PM or our 2nd group PM. But I mean.... I don't think there's any other answer to this question other than through a PM........

 

 

I'd like to suggest that the Coinshots go after the inactives now that it's night two. The case for killing inactives is that, regardless of alignment they're hurting us. If they're not there in the later cycles they can't do anything to help us. Say we have 5 inactive on cycle 7 on the innocent team. If there's 15 of us total and 6 are Spike it'd normally be 6v9 and we'd be fine but since we have 5 inactives the vote tally is actually 6v4 and we've already lost even though we technically ountnumber the Spiked.

 

Now if you have better suspicions, by all means go for it. I'd rather kill a Spiked than an inactive any day. But inactives are good to kill if they're on our team, and even better to kill if they're not on our team.

Inactives (no read)

4. IrulelikeSTINK - STINK (Glitched AI in the Shape of a Horse) (inactive d2)

8. Bort - Bartholomew the Blind (Knight Awkward)

10. Ripplegylf - Clara Lepinceau (Former Noblewoman)

13. WeiryWriter - Riew (Skaa Courier)

17. Phattemer - Exisa (Small and Paranoid)

19. Creccio - Inor Haze (Mortician/Taxidermist)

20. Shallan - Citona Vinid (Bellringer)

21. Alvron - Vron (Alchemist and all around resurrected guy)

22. Lightsworn Panda - Jain (Panda, of course)

 

6. OrlokTsubodai - Locke Tekiel (Estranged Son of a Noble House)

 

This is my list of inactives. If you have a problem with it tell me. Our view on "inactive" might be different. For example if a player's only post is RP, I'd consider them inactive.

 

It's blue just because it's blue in my notes. It has no correlation with OOG information.

 

 

I'm sorry, I have already said that I cannot be as active as I would like this week, and am doing my best to check the thread a few times each day. If  that isn't enough activity for you, then fine, but I don't like inactivity kills this early in general, especially over break.

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

Now I'm a little surprised I'm considered to be on the inactive list - I have posted several times this game, as well as being active in PMs.

Primarily though, as I have explained to a couple of people in PMs, I'm avoiding getting too involved in the first few days of games - in the past I have had a tendency to tunnel in on players in the early game, to the detriment of my ability to analyse later - I find myself far more objective if I watch and think about the game for a couple of cycles before getting more involved, I think.

Despite the high propensity for vote manipulation, I going to put my voice behind smokers not smoking this cycle - and I'd certainly advocate seeking on both Wyrm and Kas - Wyrm because I almost always suspect him (which contributes a little to my current reluctance to advocate for his lynch - I've been over zealous in the past), and Kas because having such a valuable player cleared will both be useful, and allow us to consider his thoughts in a far clearer light.

[Hellscythe he/him]

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm attacking you for being inactive, I realize it's the holidays and people have real lives. But I'm glad it got you guys up and posting! No offense to you Orlok, but I don't think I'd consider 2 posts to be "several"

 

I view inactivity as a "Spiked play". If the village doesn't know anything about you they can't effectively suspect you and thus lynch you. By saying nothing but, RP or saying things that don't help the game(such as Sart's posts or Stink's N2 posts *no offense intended to either*) you're not contributing your thoughts on who you think is Spiked and we learn nothing about your alignment or the alignment of others. Such as how Lopen died while only posting one post overall and thus didn't incriminate any of his teammates.

 

Because of this, to me at least, posting without contributing information is essentially the same thing as inactivity except you're actively withholding information rather than inactively.

 

Again, apologies if this seems like I'm attacking you guys. To be honest the main reason I hate inactives is my first game, MR9. The entire evil team was essentially inactive to the point of not sending in kill orders multiple days in a row. However our team also had inactives, and I couldn't decipher the difference between our inactives and theirs so I just got frustrated with how I couldn't figure out the game.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Hellscythe

[Amanuensis he/him]

Because Hellscythe has posted after my summary but not yet addressed my comments that are relative to him, here's a reminder. Please answer. Thanks.

 

Hellscythe: Asks Kas how we are going to know the password to unencrypt his message when he dies. Adds a vote tally and comes to the defense of Lopen, claiming that he thinks he is innocent based on pure gut Pure gut? What? At this point Lopen hadn’t even posted yet. I had completely overlooked this until now. Hellscythe, please explain. Votes for Wyrm who while not being his number one suspicion the foundation against him is more solid.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Adavantos

[Hellscythe he/him]

LOL I totally looked at that and was planning to respond, then I saw all these posts from the people I put on that list of inactives and totally forgot sorry. Well it'll be easier to explain if I just show you all my PM's with Lopen. Can I copy paste them? I heard you're not allowed to quote straight from PM's, but what about just plain text?

[STINK he/him]

Paraphrase them

[Hellscythe he/him]

Me: Just going off of a pure feeling of the game I'd say you're one of the good guys. And as such I'd like to stay in contact with you as long as the Tineye allows us to!

Merry Christmas 

 

Lopen:

Asks me if I'm psychic.  

Asks me why I think he's good even though he hasn't posted. 

Mentions that he'd love for the Tineye to stay alive because he likes PM's. Mentions he had 30 in LG15.

Merry Christmas to you too!    (Even though it's the day after Christmas for me, we can justfudge the facts.   )

Then asks me if anything interesting is going on in the game.

 

Me: Nope. Except someone started a list of what each role should do and Wilson didn't start a lynch train on them hahahahaha.

 

Lopen:

Mentions that it's a good thing for those players that she's not playing.

Mentions that the advice from Luckat seemed good, (Also mentions Shallans did too, but people jumped on her for that too O.o)

 

Me: I ask him what he thinks about the Tineye messages. Lopen doesn't respond.

*Lopen dies*

Me: Gosh my pure feelings suck. Not using those again.

 

If anyone has any questions or concerns about this post please don't hesitate.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Hellscythe