Support NeoGAF

[Werewolf Jones]

We can't really determine an inactive player until Day 2ish, our best bet is to go after fidgety people or those who are overly defensive.

Too early to decide. I doubt any of the votes that have been cast so far will stick by the time everyone has had their chance to post. If we had zero information, I would approve of lynching an inactive player, but a lot can happen between now and sundown.

That's fair then. Not that I'm particularly eager to get someone killed as of right now, but it's gonna happen. Although I'm not too fond of pointing figures just yet.

 

[Neuromancer]

It is also worth noting that killing a tourist today doesn't actually hurt us.

Assuming we never hit a cultists and there is one kill a night, if we kill someone today we will start every subsequent day with an odd number of players, and will lose when the number of cultists passes the number of tourists. So if there are 4 cultists we will lose at the start of Day 9 when there are 7 players left (4 cult, 3 tourist) . At that point 8 players will have been killed by the cultists and 8 will have been killed by the town.

If we No Lynch today we would still lose on Day 9 when it starts with 4 cult and 4 tourists. But at that point we will only have had 7 chances to kill a cult instead of 8.

So as much as it sucks for the tourist we are probably killing this one is kinda "free".

Yeah I'm seeing the math now. It checks out.

 

[Sorian]

We can't really determine an inactive player until Day 2ish, our best bet is to go after fidgety people or those who are overly defensive.

This is my exact thought process at the moment. You put it so perfectly that I figured I'd just copy and paste what you said.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

Fuck it. We're being mocked in Archer. I read your excuse, and it was acceptable. Now prove yourself worthy of not being mocked Tucah.

Unvote:Tucah

 

[Flame_AC]

Back to the main point though Neuromancer, who all was it that had drawn your suspicion?

 

[Sorian]

Thread hasn't had a lot of activity so I figured I'd supply a bump and just re-iterate what I'm looking for. I'd like Neuromancer to tell us about what suspicions he has been having. And I'd like to hear more from Tucah only because RNGsus chose him and I wouldn't be doing my due diligence if I didn't look into that.

 

[Tucah]

Fuck it. We're being mocked in Archer. I read your excuse, and it was acceptable. Now prove yourself worthy of not being mocked Tucah.

Unvote:Tucah

Thread hasn't had a lot of activity so I figured I'd supply a bump and just re-iterate what I'm looking for. I'd like Neuromancer to tell us about what suspicions he has been having. And I'd like to hear more from Tucah only because RNGsus chose him and I wouldn't be doing my due diligence if I didn't look into that.

Aw man some guys are throwing jabs at me in there

Not really sure what to say this early on besides that fuck the RNGsus - I'm town and don't want to get kicked out of this game super early for the second time. I just want to play for more than a day, goddamnit.

 

[RetroMG]

I do kind of feel like there should be a rule that people who went out Day 1 in the previous games are immune for the first day and night of the current game.
We can call it the Barrylocke protocol.

 

[Neuromancer]

Back to the main point though Neuromancer, who all was it that had drawn your suspicion?

My suspicions were based off defensiveness and also not fully thinking about the conditions of winning the game so I would like to retract them for now. If I come up with any well reasoned accusations I'll be sure
to share them.

 

[Sorian]

Aw man some guys are throwing jabs at me in there

Not really sure what to say this early on besides that fuck the RNGsus - I'm town and don't want to get kicked out of this game super early for the second time. I just want to play for more than a day, goddamnit.

If it makes you feel better, my vote has fallen off of you for now as well. Just want everyone speaking up. What are your thoughts on the thread so far.

 

[RetroMG]

Any word on why we shouldn't suspect you, Sorian? Just making sure that you get equal airtime.

 

[Sorian]

Any word on why we shouldn't suspect you, Sorian? Just making sure that you get equal airtime.

I've been waiting for someone to ask! I was only going to share my suspicions once I had suspicion thrown to me. You did ask at a bad time though, I'm raiding in FFXIV so I can't make a long detailed post. I promise to have it all typed up before I do to bed in a few hours though.

 

[Fireblend]

I've been waiting for someone to ask! I was only going to share my suspicions once I had suspicion thrown to me. You did ask at a bad time though, I'm raiding in FFXIV so I can't make a long detailed post. I promise to have it all typed up before I do to bed in a few hours though.

Are you raiding a train?

 

[Sorian]

Are you raiding a train?

No, I'm inside of alexander killing goblins. Best day ever!

 

[Tucah]

If it makes you feel better, my vote has fallen off of you for now as well. Just want everyone speaking up. What are your thoughts on the thread so far.

No one super suspicious so far in my eyes. A lot of the people who I had thoughts on/people started to pile on early on have cleared up as more posts have come through. A few started to jump on your early vote but I get wanting to throw pressure on someone (seemingly at random) hoping they slip up and all is forgiven. Lord of Castamere struck me as a bit suspicious/a little eager quickly piling on the vote for me but his explanation of trying to put a bit more pressure as votes start to number was a suitable explanation for the early goings. The last person who got a bunch of attention was Neuromancer for his no lynch stance, but I was no lynch in my last game so I can understand where he was coming for.

tl;dr everyone's cool in my eyes as things stand so far but it's obviously still super early

 

[Flame_AC]

I do kind of feel like there should be a rule that people who went out Day 1 in the previous games are immune for the first day and night of the current game.
We can call it the Barrylocke protocol.

While I feel bad for people who die Day/Night 1, making it so that people are protected just makes it so that they have no reason to contribute to the discussion and would frankly hurt the games. Besides, those dead people would get to start the dead thread!

 

[OceanicAir]

Just wanted to pop in and say that I'm aware of the game. Was on a road trip and have some grad school things to do in the morning but I'll give a full post tomorrow though. Not a huge fan of a day 1 lynch (loved it as mafia in the last game). As of right now though I'll vote Blarg for Blarging it up. While amusing it is not at all helpful to town. I mean you guys saw what he did as a faction cop right? Pictures of straws and a declaration of being mafia aligned when there was really no headway in his direction (loved this too as a mafia). I'm also monitoring someone else... but anyway

Blargonaut

 

[Timeaisis]

Sorry, was traveling most of today so I just started reading the thread.

My one comment right now is lol blarg.

Also, I know I've flip flopped in past games on whether lynching D1 is the right call or not, but at the moment I'm leaning towards lynching.

 

[Droplet]

Our votes so far. Sorry if I made a mistake. I might consider writing a script for this, it's pretty easy to screw up.

Neuromancer (3)
Matt Attack
Flame_AC
Sorian

Tucah (0)
Lord of Castamere

Blargonaut (3)
Droplet
ultron87
OceanicAir (kind of, since he didn't include Vote: )

Lord of Castamere (0)
Never Forever

No Lynch (0)
Neuromancer

 

[Sorian]

Any word on why we shouldn't suspect you, Sorian? Just making sure that you get equal airtime.

Our votes so far. Sorry if I made a mistake. I might consider writing a script for this, it's pretty easy to screw up.

Neuromancer (3)
Matt Attack
Flame_AC
Sorian

Tucah (0)
Lord of Castamere

Blargonaut (3)
Droplet
ultron87
OceanicAir (kind of, since he didn't include Vote: )

Lord of Castamere (0)
Never Forever

No Lynch (0)
Neuromancer

Are you keeping track of all unvotes as well? If so I had a vote on Tucah which was unvoted when I voted for Neuromancer.

 

[Droplet]

Are you keeping track of all unvotes as well? If so I had a vote on Tucah which was unvoted when I voted for Neuromancer.

Those are the strikethroughs. I must have missed your initial vote though since I don't have you there. Let me double check and fix my errors.

 

[Droplet]

Ok yeah, I missed the first page we started votes since I thought I only saw a fakevote on there. I almost included Kark by accident when LoC "voted" for him too.

Neuromancer (3)
Matt Attack
Flame_AC
Sorian

Tucah (0)
Sorian
Lord of Castamere

Blargonaut (3)
Droplet
ultron87
OceanicAir (kind of, since he didn't include Vote: )

Lord of Castamere (0)
Never Forever

No Lynch (0)
Neuromancer

 

[Neuromancer]

I don't know to say guys. On the one hand it's kind of flattering I guess.

Edit: guys and girls I mean

 

[Sorian]

Any word on why we shouldn't suspect you, Sorian? Just making sure that you get equal airtime.

So as I said before, I was waiting for the suspicion to spin around towards me before I posted real thoughts. No reason to ever start playing your cards until someone asks to see them. I'll start with the obvious. I'm still not feeling good about Neuromancer. A no lynch vote on the first day can be viable but that type of vote should only come in the final hours of the day. Until that time comes up, it's extremely important to get people discussing and saying their thoughts. I really didn't like this post for that reason:

What real discussion can there possibly be at this point other than foundless accusations? I don't get you at all. I say lets see how things shake out tonight.

This was a call to halt the flow of information which, at the end of the day, is one of the most anti-town moves I could see. I know that he was trying to deflect me a bit but I don't think there was any reason to go on the defensive that hard and call for a shut down of communication.

--

I'll also mention Blarg, I'm going to accept that Blarg is gonna Blarg and he is always going to play some high level mind games. That being said, he's made at least two offhand comments now about how he wants to make a kill tonight or other cultist related activities. Personally, I read that as him playing sarcastic when really he is telling the complete truth. We read it as sarcastic and just let him go about his merry business without throwing much suspicion on him past joking.

---

Finally, and surprise surprise, I'm going to vote change again because even though I don't trust Neuro at all, I think I've seen as much as I'm going to see from him for the next few hours. I have reservations about Fireblend. He's been taking a hard wait and watch stance since we've started. Now I know that this is similar to the stance I took but Fire even went so far as reserving his power to vote to help apply pressure around the room. Posts like these two:

Huh, so it wasn't ketchup after all? Suddenly I seem to have lost my appetite for these bagels.

Anyway, here's hoping we all have a great game and have fun and get to see this through to a satisfying, successful, cultist-free end.

I'm gonna monitor the thread for a bit and see where the mood swings before I make my move. It's my first time (other than the ONUW games) and I want to be as useful as I can be.

Yeah. What I'm thinking of doing is waiting a while, seeing who hasn't posted or has posted the least and trying to use my vote to get that person to be a bit more active. With zero info to go on, if we're going to lynch someone today odds are it's going to be a good guy, so I'd rather condemn an inactive one *shrug*

In that sense I don't think the RNG votes are very useful, but I guess they might yield some early info.

Just scream your intent to wait and watch and wait while serving the purpose of posting but not doing anything meaningful. There will come a time during day 1 to start proding the inactive but right now I'd like to hear more from those who I know are watching the thread and I'm fairly certain Fire is refreshing the page often at this time.

VOTE: Fireblend

Share your thoughts on what I've said or maybe small things you've been noticing.

 

[Neuromancer]

For what it's worth (not much I know) I wasn't trying to shut down the flow of information. I was trying not to get a tourist killed, which I now know doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I'm on board now.

 

[Flame_AC]

For what it's worth (not much I know) I wasn't trying to shut down the flow of information. I was trying not to get a tourist killed, which I now know doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. I'm on board now.

I think you're being a bit too defensive or worried about your own death. You're probably not going to get lynched, though my vote is staying at least for now, barring some revelatory information that incriminates you. Is there anyone you want to take a closer look at? You mentioned earlier that you wanted to have well reasoned accusations before calling out any names; though as we both know we're not likely going to get that on Day 1, so who do you want to investigate?

 

[Lone_Prodigy]

I find Neuromancer a bit overly defensive, and his no-lynch vote came out of nowhere when others were discussing how we shouldn't do a no-lynch.

Vote: Neuromancer

 

[Fireblend]

Finally, and surprise surprise, I'm going to vote change again because even though I don't trust Neuro at all, I think I've seen as much as I'm going to see from him for the next few hours. I have reservations about Fireblend. He's been taking a hard wait and watch stance since we've started. Now I know that this is similar to the stance I took but Fire even went so far as reserving his power to vote to help apply pressure around the room. Posts like these two:

Just scream your intent to wait and watch and wait while serving the purpose of posting but not doing anything meaningful. There will come a time during day 1 to start proding the inactive but right now I'd like to hear more from those who I know are watching the thread and I'm fairly certain Fire is refreshing the page often at this time.

VOTE: Fireblend

Share your thoughts on what I've said or maybe small things you've been noticing.

I agree with you in that I've been re-stating the same core message in most of my posts, I just don't have much to say and want my presence to be known I guess while also making sure to send the message to other less active players that I'd like them to speak up.

And well, I think it's a safe stance to have. As I said, I don't think we really need everyone random-voting if what we want are quick reactions, specially from people who've been posting often. What else could they say? Instead, saying I'll vote for an inactive player justifies my vote in an indirect way instead of it seeming like senseless (or even worse, purposeful) campaigning against someone that may later retaliate, like we saw with Neuro.

As I said, I'm expecting these "reaction-seeking" votes to be eventually replaced with more justified votes tomorrow or the day after, so I just don't see a reason for joining any particular bandwagon.

About other people reads... I don't have much, really. You've been posting a lot more frequently than I have but it seems you have more experience with these games and know how to drive the discussion. I hope to get there eventually, but I'm in a more reactive state of mind at the moment.

I did mention earlier that I thought the Droplet-Never Forever exchange seemed kinda odd at such an early time in the game, specially Droplet getting all defensive, but I wouldn't read too much into it.

And then there's the Blarg shenanigans which are exasperating but at least generate activity, I'm just not sure if the discussion it promotes is positive or not, so I'm not sure how I'd feel about an anti-Blarg campaign this early I maintain we should be actively seeking to discourage inactiveness, even if the possibility exists that they may have power roles. They're randomly distributed anyway, so killing a random player has the same chance of accidentally killing a power role player than killing a random inactive player does.

Maybe we shouldn't kill someone that hasn't posted at all though, since I'd like them to be able to defend themselves and be able to at least hint at having power role, while truly inactive players can be replaced with those on the waiting list.

And that's kind of a brain-flush of my first real-life-not-in-game day thoughts. Hope you find em satisfying

I'm boarding a train soon btw - the sleep train - so I'll be back in 10 hours or so.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

I'm going to bed. A very interesting day. I'll have an analysis, and new vote, sometime tomorrow. Good night.

 

[Rats Off To Ya]

I really don't like the Neuromancer bandwagon. Everything he's said is completely reasonable for somebody new to this game. The day one lynch seems counterintuitive at first; I was also against it while spectating the previous games. But I've come to accept the logic behind it, and so has Neuromancer. Once we explained it to him he changed his tune. That was newbie town play, not scum play.

 

[Matt Attack]

I'm a little busy right now so I don't have time to comment much on recent happenings/accusation, but I do want to change my vote.

VOTE: Blargonaut

You know I want to believe in you, and I've sort of had the "blarg gonna blarg" mindset, but I feel a little uncomfortable letting somebody off of the hook just because of that. I'm hoping there's some deeper meanng behind your posts, but honestly I have no clue at this point. I'll keep this vote on until we can get some hopefully useful discussion out of you. As t stands, I just don't know what to make of your posts.

I'd also like to hear more from nin1000, who I believe has posted a few times since the game started without actually saying much.

I really don't like the Neuromancer bandwagon. Everything he's said is completely reasonable for somebody new to this game. The day one lynch seems counterintuitive at first; I was also against it while spectating the previous games. But I've come to accept the logic behind it, and so has Neuromancer. Once we explained it to him he changed his tune. That was newbie town play, not scum play.

I agree with this. It doesn't mean he's necessarily town, but I'm willing to accept his explanation for now.

 

[Sorian]

I agree with you in that I've been re-stating the same core message in most of my posts, I just don't have much to say and want my presence to be known I guess while also making sure to send the message to other less active players that I'd like them to speak up.

And well, I think it's a safe stance to have. As I said, I don't think we really need everyone random-voting if what we want are quick reactions, specially from people who've been posting often. What else could they say? Instead, saying I'll vote for an inactive player justifies my vote in an indirect way instead of it seeming like senseless (or even worse, purposeful) campaigning against someone that may later retaliate, like we saw with Neuro.

As I said, I'm expecting these "reaction-seeking" votes to be eventually replaced with more justified votes tomorrow or the day after, so I just don't see a reason for joining any particular bandwagon.

About other people reads... I don't have much, really. You've been posting a lot more frequently than I have but it seems you have more experience with these games and know how to drive the discussion. I hope to get there eventually, but I'm in a more reactive state of mind at the moment.

I did mention earlier that I thought the Droplet-Never Forever exchange seemed kinda odd at such an early time in the game, specially Droplet getting all defensive, but I wouldn't read too much into it.

And then there's the Blarg shenanigans which are exasperating but at least generate activity, I'm just not sure if the discussion it promotes is positive or not, so I'm not sure how I'd feel about an anti-Blarg campaign this early I maintain we should be actively seeking to discourage inactiveness, even if the possibility exists that they may have power roles. They're randomly distributed anyway, so killing a random player has the same chance of accidentally killing a power role player than killing a random inactive player does.

Maybe we shouldn't kill someone that hasn't posted at all though, since I'd like them to be able to defend themselves and be able to at least hint at having power role, while truly inactive players can be replaced with those on the waiting list.

And that's kind of a brain-flush of my first real-life-not-in-game day thoughts. Hope you find em satisfying

I'm boarding a train soon btw - the sleep train - so I'll be back in 10 hours or so.

Funny you say the bolded, my only other mafia experience was actually the ONUW - Game 2, that's about it. Anyway, this is a good post, probably not for the reason you were expecting though. I did not like the exchange between Droplet and Never Forever either. Specifically, I didn't like how it played from Droplet's side. It could go either way for me, she wanted to post a piece of information that she felt was relevant but, in the end, it was a fairly useless comment and I have to look at it and wonder why? Either it was an attempt at jumping to LoC's aid when aid wasn't actually needed (and LoC even told her she probably shouldn't have done that later):

That was filler, but take it how you want. Honestly, I'd rather you saved that for a time when I needed it. The last thing I want right now is another Night 1 death. PTSD.

or it was just a sloppy way to show some activity (whether for the desire of being a part of the game or to look more town to everyone). Just my thoughts on that matter. Nothing concrete.

With that being said, you've appeased me for now. I will make calls for people to post but I know I can't expect much during the first day phase. I should also note that Tucah hasn't quite fallen off my shortlist yet. His last post was still all fluff and no substance.

With that being said, I'll be heading to bed for a few hours as well. Fire, you get the honor of holding onto my vote for now. One of the reasons I hopped off of Neuromancer is because I knew we'd probably start seeing a bandwagon for him (as seen by Lone_Prodigy's post above) and I don't want anyone getting to many votes this early on. Gotta keep everyone on their toes. I'll sleep on it but the last thing that left a sour taste in my mouth is Prodigy's obvious bandwagon vote. I agree with his reasoning so I don't think it bothers me much but I've been looking out for just random bandwagon voting.

 

[Flame_AC]

As I said, I'm expecting these "reaction-seeking" votes to be eventually replaced with more justified votes tomorrow or the day after, so I just don't see a reason for joining any particular bandwagon.

I maintain we should be actively seeking to discourage inactiveness, even if the possibility exists that they may have power roles. They're randomly distributed anyway, so killing a random player has the same chance of accidentally killing a power role player than killing a random inactive player does.

I agree that we should discourage inactiveness; however, as was mentioned earlier, that is going to be impossible to tell until sometime Day 2ish. I disagree when you state that lynching someone like Blarg or Neuromancer is akin to lynching someone you or anyone else deems 'inactive' on Day 1. Lynching people who have at least posted in the thread since the game has started will allow them to defend themselves should they be on the fast track to death. These people who have posted could potentially have power roles and could defend themselves accordingly should the need arise, inactive players do not have that luxury and the town runs the risk of losing a power role without so much as a single defense post.

 

[Darryl]

I got a temporary item today offering me 5 abilities. It expires after the night phase and passes to another player. An example of an ability is blocking a night eviction, although the abilities get truly insane. I don't wanna spoil it. Seems pretty safe to say this publicly since it's not gonna be in my possession anymore and all future obtainees will know I'm town.

I hope everyone who gets this item in the future uses it responsibly and never ever for a minute thinks to use it against me (plz).

 

[Fireblend]

I agree that we should discourage inactiveness; however, as was mentioned earlier, that is going to be impossible to tell until sometime Day 2ish. I disagree when you state that lynching someone like Blarg or Neuromancer is akin to lynching someone you or anyone else deems 'inactive' on Day 1. Lynching people who have at least posted in the thread since the game has started will allow them to defend themselves should they be on the fast track to death. These people who have posted could potentially have power roles and could defend themselves accordingly should the need arise, inactive players do not have that luxury and the town runs the risk of losing a power role without so much as a single defense post.

I agree, which is why I added the line that goes right after the part of my post you quoted that you decided to leave out, lol.

Also, I agree that Neuro should probably be left off the hook. His actions don't seem indicative of much.

 

[Sorian]

Actually, sorry, I lied. Fire, you don't get the honor of my vote anymore. I don't know what Darryl is on about because it's late and I have a headache but he gets to hold my vote while I sleep. Blarg and him are going to be the death of me, I can already feel it (figurative death, not literal in-game death)

VOTE: Darryl

 

[Darryl]

Also based on the content of posts so far, Droplet appears to be the most stressed and forced content-wise.

Also anyone shifting focus to Blarg is hot seat imo. Seems cultist to justify an eviction based on attitude at the moment. It almost defeats the purpose of a day 1 eviction if you are just trying to clear the roster.

Vote: Droplet

 

[Flame_AC]

I got a temporary item today offering me 5 abilities. It expires after the night phase and passes to another player. An example of an ability is blocking a night eviction, although the abilities get truly insane. I don't wanna spoil it. Seems pretty safe to say this publicly since it's not gonna be in my possession anymore and all future obtainees will know I'm town.

I hope everyone who gets this item in the future uses it responsibly and never ever for a minute thinks to use it against me (plz).

I'm curious whether you're comfortable sharing what you might be planning on doing with it? Also, why is one of the abilities stopping a night 'eviction', isn't that something that might have belonged in AC mafia?

 

[Fireblend]

With that being said, you've appeased me for now. I will make calls for people to post but I know I can't expect much during the first day phase. I should also note that Tucah hasn't quite fallen off my shortlist yet. His last post was still all fluff and no substance.

With that being said, I'll be heading to bed for a few hours as well. Fire, you get the honor of holding onto my vote for now. One of the reasons I hopped off of Neuromancer is because I knew we'd probably start seeing a bandwagon for him (as seen by Lone_Prodigy's post above) and I don't want anyone getting to many votes this early on. Gotta keep everyone on their toes. I'll sleep on it but the last thing that left a sour taste in my mouth is Prodigy's obvious bandwagon vote. I agree with his reasoning so I don't think it bothers me much but I've been looking out for just random bandwagon voting.

Sorry I replied to Flame's post first, it's just the first reply I saw. Fair enough. I shall accept your vote for now and I agree with everything, I wouldn't want anyone to accidentally trigger an early lynching (that's something that can happen, right?), and prodding people is the most we can do at the moment.

 

[Fireblend]

Wait, this is moving fast. Guess I'll sleep easier tonight without Sorian's vote weighing on the back of my mind then I'm not awake enough to make any judgement regarding Darryl's claim, but it sure seems like it's going to get the ball moving, which I'm all in favor of doing.

 

[Flame_AC]

Sorry I replied to Flame's post first, it's just the first reply I saw. Fair enough. I shall accept your vote for now and I agree with everything, I wouldn't want anyone to accidentally trigger an early lynching (that's something that can happen, right?), and prodding people is the most we can do at the moment.

It'd take 13 votes for an early lynch, something I don't think we'll ever get to, even if we had a confirmed cultist just due to the way activity works.

 

[Darryl]

I'm curious whether you're comfortable sharing what you might be planning on doing with it? Also, why is one of the abilities stopping a night 'eviction', isn't that something that might have belonged in AC mafia?

I'm just used to those terms so they're the ones I am using. I'm not using it because there's nothing to justify any abilities used at this point. I don't know who needs to be saved at a night eviction. I imagine these things will be quite the game changer later on.

Also, such critical thinking Sorian. You know this claim of mine can easily be verified very quickly since as I said, it will be passed to another player. Reactionary "just looking for a reason to evict people" is not pro-town. You and Droplet have easily emerged as top Cultist candidates imo.

 

[Matt Attack]

Also anyone shifting focus to Blarg is hot seat imo. Seems cultist to justify an eviction based on attitude at the moment. It almost defeats the purpose of a day 1 eviction if you are just trying to clear the roster.

I don't see how it's anti-town to apply pressure on somebody who has made multiple posts that, at least at first glance, don't seem to mean anything (my vote has nothing to do with his attitude, which I think I appreciate?). I think it would be more cultist to just let those posts slide without calling into question the intent behind them.

 

[Droplet]

Funny you say the bolded, my only other mafia experience was actually the ONUW - Game 2, that's about it. Anyway, this is a good post, probably not for the reason you were expecting though. I did not like the exchange between Droplet and Never Forever either. Specifically, I didn't like how it played from Droplet's side. It could go either way for me, she wanted to post a piece of information that she felt was relevant but, in the end, it was a fairly useless comment and I have to look at it and wonder why? Either it was an attempt at jumping to LoC's aid when aid wasn't actually needed (and LoC even told her she probably shouldn't have done that later):

I'll admit it was a bad play for me, but I disagree that it was a useless post. I explained why I posted it when I did and it was at the very beginning when we had no information to go off of, and we got to see a wide variety of reactions to it. Is that more useless than RNG voting and bandwagoning on Neuromancer because of his newbie post?

Also,

Unvote: Blargonaut

I don't like Blarg's style of posting, but for now I think we have more pressing issues. Plus I see how many people have been voting for him now and I think it's really dangerous.

Also based on the content of posts so far, Droplet appears to be the most stressed and forced content-wise.

Also anyone shifting focus to Blarg is hot seat imo. Seems cultist to justify an eviction based on attitude at the moment. It almost defeats the purpose of a day 1 eviction if you are just trying to clear the roster.

Vote: Droplet

I was more hoping he would post something in his defense after that, but he actually just kind of left. I hope he comes back and explains himself.

 

[Flame_AC]

I'm just used to those terms so they're the ones I am using. I'm not using it because there's nothing to justify any abilities used at this point. I don't know who needs to be saved at a night eviction. I imagine these things will be quite the game changer later on.

Also, such critical thinking Sorian. You know this claim of mine can easily be verified very quickly since as I said, it will be passed to another player. Reactionary "just looking for a reason to evict people" is not pro-town. You and Droplet have easily emerged as top Cultist candidates imo.

Fair enough on the term differences.

However, you're claim is not as easily verified as you think it is. Should you be a Cultist, you could have a power which transfers among the members in the group, then you can just have a potential team mate say that they have it and "you're in the clear".

Personally, Droplet's thing with NeverForever didn't strike me as particularly slanted one way or another, more of just a misplay, though I'll take another look later.

I'll be back in about 12 hours. I'm keeping my vote on Neuromancer, though I imagine I'll be changing it once I get back and catch up.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

I lied. I'm being fueled by Pop music. I blame never forever.

My top 3 cult list of day 1. I have nothing concrete. This is my beginning gut check.

Retrogamer-Not posting much of anything. Active, but not with substantial posts. He's not trying to rock the boat.
Nin1000- Not much of anything. Could be a low end cultist. Lurking.
Flame_Ac- My vote for active cultist. Saying all the right things. Throwing off bad vibes.

A word of advice Neromancer. You're falling into the Eguntz/Exmachina trap. If you don't know know those names are, learn them before you post again. Good luck.

I got a temporary item today offering me 5 abilities. It expires after the night phase and passes to another player. An example of an ability is blocking a night eviction, although the abilities get truly insane. I don't wanna spoil it. Seems pretty safe to say this publicly since it's not gonna be in my possession anymore and all future obtainees will know I'm town.

I hope everyone who gets this item in the future uses it responsibly and never ever for a minute thinks to use it against me (plz).

Interesting. I'm not sure that was wise though. You don't know what other roles might be out there.

 

[Flame_AC]

I left one thing out of my last post and couldn't edit it and didn't know if it was fine to double
post, but here is a short list, not all, of the people who have posted less than spectators.

Capitan
Coppanuva
Lone Prodigy
OrangeYouGlad

Also, I'm touched LoC, though I'm not sure what you mean by throwing off bad vibes, elaborate if you could?

 

[Darryl]

Fair enough on the term differences.

However, you're claim is not as easily verified as you think it is. Should you be a Cultist, you could have a power which transfers among the members in the group, then you can just have a potential team mate say that they have it and "you're in the clear".

Personally, Droplet's thing with NeverForever didn't strike me as particularly slanted one way or another, more of just a misplay, though I'll take another look later.

I'll be back in about 12 hours. I'm keeping my vote on Neuromancer, though I imagine I'll be changing it once I get back and catch up.

The thought that I would make a claim when I had zero votes on me and then implicate other Cult members is just insanely stupid. There is no purpose there. I'm revealing this because it is what it is and it is going to be a huge part of the game going into the future.

 

[Darryl]

I don't see how it's anti-town to apply pressure on somebody who has made multiple posts that, at least at first glance, don't seem to mean anything (my vote has nothing to do with his attitude, which I think I appreciate?). I think it would be more cultist to just let those posts slide without calling into question the intent behind them.

"Let's apply pressure to Blarg! Maybe we will get an implicating game of impromptu scrabble out of him!"

 

[Lord of Castamere]

You just sound too good to be true. Everything you've said has lined up a little too well. In truth you're my wild card solt. My #3 batshit insane pick.
---
Vote: Retromg

Almost everything you've posted so far has been fluff. You've been the worst type of inactive. The lurking, kinda here, but not, type. Treat this as a gentle prod to hear some actual thoughts.

Oh, and 5 hours after I wake up the real inactive witch-hunt begins. Get your ducks in a row before I pet them.