Quick Fix Game 12: The Time of Reckoning

[Clanky he/him]

So board game weekend is finished and it was a smashing success. I shouldn't have anything stopping me from contributing here daily for a while now.

 

So Phat when you say "Latest clarification: you are notified if you survive an attack, but not if you are protected from one." does that mean you are told if you survive from accelerated healing but not if it's a forcefield that saved you?

 

 

 

So Anamaxinder was an epic all along. I think that points to either Orlok, Hellscythe, Bridge Boy, or Mailliw as being eliminators trying to start a bandwagon.

 

I disagree that Anamaxinder being an Epic really implicates any of those players there as it was a a first cycle lynch on a perpetual inactive. I doubt any reckoners would really stick there head out too far for that. Still any random list of four players is more likely than not to have a reckoner in it so you still could be right. 

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

Phatt was, I suspect deliberately, vague about how I survived the attack, but I am fairly sure that it was due to my accelerated healing rather than being protected. No indication was given as to the source of the attack.

[Amanuensis he/him]

@Rae, I will respond to your last RP post soon. I am currently not in the right mindset, thanks to the copious amount of refreshments I had last night.

 

I too will admit that I was attacked, and will inform you all that it was done by the Reckoners.

 

How do I know that? Well, it's because I attacked Orlok. I am a Matter Disruptor with Accelerated Healing. Unfortunately that means that my protection is now null, and I would very much appreciate it if someone who can project Forcefields would protect me tonight.

 

Before anyone asks, I decided to "disobey the group" and attack Orlok because I personally did not believe Anamax was evil and was very suspicious of anyone who voted for him. Among them was Orlok, whom I already was suspicious of for other reasons, so I decided it would be better to ensure someone that I personally felt was evil died.

 

Yes, I realize that me claiming this openly is the exact same thing I did in MR10, but I promise I am not a Reckoner. I am confident that they were not given an additional kill role this game, as otherwise I am pretty certain another player would have been attacked last night, since this is a QF.

 

In regards to this game, guessing ability distribution is more complicated than others, so I won't be pulling the "this role has to be evil" thing this time. However, knowing that I am innocent and a High Epic, it makes me considerably more wary of my target as apparently he is as well. For that reason... Orlok. I'm sorry mate, but since C1 you're my best lead and knowing that this is a QF I don't think I can afford to play cautiously.

 

This being said, I am open to taking suggestions for my kills. Note that I say suggestions, because while I am a Democrat I will not hesitate to decide who I kill on my own if the overall decision if the village contradicts my own personal opinion.

 

I realize that saying that is very suspicious, but I don't think it's worth sugar coating. I was right about Venture and I am confident that I am right about Orlok. If someone makes a good enough point about another player then I will reconsider my target but please keep in mind that I will likely go for what I believe is accurate first.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Adavantos

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

I must admit to being more than a little surprised about your tunnelling, Adavantos. As far as I'm aware, you're suspicious of me for two reasons - my early vote on Anamaximder, and getting involved from the start.

Both of these I've explained - particularly my playstyle change - which I both deliberately confuse whenever Kipper is playing, as I ran into an unfortunate problem a couple of months ago where he was able to peg my alignment early, but have primarily changed it, as I explained, because I missed the vast majority of the AG due to being seriously unwell, and actually want to start playing again.

You will note that despite being the first vote on Anamaximder, I was not responsible for the bandwagon, and have a policy of note removing votes straight away from poke vote-esque targets, to actually put some pressure on them.

If I am going to be targetted consistently by Ada, I too would appreciate protection now - not least because I have a fairly useful role this game.

[Kynedath]

Ada, What are your other reasons for attacking Orlok? I am not seeing anything suspicious about him before Anamax was lynched.

 

Even then, Orlok has the least likely probability of being evil due to his early involvement in the lynch. He put the first vote on Anamax, which isn't the best thing for the reckoners to do. I recently found a forum all about forum mafia that said that eliminators were extremely unlikely to be the first people on a band-wagon. The most likely candidates are the third and last people. The eliminators are much more likely to see a misconception between three or four players, and they latch on to it, creating a voting frenzy on one of those people.

 

The most likely people to be reckoners in Anamax's kill train would be Hellscythe and Maill. They were the ones who joined after there were enough votes for a potential lynch. Hellscythe is my personal guess, due to him jumping off of all other previous suspicions and jumping onto Anamax's case with a determination not to move his vote until the cycle was over or until Anamax posted again. He had a very high probability of knowing that Anamax wouldn't post again, therefore giving the reckoners an easy kill without actually doing anything. Adding the fact that Hellscythe didn't give us any real explanation as to why he voted for Anamax other than "I don't like your inactive play style", along with him not being on since roll-over, I find it fairly likely that Hellscythe is a reckoner working subterfuge within our ranks.

 

@Orlok, What is this fairly useful role that you speak of?

[Amanuensis he/him]

             Following the... removal... of the misguided minion, all the Epics went back to their apartments. A shadowy figure didn't go to their own, however. They were following someone else, also obscured. As their target went inside, the figure went out the window of the corridor, along the wall, and into the window of the room.

Excellent... their target was facing away. They could have done the job either way but this was less messy. They pulled a knife and threw it into the back of the target's head, immediately backflipping out the window.

The target lay on the floor, unmoving. Then they stood up. They yanked the knife from their head with an annoyed grunt, and began to examine it. Just a simple 6" blade, with a standard handle. The handle was covered in powdered chalk to give a better grip, and the blade was now slick with blood. Nothing special to see. They tossed down and went to sleep.

 

For reference, this was my attempt on Orlok. I asked Phatt to leave the hint "white powdered chalk" (like gymnasts use) in all my relevant write ups, hoping that it might make the Reckoners think Rae was the Matter Disruptor and thus indirectly keep me from being attacked by them. Unfortunately they decided to gun for me first, most likely because of my perceived "threat level," though it's possible it's because I challenged a player on their team, or just generally did something yesterday that spelled trouble for them.

 

I must admit to being more than a little surprised about your tunnelling, Adavantos. As far as I'm aware, you're suspicious of me for two reasons - my early vote on Anamaximder, and getting involved from the start.

Both of these I've explained - particularly my playstyle change - which I both deliberately confuse whenever Kipper is playing, as I ran into an unfortunate problem a couple of months ago where he was able to peg my alignment early, but have primarily changed it, as I explained, because I missed the vast majority of the AG due to being seriously unwell, and actually want to start playing again.

You will note that despite being the first vote on Anamaximder, I was not responsible for the bandwagon, and have a policy of not* removing votes straight away from poke vote-esque targets, to actually put some pressure on them.

If I am going to be targetted consistently by Ada, I too would appreciate protection now - not least because I have a fairly useful role this game.

 

Since it doesn't seem like I already acknowledged your explanation for your play style change, I'll go ahead and do so now. I get where you are coming from. I intentionally shift my play style game to game to keep people guessing, particularly so that when I'm evil it will be harder for people to find me out. However said explanation does not affect my opinion of you at all. In fact, the only thing that suggests to me that you are not evil is because of the fact that the Reckoners attacked me. If you were one of them, I feel that you would have kept them from attacking me to prevent people from looking at you closely afterwards. I have not ruled out the opposite being true, as I can see why eliminators might consider it worth the gamble.

 

Ada, What are your other reasons for attacking Orlok? I am not seeing anything suspicious about him before Anamax was lynched.

 

Alright. Here we go.

 

OrlokTsubodai, Posted 16 January 2016 @ 01:22 AM

 

 

 

I'd agree with Lopen - although I would hope that it not being in the run up to Christmas or over thanksgiving would mean that we should be far less likely to see inactivity of that scale.

Either way, I highly doubt anyone will have justifiable suspicions early in the game, and would ask that coinshotting, for want of a better term, doesn't occur without strong suspicion.

Anamaximder, this marks a significant change from your usual play style - why the difference? 

 

Orlok's first post, where he follows up Lopen's post advocating that Matter Disruptor(s) hold off from killing anybody this early. Reason I find this suspicious is mostly because of my opinion on the matter. Being one, I decided it was better for me to not waste the cycle. I expected that I would be attacked sooner rather than later and that I should use my only active ability now while I still had the chance. All roles, kill oriented or otherwise, are meant to be used, and personally I think they are very important for progressing the game. Besides lynching it is the only way we can remove the eliminators before they remove us, and unlike the lynch it can't be manipulated by them. Personally I think either Lopen or Orlok (unlikely both, possibly neither) are asking the MD(s) to not use their power too soon to combat this. Every cycle that an MD does not use their power is a cycle that they get to stay alive.

 

OrlokTsubodai, Posted 16 January 2016 @ 01:55 AM

 

 

 

I may have missed something from the last couple of games, but the last time I looked properly at him, he had a tendency to post about not getting involved until we have more information before going inactive - the change in my view this game is his votingwithout hesitation.

Should he be prepared to be more involved this game, though, it can only be a good thing. 

 

Response to Kipper's reply to Orlok's vote on Venture.

 

OrlokTsubodai, Posted 16 January 2016 @ 04:53 PM

 

 

 

Adavantos, I see what you mean - there is a contrast. However, 1) This is a quick-fix, and thus there is less time to actually do so, and 2) I have been rather unwell recently, and would like to get back to actually playing these games rather than letting yet more time pass. 

Regardless, I was hoping to encourage Anamaximder to continue the activity indicated by such an early vote, and forcing him to face a vote helps do so. 

 

Response to my vote on him.

 

As Kynedath already pointed out, eliminators will usually not begin lynches. However, as we learned from the Shallan Debacle of LG15b, it is not always the case. I am inclined to believe this is a similar situation. I probably wouldn't think much of it if the victim were anyone else, but it was Anamax. Because of his playstyle he is an easy target for an eliminator to instigate a bandwagon on with an early vote without having to worry about being scrutinized too much and maybe even defended by wayward Epics (like Kyn, assuming he isn't a Reckoner himself.

 

Allow me to refer to the last post I made yesterday where I expressed my opinion of the lynch train on Anamax.

 

 

Okay, so, here's what I don't understand. I want Venture/Anamax to become more active as much as the next guy. But obviously putting him up for the lynch hasn't had much of an impact on him in any of these games so far, and I don't think killing him early every game is really going to encourage him to interact with us more. Plus, if it turns out he is a Reckoner, does killing him really benefit us much? While I'm aware there's a chance he could have a really useful ability for his team which might make it ideal that we do, I personally think that there are better targets for us to take out first. Instead of us tunneling on a player whose impact on the course of these games is minimal due to frequent inactivity, I honestly believe that players like myself who are active enough to sway votes and manipulate players should be pursued before players like him, especially when there's no real evidence against him. Does that make sense, or am I speaking tongues?

 

Disclaimer: I am not defending Venture. I have no reason to believe he's good or evil, currently. I just feel that he's a poor choice for a C1 lynch, where as other players have actually done things that are atypical of them or can be considered suspicious.

 

Emphasis mine.

 

Orlok's reason for voting for Anamax were A: Because he started the game off with a vote, which he expressed as suspicious because he believed it was atypical of him and B: Because he wanted to encourage him to participate more by pressuring him with death. For Point A I find this suspicious because Orlok voted for Anamax for the exact same reason I voted for him (playing "differently") only in Anamax's case he wasn't playing differenty at all, as Kipper explained shortly after Orlok's vote. Point B only came up much later, as if he made it up for the sole purpose of justifying him not removing his vote. In my opinion this also contradicts the very first statement Orlok made about MDs. He asks that they don't use their ability without strong suspicions and proceeds to vote for a player without any justifiable reason for why he might be evil. He had plenty of opportunity to retract his vote after being challenged but never did. I also find it suspicious that he disappeared at the stage in the cycle where where Anamax accrued enough votes to die. It's very likely he was just asleep or busy, but it's also possible that he was watching the thread through emails and decided to stay off site so that he didn't have to get involved.

 

Also, I just want to say that I don't consider myself to be tunneling. I am conscious of the fact that I could be wrong and have stated so. I just am pursuing my biggest suspicion. Your claim of having a "fairly useful role" is also a red flag for me. I can't remember who it was (I think Hellscythe) but he pointed out a shift in Creccio's playstyle in MR10 where he was noticeably concerned with death and reasoned he was either an important role or a Diagrammist. Personally I think you're just a Reckoner trying to avoid death.

 

You won't need the protection, though. Unless you get lynched or get attacked by the Reckoners (which I doubt will happen), you're not going to die. I'm not going to use my power on you again. I have a couple other leads to pursue first.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Adavantos

[Clanky he/him]

Well that was interesting. So the first two people attacked both had accelerated healing then. 

 

Orloks original vote for Anamaxinder was definitely not based on the best of reasons but it was a first day vote so what else do you expect? I don't really see what else makes him kill worthy. 

 

 

 

I too will admit that I was attacked, and will inform you all that it was done by the Reckoners.

 

How do I know that? Well, it's because I attacked Orlok. I am a Matter Disruptor with Accelerated Healing. Unfortunately that means that my protection is now null, and I would very much appreciate it if someone who can project Forcefields would protect me tonight.

 

Before anyone asks, I decided to "disobey the group" and attack Orlok because I personally did not believe Anamax was evil and was very suspicious of anyone who voted for him. Among them was Orlok, whom I already was suspicious of for other reasons, so I decided it would be better to ensure someone that I personally felt was evil died.

 

1Yes, I realize that me claiming this openly is the exact same thing I did in MR10, but I promise I am not a Reckoner. I am confident that they were not given an additional kill role this game, as otherwise I am pretty certain another player would have been attacked last night, since this is a QF.

 

In regards to this game, guessing ability distribution is more complicated than others, so I won't be pulling the "this role has to be evil" thing this time. However, knowing that 2: I am innocent and a High Epic, it makes me considerably more wary of my target as apparently he is as well. For that reason... Orlok. I'm sorry mate, but since C1 you're my best lead and knowing that this is a QF I don't think I can afford to play cautiously.

 

This being said, I am open to taking suggestions for my kills. Note that I say suggestions, because while I am a Democrat I will not hesitate to decide who I kill on my own if the overall decision if the village contradicts my own personal opinion.

 

I realize that saying that is very suspicious, but I don't think it's worth sugar coating. 3 I was right about Venture and I am confident that I am right about Orlok. If someone makes a good enough point about another player then I will reconsider my target but please keep in mind that I will likely go for what I believe is accurate first.

 

 

1: Why are you so sure they don't have a kill role when already two people with accelerated healing have been discovered?

 

2: That is the third time Ada has said he was innocent/not a reckoner in this post. Repetition for a reason? This one is most interesting since he says "I am innocent and a High Epic" key on the high epic. I don't know about anyone else but in my GM PM I was told that I was an Epic, not a High Epic. Just poor wording or because he didn't get the same type of PM? High Epic is a Final Title that you get depending on how many Epics are alive at the end of the game.

 

3: Logical Fallacy! Just because you were right about Anamaxinder (which isn't that hard to be when the odds are 75-80% that you were) that doesn't mean that you are any more likely to be right about anything else going forwards. 

 

Extra thoughts: I know that Ada acknowledges MR10 but I would think because of the success of that ploy he would be more likely to try something similar again. Confidence is key! I think we can conclude for sure that Ada is a Matter disrupter or part of a reckoner team that includes one. It wouldn't be smart to lie about something like that if you know that someone out there knows you are lying and has a kill role.

 

 

EDIT: Ninja'd by Ada

Edited January 17, 2016 by Clanky

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

Orlok's first post, where he follows up Lopen's post advocating that Matter Disruptor(s) hold off from killing anybody this early. Reason I find this suspicious is mostly because of my opinion on the matter. Being one, I decided it was better for me to not waste the cycle. I expected that I would be attacked sooner rather than later and that I should use my only active ability now while I still had the chance. All roles, kill oriented or otherwise, are meant to be used, and personally I think they are very important for progressing the game. Besides lynching it is the only way we can remove the eliminators before they remove us, and unlike the lynch it can't be manipulated by them. Personally I think either Lopen or Orlok (unlikely both, possibly neither) are asking the MD(s) to not use their power too soon to combat this. Every cycle that an MD does not use their power is a cycle that they get to stay alive.

I disagree with this argument wholeheartedly. Your argument that you 'needed to use your active ability whilst [you] still have the chance' being the area I have the most trouble with.

Regardless of the likelihood of your death, you are still working from little evidence - and you being likely to die makes you no more likely to be right than any other player with the matter disruptor ability. You seem to be putting the private benefit - of getting to use your ability, above the social cost of using said ability on not terribly much evidence.

I am in no way opposed to the use of kill abilities by players, but do not think the first cycle is the appropriate time to use them.

Regarding Kipper's statement about Anamaximder's playstyle being consistent with AG2, I would like to highlight again that I was unable to follow the early stages of the AG, and have a hazy at best recollection of that I was involved in. My evidence for Anamaximder's playstyle comes from an analysis of it I did in an earlier game - although the specific game slips my mind.

I would also ask that you consider whether I would choose a game in which I am evil to begin such a drastic change from my playstyle of the last games I've played, and carry out said change in a high profile manner by placing such an early vote.

Adavantos, I find what you say to be incredibly inconsistent. Within your post, you acknowledge that you play in a similar manner with regard to playstyle change, accuse me of being a reckoner, but cover yourself with a justification '(or potentially neither)', before claiming me to be a reckoner once more, and then decide that despite me being your biggest suspicion, and one who has now admitted to having used up my protection, you say you won't kill me?

Admittedly, you could explain the last bit as an attempt to draw protection away from me - so I will once again reiterate my desire to be protected this cycle.

[Amanuensis he/him]

1: Why are you so sure they don't have a kill role when already two people with accelerated healing have been discovered?

 

There are only 18 players. I'm guessing that 4 of them are Reckoners, possibly 5. Giving them 2 kills effectively halves the length of this game, which will already end up relatively short due to numbers and has the potential to get even shorter due to the inactivity filter. I have no prior knowledge of Phatt's GMing tendencies, but it just makes most sense to me that they don't have one. That and there were only two kills last night, one of which I know was mine. Given the fact that I was an eliminator kill role in MR10, I have personally thought through the "should I hold back killing anyone for the long con or kill as often as I can" debate. In my opinion the second option is best for victory, and therefore I expect another player would have been attacked if they had one.

 

2: That is the third time Ada has said he was innocent/not a reckoner in this post. Repetition for a reason? This one is most interesting since he says "I am innocent and a High Epic" key on the high epic. I don't know about anyone else but in my GM PM I was told that I was an Epic, not a High Epic. Just poor wording or because he didn't get the same type of PM? High Epic is a Final Title that you get depending on how many Epics are alive at the end of the game.

 

That was flavor text. In Steelheart, David explains that a High Epic is one who has a power that protects them from death.

 

3: Logical Fallacy! Just because you were right about Anamaxinder (which isn't that hard to be when the odds are 75-80% that you were) that doesn't mean that you are any more likely to be right about anything else going forwards. 

 

I said I was confident about Orlok, not that I absolutely had to be right. I wasn't saying that I was right about Anamax to substantiate me being right about Orlok. I let everyone know that I am open to suggestions and will alter my opinions according to evidence and theories presented by others. I am only human and honestly more prone to making mistakes than most.

 

Extra thoughts: I know that Ada acknowledges MR10 but I would think because of the success of that ploy he would be more likely to try something similar again. Confidence is key! I think we can conclude for sure that Ada is a Matter disrupter or part of a reckoner team that includes one. It wouldn't be smart to lie about something like that if you know that someone out there knows you are lying and has a kill role.

 

The success of that ploy was purely because of how hard it was to gain information about the dead and because of our team's protective roles. Main reason I'm doing it again is because I make a point to do things twice, once on the eliminator team, another on the village, so that people can't use it as evidence against me. An example of this is that I roleclaimed to Stink C1 in MR10 and AG2.

 

---

 

I disagree with this argument wholeheartedly. Your argument that you 'needed to use your active ability whilst [you] still have the chance' being the area I have the most trouble with.

Regardless of the likelihood of your death, you are still working from little evidence - and you being likely to die makes you no more likely to be right than any other player with the matter disruptor ability. You seem to be putting the private benefit - of getting to use your ability, above the social cost of using said ability on not terribly much evidence.

I am in no way opposed to the use of kill abilities by players, but do not think the first cycle is the appropriate time to use them.

 

I understand and respect your opinion. I just don't share it. I doubt there is another kill role out there, and didn't like Anamax being up for the lynch. So I decided to attack a player who I actually thought was evil. Whether I was right or wrong about you, it would have amplified discussion this cycle by giving us all something more to talk about. Similar concept to what Wyrm did by claiming Tin Eye N1 in AG2.

 

Regarding Kipper's statement about Anamaximder's playstyle being consistent with AG2, I would like to highlight again that I was unable to follow the early stages of the AG, and have a hazy at best recollection of that I was involved in. My evidence for Anamaximder's playstyle comes from an analysis of it I did in an earlier game - although the specific game slips my mind.

 

I understand this too. I'm not trying to blame you for that. I just think it's odd you never retracted your vote, when it was initially placed for something another player explained was not true.

 

I would also ask that you consider whether I would choose a game in which I am evil to begin such a drastic change from my playstyle of the last games I've played, and carry out said change in a high profile manner by placing such an early vote.

 

I have considered it. Hasn't swayed me either way since it's an effective way to defend yourself on either side.

 

Adavantos, I find what you say to be incredibly inconsistent. Within your post, you acknowledge that you play in a similar manner with regard to playstyle change, accuse me of being a reckoner, but cover yourself with a justification '(or potentially neither)', before claiming me to be a reckoner once more, and then decide that despite me being your biggest suspicion, and one who has now admitted to having used up my protection, you say you won't kill me?

 

Once again, I've been wrong before and could be wrong now. I can't pursue my suspicions halfheartedly. I am expressing overconfidence to instigate discussion, both from you and others. Same idea as adding pressure on players with poke votes, only with more substance.

 

Admittedly, you could explain the last bit as an attempt to draw protection away from me - so I will once again reiterate my desire to be protected this cycle.

 

You're half right. It was an attempt to draw protection away from you, but not so I can kill you. Reckoners have already attacked me once. They might do it again, especially since they now know I'm a kill role. I didn't want anyone with Forcefield Projection having to debate between us.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Adavantos

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

An interesting argument.

Once again, I've been wrong before and could be wrong now. I can't pursue my suspicions halfheartedly. I am expressing overconfidence to instigate discussion, both from you and others. Same idea as adding pressure on players with poke votes, only with more substance.

The downside, of course, to this, is that it has polarised discussion today - with it being centred largely around my alignment, and most players haven't contributed at all.

Given it is a quick fix, and it's entirely possible that I shall die tonight, I'd exhort everyone to try to make an appearance at least once a day - with the relatively low number of players we have, activity is all the more important.

[Kipper]

A note on WGGs because I've seen a couple people mention them:

The thing about WGGs (with me, at least) is that we can't draw many conclusions from them.

Example: A villager is attacked. The villager survives. They tell the thread that they survived.

Example: An Eliminator is WGGd. The Eliminator survives. They tell the thread that they survived.

In both of these, the public information is the same, so (especially in C1), if people are attacked and survive, I don't think that we should necessarily assume any greater guilt or innocence from a survived attack. It's one of those things that both an Eliminator and a Villager would do the same with.

I personally believe that Adavantos is a villager right now. His reaction today and posting were exactly what I would have expected from him based off of that lynch. In the same way, though, I think Orlok is also innocent. Mailliw is really standing out to me in how he seems to have deliberately ignored Venture's previous playstyle.

which I both deliberately confuse whenever Kipper is playing...

I hate you

@Elbereth It's all cool, mate. I appreciate that it's at least consistent with what you've been doing in past games, even if it still does bother me. I'm watching you...

[Araris Valerian he/him]

Ok guys, sorry for how inactive I've been so far. I had some IRL things come up this weekend and I really only have time right now to post my thoughts. Since this is a QF, I don't find it particularly suspicious that we lynched a villager or which people were involved in the Day 1 lynch. Especially because of how it is fairy easy to lynch Venture due to his activity. So if I did have any suspicions they would probably fall on Orlok for giving an easy out with the lynch. However, I find it a bit more likely that the Reckoners just let us lynch a villager for free.

 

I guess my vote will go on Elkanah, since Orlok started the votes on Annax, not BB, and that has already been brought up, so I find it a little suspicious that you were willing to place a vote without checking on your info first. And as a warning, I will not be able to retract this post before the cycle ends, so consider it my final vote.

[Clanky he/him]

There are only 18 players. I'm guessing that 4 of them are Reckoners, possibly 5. Giving them 2 kills effectively halves the length of this game, which will already end up relatively short due to numbers and has the potential to get even shorter due to the inactivity filter. I have no prior knowledge of Phatt's GMing tendencies, but it just makes most sense to me that they don't have one. That and there were only two kills last night, one of which I know was mine. Given the fact that I was an eliminator kill role in MR10, I have personally thought through the "should I hold back killing anyone for the long con or kill as often as I can" debate. In my opinion the second option is best for victory, and therefore I expect another player would have been attacked if they had one.

 

In MR8 there was a similar opinion of no eliminator kill role in MR8 since it seemed like it could be overpowering. However that was counteracted by giving the village an abundance of shardplate which is the equivalent of accelerated healing in this game. Given that apparently two accelerated healings have showed up this game I would say that there is a possibility that the same type of balance mechanic could be in use for this game.

 

That was flavor text. In Steelheart, David explains that a High Epic is one who has a power that protects them from death.

I understand the flavour component for that and there isn't really any way to determine if what you say is the truth. I just found it interesting that you were repeating the fact that you are innocent multiple times.

 

 

I said I was confident about Orlok, not that I absolutely had to be right. I wasn't saying that I was right about Anamax to substantiate me being right about Orlok. I let everyone know that I am open to suggestions and will alter my opinions according to evidence and theories presented by others. I am only human and honestly more prone to making mistakes than most.

 

Exactly. You didn't specifically say that because it is obviously not true. But by placing those two statements in the same sentence people will naturally associate them with each other without you having to actually say it.

 

 

The success of that ploy was purely because of how hard it was to gain information about the dead and because of our team's protective roles. Main reason I'm doing it again is because I make a point to do things twice, once on the eliminator team, another on the village, so that people can't use it as evidence against me. An example of this is that I roleclaimed to Stink C1 in MR10 and AG2.

I am just saying here that if I were you and had successfully pulled off a stunt like that I would feel more confident in my ability to do it again. Also the whole point of setting a standard such as doing things twice is that you can use that to trick people by making them think you are following a standard.

 

EDIT: Format

Edited January 17, 2016 by Clanky

[Arrae]

If I am going to be targetted consistently by Ada, I too would appreciate protection now - not least because I have a fairly useful role this game.

What's the "useful role" you have?

 

In the MR10 Diagrammist doc, I think Adavantos said that he considers vigilante roles killing as soon as possible something only an eliminator would do. I'm curious why he's suddenly changed his opinion -- what if he's not actually a matter disrupter?

 

Anamaximder was innocent, so I think someone in the bandwagon must have been an eliminator. Previously I thought that meant that Orlok must be an eliminator, but I think I might be tunneling slightly on him. I also have a history of misjudging Orlok's alignment, so any gut feelings I have are probably wrong.

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

Since this will probably keep coming up, I think it's worth disclosing my role - I have invisibility.

Arranae, the problem with Adavantos not being a matter disruptor is that by claiming it, he'd be telling whoever the actual matter disruptor is that he's lying about his role.

[phattemer]

By the way, nobody is currently in danger of death by Perseus. Anyone who is (i.e. inactive for one full cycle) will have their name in the write-up.

[Clanky he/him]

 

In the MR10 Diagrammist doc, I think Adavantos said that he considers vigilante roles killing as soon as possible something only an eliminator would do. I'm curious why he's suddenly changed his opinion -- what if he's not actually a matter disrupter?

 

#BigifTrue Can anyone confirm?

 

So can anyone think of a good way to determine if Orlok is telling the truth about having Invisibility? Did you get any results from last cycle Orlok?

[Amanuensis he/him]

In the MR10 Diagrammist doc, I think Adavantos said that he considers vigilante roles killing as soon as possible something only an eliminator would do. I'm curious why he's suddenly changed his opinion -- what if he's not actually a matter disrupter?

 

#BigifTrue Can anyone confirm?

 

If I recall correctly, that was from a comment I made in my PM with DeathClutch, early enough in the game that I was still trying to make it look like I wasn't a Cook. Though I will say that I think Rae's wording is off, or at least casts my point that game in the wrong light. There were a total of four attacks that cycle if I recall correctly; one Diagrammist and three Cook. My point? It happens.

 

So can anyone think of a good way to determine if Orlok is telling the truth about having Invisibility? Did you get any results from last cycle Orlok?

 

Best way would be to kill him, but I no longer think that's the wise choice right now, assuming he's telling the truth / not a Reckoner. A role like his is extremely useful. Having him reveal his results afterwards is the only way to maybe prove it. It's possible he could be a lying Reckoner who has a friend to substantiate his claims, but that would put two of them at risk so if that's how he wants to handle this I don't mind at all. I think it's best if he does this as soon as he can every cycle so that we can discuss the results.

 

Unfortunately I would have preferred it if he never said he had an important role to begin with. If he is actually an Epic, my intent was to protect him from the Reckoner kill by making it look like I really wanted him dead without actually sealing the deal. If he's not evil, now they have a legitimate reason to go after both him and me, which makes the Forcefield Projectors job harder and puts us both at risk, assuming there's not two, or that if there are they don't protect the same person, who also happens to be the one the Reckoners don't attack.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Adavantos

[queensteph she/her]

Adavantos, if you think killing Orlok isn't a wise choice, then why haven't you removed your vote?

[phattemer]

Latest clarification: Transmogrification is NOT a roleblock. It simply makes someone's vote not count.

[Amanuensis he/him]

Adavantos, if you think killing Orlok isn't a wise choice, then why haven't you removed your vote?

 

I intend to. Do you plan to remove yours?

[Orlok Tsubodai he/him]

Unfortunately I would have preferred it if he never said he had an important role to begin with. If he is actually an Epic, my intent was to protect him from the Reckoner kill by making it look like I really wanted him dead without actually sealing the deal. If he's not evil, now they have a legitimate reason to go after both him and me, which makes the Forcefield Projectors job harder and puts us both at risk, assuming there's not two, or that if there are they don't protect the same person, who also happens to be the one the Reckoners don't attack.

Emphasis mine.

This seems like a wholly misleading statement. Are you arguing that you came at this with such a high level that your arguments were equally valid regardless of my innocence?

You seemed fairly set on my guilt a few hours ago - so this sudden claim to have been trying to ensure my protection all along is to be completely disingenuous. I'm afraid, Ada, that a lot of what you've said today strikes me as manipulation, which makes me very wary.

[Amanuensis he/him]

This seems like a wholly misleading statement. Are you arguing that you came at this with such a high level that your arguments were equally valid regardless of my innocence?

You seemed fairly set on my guilt a few hours ago - so this sudden claim to have been trying to ensure my protection all along is to be completely disingenuous. I'm afraid, Ada, that a lot of what you've said today strikes me as manipulation, which makes me very wary.

 

 

Yes, that is what I am saying, because that was my original intent. Though it was less about trying to ensure your protection and more about trying to ensure mine. Let's say you're good. Village Matter Disruptor (me) admits to everyone that he tried to kill you and votes for you. The Reckoners look at this and say "oh, cool, Orlok isn't one of us, so let's just let the MD keep tunneling on him and go after someone else." At the same time the Forcefield Projector looks at this and thinks "oh, cool, we've got an Epic Matter Disruptor who survived an attempt on his life at the hands of the Reckoners due to Accelerated Healing. I should totally protect him." Both plans are ruined by your claiming to have an important role, especially Invisibility, because now the Reckoners have a good reason to attack you and the Forcefield Projector has a good reason to protect you. My main problem with this situation is that I want to live, but an Epic with Invisibility is much more important than Matter Disruptor, in my opinion, and is more worthy of keeping safe. Does it affect my opinion of you being evil? No, not really. But I would rather give you a chance to prove it and potentially unveil a Reckoner, just in case I'm wrong.

 

I had a really good idea just now, but then I checked the rules to clarify and Invisibility doesn't work the same way Lookout does. Sadface.

 

Anyway, as for that bit about manipulation, I do that all the time, good or evil. Remember the big hooplah I caused in AG2 where I tried to trick Alvron into thinking I was a Seeker when I was only a proxy for one?

Edited January 17, 2016 by Adavantos

[Clanky he/him]

 

For reference, this was my attempt on Orlok. I asked Phatt to leave the hint "white powdered chalk" (like gymnasts use) in all my relevant write ups, hoping that it might make the Reckoners think Rae was the Matter Disruptor and thus indirectly keep me from being attacked by them. Unfortunately they decided to gun for me first, most likely because of my perceived "threat level," though it's possible it's because I challenged a player on their team, or just generally did something yesterday that spelled trouble for them.

 

 

Phatt, is that allowed for any kill roles/protection roles that they can insert a hint into their uses that appear in the write-up?

 

 

 

Best way would be to kill him, but I no longer think that's the wise choice right now, assuming he's telling the truth / not a Reckoner. A role like his is extremely useful. Having him reveal his results afterwards is the only way to maybe prove it. It's possible he could be a lying Reckoner who has a friend to substantiate his claims, but that would put two of them at risk so if that's how he wants to handle this I don't mind at all. I think it's best if he does this as soon as he can every cycle so that we can discuss the results.

 

Unfortunately I would have preferred it if he never said he had an important role to begin with. If he is actually an Epic, my intent was to protect him from the Reckoner kill by making it look like I really wanted him dead without actually sealing the deal. If he's not evil, now they have a legitimate reason to go after both him and me, which makes the Forcefield Projectors job harder and puts us both at risk, assuming there's not two, or that if there are they don't protect the same person, who also happens to be the one the Reckoners don't attack.

 

 

I should have specified that I meant best way to prove his role without killing him.  Would it work if somebody with a role they wouldn't mind having revealed in thread came forward so that Orlok could follow them and next cycle reveal the role?

 

EDIT: Ninja'd by Ada. 

 

 

Yes, that is what I am saying, because that was my original intent. Though it was less about trying to ensure your protection and more about trying to ensure mine. Let's say you're good. Village Matter Disruptor (me) admits to everyone that he tried to kill you and votes for you. The Reckoners look at this and say "oh, cool, Orlok isn't one of us, so let's just let the MD keep tunneling on him and go after someone else." At the same time the Forcefield Projector looks at this and thinks "oh, cool, we've got an Epic Matter Disruptor who survived an attempt on his life at the hands of the Reckoners due to Accelerated Healing. I should totally protect him." Both plans are ruined by your claiming to have an important role, especially Invisibility, because now the Reckoners have a good reason to attack you and the Forcefield Projector has a good reason to protect you. My main problem with this situation is that I want to live, but an Epic with Invisibility is much more important than Matter Disruptor, in my opinion, and is more worthy of keeping safe. Does it affect my opinion of you being evil? No, not really. But I would rather give you a chance to prove it and potentially unveil a Reckoner, just in case I'm wrong.

 

I had a really good idea just now, but then I checked the rules to clarify and Invisibility doesn't work the same way Lookout does. Sadface.

 

Anyway, as for that bit about manipulation, I do that all the time, good or evil. Remember the big hooplah I caused in AG2 where I tried to trick Alvron into thinking I was a Seeker when I was only a proxy for one?

 

 

But you did try and kill him last cycle. So that means this plan was made this turn. So you were protecting him from the reckoner kill by forcing a lynch on him that you maybe could have reversed in time? What about all the questions that would have come your way when you didn't actually kill him with your roll when you had already told everyone you would if he wasn't lynched? Were you hoping for a legitimate reason to remove your vote and for somebody to suggest a better target for you to kill with matter disruption? If not then I'm pretty sure your plan wouldn't have worked. Adavantos.

Edited January 17, 2016 by Clanky

[queensteph she/her]

@Ada

The reason I was asking so suddenly was because I was thinking that the rollover was at 3pm but now realize it's at 5pm[edit2: I'd accidentally written 6pm]. So I was confused as to why you weren't removing it so close to rollover.

As for me, I haven't decided whether or not I still think Orlok is evil, but I'm leaving my vote there for now.

P.S. Could someone do a vote tally?

P.P.S Also, Lopen, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the whole Orlok thing.

P.P.S I wouldn't mind getting a PM.

Ninja'd by Clanky

After reading through everything so far if I change my vote off of Orlok it'd probably be onto Ada because his posts are confusing me and I can't tell whether he's trying to protect or kill Orlok. u feel?

Edited January 17, 2016 by queensteph