Rogue OM Squad/ROMSII Dead Thread
The following is the transcription of the Dead Thread for "Return of the Rogue OM Squad".
The ROMSII DT was originally in the format of a Google Document. Players used makeshift delimiters to approximate posts and prefaced 'posts' with their names to indicate who was speaking. To enhace readability, the thread is presented in a table with clearer delimiters and attribution.
Lyaka, Elliania, Limeysmum (CandyK), MeegerMary, Kinocha, Darkaardvark
Original Document Header
Below we shall madly pick apart the Rogue strategy.
Instead of choosing colors (possibly not enough, and eye-smarting!) let's use this format instead:
[My Name]: ......(discussion goes here)
The use of separator bars between 'posts' is also encouraged :)
|Elliania||Second post! Umm, anyway, just to be constructive my FOS is on Gldenstern right now. I admit so far I haven't really done a lot of analyzing, mostly just reading along, but she has a high FOS from a lot of people with a lot of good reasons. And I really don't think Kewene is a Rogue (don't ask me why) so I really hope the next lynch goes to Gldenstern.|
|Lyaka||Ehhh. I'm really looking harder in PTG's direction right now. Maybe it's just because his attitude annoys me, but lynching him would be so darn satisfying. My other major worry is Prosperity. Somehow the Rogues twigged to Argemone. I at least had no clue, so it wasn't obvious from the posting going on. Either the Rogues have a power- not out of the question- or Prosperity ratted her out. Why not lynch her and find out for sure?|
|Limeysmum||ok, I'm not entirely sure how this works, but I'll try. I've suspected Kewene for some time, but now the lynch has happened I'm not as sure. Time will tell I guess. Gldnstern is high up on my list, as well as Hazarath, Shaimus and PTG. However, that's only if I truly trust that all the innocents are really innocent. I still think there is/was a twist we don't know about and that has me very puzzled. The Rogues took out 4 of us beforeSynful. Seemed odd. Then snagged Hohum before getting Satin and Dark. Was this to cause confusion? Finally, I've been bothered from early on in the game about several "untruths"Synful made, or at least the fact that her posts made it look that way. (sorry Syn) For example, if I were an innocent holding a clue and sent it to 5 people, I'd darn well know who they were. The fact that she said she sent them in 2 emails and didn't know the 5th person was darn silly. My email from her clearly showed she sent it to Goldgenie. The second email, then, would have gone to Gldstern, PTG, and another person. Why didn't gldstern or PTG come forth with who it was? Therefore, was Syn pulling our leg, or is PTG/Gldstern a Rogue and didn't share that info? Hee, enough for now--now I'll see if I know what to do with this.|
|Lyaka||I thought I remembered reading a post where she came back and said that she'd looked up the fifth person she sent it to and it was GG. At any rate, I knew that she sent it to GG, even without reading your post, so it was said somewhere in the main thread. But it is suspicious for Gldnstern and PTG. I'm betting Gldn goes next round- it's sheer luck he didn't this round.|
|MeegerMary||Ive had suspicions on Hazarath from the very begining of the game. Before it all officially began, he started talking to me in game and asking questions about my opinion on the new twists of the clue holders and password stealer. Itcouldve been innocent enough but I thought it was wierd that he would start talking to another player hed never spoken to before so quickly. I never said anything more than 'i dont know' and 'should be fun' to him, but that put him right at the top of my FOS list. He never did anything in the game that I can recall to make him look rogue like and has been flying under the radar an awful lot. That screams rogue to me.
Also, I wouldnt be surprised at all to find out that the rogues had their own secret agent working for them to find out the identity of the PWS. But we shoulda taken prosperity out when she made that revelation just to be sure about where she stands.
|Elliania||Hah, I was right. Kewene just didn't look suspicious to me... Anyway, probably better to lynch anyone than noone. PTG... he acted very very strangely somewhere in the middle... He started useless fights and was generally very annoying. At that stage I would have said lynch him for the satisfaction as well ;). In my opinion he has either calmed down or changed hisplaystyle, because he isn't nearly as annoying now as he was then.
All in all, I think though, that he gets far too much attention to be a Rogue. He must have known from the last game that high profile players get lynched sooner and that it's best to post a little, but not too much... He was almost asking to be lynched in between there, which is very strange behavior for a Rogue. So he is lower on myFOS list. Not completely off, but lower. Now Vireyda... I thought from the beginning, that if I was a Rogue and wanted to stay alive, I would make myself useful to the town. And she maintains the wiki, doesn't she? I haven't checked it out myself yet, but it was mentioned several times in the threat as being very useful. And it was quoted as the reasonVireyda wasn't lynched yet. I like her and her posts and was quite relieved when they stopped that shortlist, but looking back, she did the most intelligent thing a Rogue could do...
|Limeysmum||Oops, I just realized I signed in with my pirate name instead of forum name. For those who don't know me well, I amCandyk on the forums.
An interesting look at the votes for the 3 Rogues so far by those not confirmed "innocent" (assuming we still feel that is legit):
Gldstern- GG- -Fred I would expect Rogues to vote forGG as they did. On the other hand, I wouldn't expect a Rogue to give up Sarbear unless Hazarath- GG- -Fred(last) it was the last vote. BothProsperityandVireyda voted early for her. Compare all that to the votes for Fred. If innocents are JoAnna- - -Fred innocent, then the Rogues knew Fred was missing (I would expect Rogues to keep in close touch by PM)orHazarath, who cast PTG- GG- -Fred the last vote, decided Fred was going and he quickly voted to cover himself. Prosperity-GG-Sar- Shaimus- - -Fred(3rd) Vireyda- -Sar-Fred (1st)
I'm still uneasy about the unknown twist. I still have a strong suspicion that one of the confirmed innocents is not so innocent in some way, or the Rogues took out a Rogue from the short list to throw us off. There are too many ways this twist could work. Satin, I see you on the list for this forum. Can you shed some light on what's going on in the innocent PM group?
|MeegerMary||None of the rogues who have been caught this far couldve been on the shortlist. They all have some repeating|
|Limeysmum||Aye Mary, that is true. I was more looking for some kind of "twist" or offbeat strategy that could throw the town off. Four of us from the shortlist were banned. Banned Rogues don't have to disclose. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's likely they would do that, but it is a valid strategy. Keep in mind that Drakes and Anonletter both posted both emails from Aenor regarding their clues. Synful only posted one and claimed she never shared the other one with anyone. Perhaps she just overlooked posting it on the forums like the others did causing me to feel uneasy about it, but it has been in the back of mind.|
|Lyaka||but didn't Synful turn out to be innocent? I know banned people don't *have* to disclose, but isn't it the case that if they choose to disclose, it's true? I've been taking it on faith that everyone who was banned and said "Innocent" meant it. If you're allowed to lie about that in your banned-death scene... that could be the twist we're worried about. Someone who was banned and claimed to be innocent wasn't.
But the town has gotten the short list squared away. One person, I don't remember who, said it perfectly. If Vireyda is a Rogue, then she's Rogue #4. But the 4-rogues clue is false, so there's a fifth Rogue somewhere else. If Vireyda is an Innocent, then the 4-Rogues clue is true, and there's a fourth Rogue somewhere else. Either way, there's a Rogue somewhere else. So you find it, and if the game doesn't end, then Vireyda must be a Rogue, and it's the hangman for her.
|Limeysmum||Aye, it has been accepted by the majority that Synful is a clue-holding innocent. However, I believe it was proven in the first game (don't have time to look it up) that a person banned can say innocent and be lying if they are a Rogue. I'm not saying this is the case, but it is possible. I highly doubt this is the case asSynful played both games the same, doing and saying things that made her suspect (whether intentionally or unintentionally). I think the twist is yet to come (or be revealed), but I personally will find it very amusing when it gets down to known innocents vs.Vireyda or Prosperity (both still around since they are highly suspect) and a Rogue be hidden in the innocent group. Definitely a fascinating game even from the sidelines. :)|
|Kinocha||As I haven't thought about this for a while, it sort of slipped my mind. I'm the fifth person Synful sent that clue to.|
|Limeysmum||Really? Wow, that's interesting. Synful named off GG, PTG, myself, and Gldstern. Prior to my bannation, Daleen (before she was PWS) sent me an email saying she had asked Synful who all she sent it to and Daleen said Synful named Satin as one of them. I shared this email with the innocent group. It was later that Synful named the 4 and said she forgot the 5th, and no one raised the fact that Synful had been in pm's with Daleen (even though Synful claimed later she hadn't PM'd anyone but the group). And no one in the group, (all banned now) seemed to notice that Satin was mentioned by Daleen. I suppose they could have overlooked it. Probably all innocent mistakes by innocents, but definitely can cause confusion among innocents.|
|Kinocha||Another thing I thought about while reading the posts here, the banned rogues have to say if they are rogues, while a lynched one, can hide it, but not claim to be innocent. At least that's how Aenor explained it.|
|Limeysmum||I think it's the other way around isn't it Kinocha? A lynched Rogue has to admit it; a banned Rogue doesn't.|
|Kinocha||Yes, of course. I got the words mixed up. The rogues can eliminate one of their own, and the innocents will not see a difference from any other elimination.|
|Limeysmum||Something else I remembered as well. Back to assuming innocents are innocent---working on 4 Rogues clue being true---whenGoldgenie was going down, he started fingering everyone. I've been working off my list as to who he didn't point to, but since he actually voted for Fred, now I'm looking at who is left that he fingered. PTG really stands out. Could PTG be a Rogue who realized that GG was playing both sides and decided to pull the plug on that not knowing where GG's loyalty would land? PTG also went after Fred (perhaps he knew Fred was no longer able to play? or using this as strategy to gain trust).|
|Elliania||Personally, I think it is a very bad idea for a Rogue to lead the lynch against a fellow Rogue. Join in at the very end, yeah, but even an inactive Rogue has to be found by the town and helps more as long as he is alive, right? It is certainly possible thatPTG thinks more along your lines though and decided to sacrifice Fred while he couldn't fight back (he was inactive, right?) Seems like the Rogues aren't the biggest pals this time round, after allGG was voted for by two Rogues...|
|Lyaka||Actually I can see a case where a Rogue would want to vote off another Rogue. I bet that they, just like the townies, need a majority to lynch/ban, right? And if there are only two Rogues left- say,Freddukins and PTG - and Fred wasn't around, then the Rogues simply could not ban. That's no good. If there were a Rogue who were inconsistently online, or a Rogue who was insisting on a different strategy and basically filibustering to get his/her way, then that Rogue would actually be a threat to the entire ROMS. If I were a Rogue, I would totally decide that that 'teammate' was more helpful dead, throwing suspicion off of me, than alive. Absolutely.
The townies could survive a small group of people going their own way, at least at first. There have been like 5 people who spent the first 10 rounds trying the abstaining strategy, and it hasn't stopped the town from lynching. Up to 49% of your group can go their own way, as long as the remaining 51% agree. One or two non-conformist townies doesn't hurt the town; they can be overruled. But one or two wild Rogues hurt the ROMS much more because there's only four or five of them. So I don't consider leading the charge against an inactive/inadequate Rogue to be an indicator of Innocence at all.
|Elliania||If your assumption is correct, that they need a majority, you are perfectly correct. That would be a great reason to lynch yer comrades. I have a hard time imagining that though, because itinconveniances the Rogues so. I always thought, any of them could send a PM to the victim/Aenor and the first one to do that decides who gets banned. Any idea what it was like last game?|
|Limeysmum||I'm not sure how it works for the Rogues. I would think they would be in constant contact via PMs, and choose who is banned that way. Not sure though how anyone could monitor their votes to prove a majority. I believe they emailAenor and the victim for notification. Also, the missed ban was after Fred was lynched so I don't think they got rid of him for that reason. *shrugs* I do think they may have voted for him though as a cover. If not, then we have some suspicious looking so-called "proven innocents" to consider.|
|Kinocha||In the last game, Aenor gave the town clues (or rather, the ability to get). Maby the rogues have something like that, and vote after that|
|Limeysmum||I agree Kinocha that perhaps they did have clues. The first 4 they banned after Drakes and Anon were me(Candyk), you, rogueOMKilla and Lyaka. All of us have a "k" and an "a" in our names. That's the only reason I can come up with as to why they chose us beforeSynful, unless she played another role besides holding a clue. Probably grasping at straws though. *grins*|
|Lyaka||I doubt the Rogues are on a first-to-call-ban-gets-it strategy. That's just too abusive. It may not be so straightforward as a majority- it may be even more abusive, like a unaninimity- but anything that abusive doesn't really make sense.|
|MeegerMary||Lots to read up on now that Im home. I love that even though we're all out of the game we now have a place to talk about it. Ive been dying to know what some of the other dead players have been thinking about the game while its continued and I think myRL friend is just about sick of hearing about this game. She seemed a bit relieved when I told her I got lynched thinking it would be the end of my suspicions and paranoia.lol|
|MeegerMary||Now that ive had a chance to read. I wonder if, like you said, when aenor mentioned at the begining of the game that there would be other secret rolls he was referring to soemthing for the rogues specifically. Most of us probably assumed at the time that it would be a pro-townie roll, but it makes sense that the rogues would have their own special power like the townies did. Besides, it seems kind of late in the game for a new twist to aid the townies to be announced. Though anything can happen in this game.|
|Elliania||As to their power, I am sure they have one, after all the townies got the PWS. But I think it might be the ability to find the PWS, because they knew beforehand that Argemone was it. As for Prosperity, yes, she knew, but she knew a lot before Argemone was finally banned and I would think if she was Rogue/working for the Rogues, she would have told them earlier and Argemone wouldn't have lasted so long. Of course it would be fun for there to be another twist... After all, with so many confirmed innocents left, the game is pretty much over, unless the Rogues get really lucky.
I really wonder though, why are there confirmed innocents left? I am not 100% sure, but I think the Rogues passed the chance to ban a confirmed innocent in favor of someone else even after they found thePWS. More secret roles? Or just bad planning by the Rogues?
|Limeysmum||Elliania, yes, they chose to ban Hohum before Satin and Dark. The only reason I can think of is that Hohum was adamant about finishing the short list. This can work 2 ways of course. Either they wanted us to finish it for him, wasting lynches in doing so or they have someone on it to protect(Vireyda or Mantus). If I had to choose one of those 2 for a Rogue, I would pick Mantus, but the dilemma there is that he supposedly was the last one PWS and found innocent. I'm eager to see who gets banned (today?) and still hope Satin comes into this discussion to tell us the mood of the innocent groups PM'S.|
|Lyaka||Dark not going down earlier punches a bit of a hole in the "contains a and k theory". His name has both *and* he was outed as a confirmed innocent somewhere in, like, round 3. (I FOS'd him, he outed himself smugly, I ate crow. It was fun.) That makes him a juicy Rogue Short List target, doesn't it? Clearly the PWS will be among the confirmed Innocents. So we can add a name to our list: f(CandyK) && f(Lyaka) !! f(Darkaardvark).|
|Limeysmum||Aye, and that is what I found strange about it. It was almost like after they got 4 of us with "k" and "a", then boom, off wentSynful and Argemone. Maybe they had another clue? or we're just beating our brains out for nothing. Heehee. Their banning pattern is yet to be revealed?
Remember at one point, I believe it was kewene, asked how to find out about someone suspicious but not sure if person was on innocent list. (This was before entire list was revealed andSynful still in the game) Synful responded to send her a PM and she would tell her. Then things happened fast, Synful and Arge was banned. This is the main reason I had Kewene on my Rogue list. I do wonder however, if perhaps a Rogue PM'd Synful and got info as to who was on the innocent list before Slashersteve posted it. Not sure how that would have helped them though unless Synful accidentally tried to protect Arge in the same way she tried to reveal the clues in the beginning. Hard to know what takes place in the PMs.
|Elliania||Maybe we should consider the possibility that unlike last round, the Rogues just aren't as smart this time and didn't really grasp the importance of the Innocents. Or like to screw with the town more than winning ;) Wouldn't that be fun? The only reason for the banning pattern is that it is confusing? And each time someone tries to analyze the number of characters in a name, they burst out giggling in front of their computer? :D|
|Limeysmum||Definitely Elliania! LOL It really could be all cut and dried, everything legit, all innocents innocent, and the 4th (assumption) Rogue would be Gldstern due to voting pattern alone(the only one who voted for Fred by proxy). Aenor may have just been "baiting" us with more unknowns to come in order to "spice up" the game. Hee, maybe that's the twist---there is none.|
|Elliania||I wouldn't say none, there have been plenty so far. The clues, clueholers, PWS, possibly PWS-finder...|
|Lyaka||Aenor's 'mysterious extra roles to be revealed later bwahahaha now guess, my minions, guess!' could just have been RogueOMKilla- aka Drakes.
Hmmm... CandyK... I like the way you think. Earlier in the game, when I was still alive, I posted basically saying that victory was not the highest goal for the town, because victory for your team meant nothing- no prizes. So people would play in a way to get themselves the most fun out of the game. Many people would say winning is the most fun, but some might disagree. I was talking about Innocents, so I suggested that staying alive the longest actually lead to the most Fun- hard to have Fun when banned, even if your bannination would lead to Innocent victory in the long run. (The Dead Thread may change this analysis!) Anyway, the same could easily be said about the Rogues. And they have the added bonus of staying alive leading to their victory. All they have to do is ban people, so what difference does it make what order they do it in? Why not confuse us as much as possible so we go on wild goose-chases and banKewene and others like her?
Flaw in this thinking: they're clever enough to use a pseudo-random banning strategy, but overlook the importance of the Confirmed Innocents? Unless they know something about those 'Innocents' that we don't. Back to the spooky music.
|Limeysmum||rofl I'm anxious to see how this all turns out. I had a theory early on about the clues, but after getting blasted for asking about time stamps I backed off on it (yes, I am a coward in forums). Assume there are 4 rogues. That makes the other clue false. If it was false, how could it be true. I made several possible lists and one of them was instead of one Rogue having no repeating number or letters, one Rogue had both repeating letters and numbers. That theory made the short list quite small with Sarbear and Joanna. I often wondered if when Aenor said to "think" if that was a possibility, making our "short list" even shorter and saving so many innocents in the long run. *giggles hysterically* Yep, I have too much time on my hands.|
|Elliania||I love that theory!! Especially since there is a Rogue on your very short list ;) Guess that theory makes Joanna innocent as well... And Lyaka, banning confirmed innocents and banning in a completely random strategy are mutually exclusive strategies. So if they vote for fun and confusion, the HAVE to overlook the importance of the Innocents, no matter how clever they are. (did that make sense?)|
|Lyaka||I didn't say completely random. I said pseudorandom. There are two options:
1.) They are banning from the Innocent list, but see no reason to just ban down the list. That's too obvious; it lets the town know exactly what they're going to do next and basically give us free round passes. Instead, they mix other Innocents in. Banning only confirmed Innocents means that we lynch according to our FOS. Banning non-confirmed innocents sends us off onto wild-goose chases. The confirmed innocents don't know the identity of the Rogues any more than the rest of us- so is it that dangerous to let them live for another round or two, if it means directing the entire town into lynching innocents?
2.) They know something about the confirmed Innocents that we don't, and that something makes them far less of a threat. So they ban a few of them, to make us think they're a threat, but then ban others, to confuse us and send us off on wild-goose chases.
Make sense now?
|Elliania||Yep, makes sense. Of course, there is still the possibility, that the Rogues aren't nearly as clever as we all think, but well... the town probably caught the most stupid Rogues already. Survival of the fittest and all that ;)|
|Limeysmum||How funny that one Rogue, or even 2 for that matter, would need soooo much time to ban someone. Hee, guess they just like to rattle everyone's nerves.|
|Elliania||So, what do you guys think, was that missed ban intentional to confuse the town (it did kill an innocent...) or seriously because of being late/inactive? I think I'd go with inactive, because again, I can't see the advantage in missing a ban... But maybe you guys can enlighten me again ;)|
|Lyaka||Do you mean the one that seems to be current or the one that just happened?
Honestly, it's hard to see what the Rogues gain by not banning anyone. The last time, I could maybe see it being intentional as a way to get the town to ban the inactive. But there aren't any more inactives. Maybe they're hoping the town- namely Shaimus- will do as they've been doing and look for patterns. Since said patterns wouldn't actually exist, they'd invent them (humans are really, really good at doing that) and lynch another innocent. That's one guess.
Another guess I have- these are really weak, but it's what I can come up with- is that the Rogue is lying low. Maybe the Rogue- if there's only one remaining- has decided that right now, he reveals more information when he bans someone than he makes up for by removing a single Innocent. Maybe he figures that if he does nothing, the town will learn nothing new, and they'll lynch people based on their current FOS. If their current FOS is wrong, maybe s/he hopes to lie low and get the town to do his work for the next few rounds. Then, when the pool has been thinned out, emerge from the shadows in a lightning stroke for the win.
This second plan assumes that he truly doesn't understand the importance of the confirmed innocents. Even if the town does lynch innocents for him, they won't lynch confirmed innocents. At least, not without some serious changes in their thinking. So he could find himself in a position where it's the confirmed innocents and him left- and we all know who goes next in that scenario.
That's what I've got; anyone else?
|MeegerMary||Interesting theory Lyaka. Up until reading that I was thinking that they've possibly just gone inactive recently and the game would consist of innocents banning innocents until the final rogues happen to get lynched. You make an excellent point though. An elaborate inactive ploy is a valid strategy here. Plus the remaining live players are mostly, at least partially, active mates so such a long period of inactivity might not be as causal as I thought. Cant wait to see how it plays out for our hidden rogues.|
|Elliania||When I asked that question, I was talking about the first ban that was missed. Now, that a second one has been missed, I really think that the final Rogue(s) are at least partially inactive. You know, like that game isn't their highest priority any more because they have almost no chance of winning anyway? If they check in by chance, they ban, if they don't, oh well whatever... The only way I see right now is another hidden twist, that somehow diminishes the importance of the confirmed innocents... And I really don't believe that, because Aenor confirmed the absolute innocence of the Innocents several times. I do not think he lied.
So anyway, my (pseudo)vote goes to Gldnstern, because I FOSed her before ;) It looks like she is going anyway...
|Limeysmum||My vote would be for Gldnstern as well. Perhaps she saw the handwriting on the wall that she was next and simply didn't bother with a ban this time. Or, the Rogue(s) feel safe enough to let the town kill it itself.
Elliania, I believe Aenor confirmed that the PWS and clue holders (all banned) were innocents. However, any unknown twist that allowed a Rogue or 2 on the list of innocents could definitely create a lot of problems for the town. Having never played the game before these two, I have no idea what kinds of things could be brought in like that nor how they work.
|Elliania||Wow, I must be really bored... Or just hate studying for my exam tomorrow so much that I would do anything to distract me ;)
Anyway, here is the link to the post, where Aenor specifically states, that all confirmed Innocents are innocent. http://forums.puzzlepirates.com/community/mvnforum/viewthread?p=998252#998252
|Limeysmum||Ok, I see what you're saying now. I always wondered about the careful wording of that post. That's why I never really trusted it. I'd give anything to see all the PMs between Arge and the responses from Aenor. The reason for this is the difference between Aenor's response which Slashersteve posted (if I remember correctly) and the one I received from Arge confirming me. It was just something I kept in the back of my mind that nagged me a little. And I don't have time to double check this, but didn't Synful offer to post those or send copies to someone making the inquiry just before she was banned? I'll look for it later if I have time or wait to see Gldnstern's result first as it may be moot.|
|Elliania||You are right of course... After I found the quote, I also noted that Aenor carefully excluded any future PMs he might send to Argemone. I still think the Innocents are innocent, because there would be so much deceit involved any other way that it would surely ruin the fun for many players. With fun being the most important objective of this game, I just don't think Aenor would do that. Still, it remains possible, would explain the Rogues behavior and would influence the current game mightily... I guess we will just have to sit back, wait and see... Tea, anyone? Or better yet, Pina Coladas? :D|
|Kinocha||I'm absolutely amazed that the Rogues missed another lynch, even though he/she/it/they aren't inactive.|
|Lyaka||Ooooh pina coladas! You're my kinda pirate, Elliania :) I heard you mention the dread word Exams- well, I just had my last one this morning, I am officially DONE! ::sips colada::
I'd lynch Gldn next, absolutely. But it's starting to really look like there's something we missed. What if... just what if... there is, like, a half-Rogue? Who wouldn't show up as a Rogue on PWS checks and can only ban every fourth round or so? They'd appear innocent until lynched, but if they happened to be the only one left in the game, they would have to miss 3 out of every 4 ban, putting them at a numerical disadvantage that might counteract not showing up on the PWS litmus-test.
I know, it's thin.
|Limeysmum||Yarrr, *sips drink* ye think like I do Lyaka. From the very beginning I felt something was wrong with the "slam-dunk" scheme. I've been trying to watch for something along those lines but could not find a pattern. One other thing, and this could be important to the innocent group, is the short time I was there, I expected to be filled in on prior emails from Aenor regarding who the PWS checked, etc. Or perhaps, emails from others that they had received. However, I found no one working together, no sharing of past info. They only shared what came up at the time. Once the older ones got banned, all of this info would be lost to those surviving. They may have clues in the old info that has disappeared along the way. I would not be surprised if something came up in the innocent group; I would be surprised if something came up and Aenor had not given an opportunity to figure it out, such as the type of wording in the emails, or some other way.|
|Elliania||/me envies Lyaka for being done.... I'm seriously yearning for the weekend, for my last exam is on Friday. I will do more than just sip virtual coladas then :D
Oh, well for now... *takes a sip* Aenor was very clear from the beginning, that the PWS wasn't nearly as mighty as the town thought, when her powers were first reveiled. Now, I have always thought, that the Rogues had the ability to kill the PWS sooner or later, so the town would be stuck with the Innocents they had discovered thus far. Considering how large the group of Innocents is, my theory went, that the Rogues found the PWS somewhat later than expected (maybe because they didn't interpret clues right, or just because of bad luck with their PWS finder or whatever) but that was it with the twists. My, I don't want to imagine the tarting, that will start when one of the innocents isn't truly innocent which was apparent only through the wording of a PM only one townie got to see...
|Limeysmum||When I was brought in, I received a PM from Arge that copied Aenor's. Arge told me that other than that email, all future emails would be shared with the group. I have no doubt she didn't share it with those who were there at that time, but past emails from Aenor were not shared with me, and we have no idea if they ever passed them on as time went on. And yes, I would expect some to tart should something come up, but I would imagine that somewhere, somehow, Aenor has a way of explanation that is perfectly logical. Of course, this a lot of speculation.|
|Elliania||But speculation is fun :D|
|Lyaka||Btw, Lyaka, who is Multi-barreled cannon? They're on the list but only watching? I had hoped Satin would join us, but in game it sounded like she was knee-deep in rl work and may just not have the time right now.|
|Darkaardvark||That'd be me. The name is a reference to my gmail account, ribauldequin, which is a multi-barreled cannon. I don't check my gmail often enough so I didn't notice until today, and I've been reading it over. Sorry about the confusion.
Gldnstern, Hazarath are my top two suspects, based off of their voting patterns closely matching the other Rogues. PTG still irks me. I can't decide. He's a barrelstopper if he's not a Rogue, that's all I have to say. The whole "I know who all the Rogues are but I'm not telling youuu" thing just got to me. But if he is a Rogue, then he's got guts. If it wasn't for him, freddunkins would probably still be around, and he lead the charge on GG as well.
|Limeysmum||*shakes hands with Dark* Good to see ye mate. Welcome to our fun and relaxed, sun-tanned circle on the beach! /em waves to waiter for another round of drinks. I'm surprised the vote for Gldnstern is taking so long. I actually thought that one would end quite fast, unless so many are tied up with exams, etc.|
|Elliania||Yay, more drinks :) How many votes are missing? Can't be a lot considering how fast the first few were coming...|
|Limeysmum||With 12 left, they need 7 votes and they only have 5. Odd that Daleen is the only one from the innocent group who has voted. (Wish I was a little mouse in that group to see if they are discussing it.) Holy Apoc checked in but didn't vote. And, of course, hee, PTG only comes in to make a comment but doesn't vote.|
|Lyaka||If you're looking for a read on the Innocents group- Dark was one of them. But he didn't tell me anything, so it's up to you to wheedle it out of him. :)|
|Limeysmum||We'll work on him after this vote is over if necessary. *grins* This vote may end it. I happened to notice Gldnstern logged on last evening so maybe she just gave up. I must say that this game seems to really have long long lags. The first game was that way due to so many inactives. The long dry spells were so boring. As a reader, this game seems worse.|
|Lyaka||I wonder if I could sign up in advance for the next one.|
|Elliania||I tried to join in advance in the planning threat in the Events Workshop. But I doubt that counted... Oh, Gldnstern was innocent. Well, damn. So, who is left really? I'm beginning to look in PTGs direction as well, but think the next vote will go the Prosperity because of that PWS business... One way or other, it will be good to know. I am very curious whether the Rogues will miss this upcoming banning as well. If they don't, that would lend credibility to Lyaka's theory of half-Rogues.|
|Limeysmum||ROFL And now the plot thickens. Logic told us all to vote Gldnstern, but I had an inkling that she'd be found innocent. Just seemed all too cut and dried for me. If the Rogue(s) skip another ban, then they must feel quite safe and content with the towns choices. Ok Dark, come clean. Any hanky panky going on in the innocent group?|
|Elliania||Yup, come on Dark, spill the beans ;) Have you seen the PMs confirming the innocence of the others, was there anything strange with the wording?|
|Lyaka||::brings peer pressure to bear:: yes, Dark, tell us!
Gldnstrn innocent... it comes as a surprise to me. I had this mental conjunction of freddukins and Gldnstrn as sort of being 'the same', and when fred turned out to be a Rogue I was sure that Gl was on the list. Now I really don't know... let's lynch PTG. It would be satisfying regardless.
|Limeysmum||Mine said "Not a Rogue OM"; Slashersteve's was posted "is innocent"; RedOgres (need to look for it) was a humorous one about being in the..shoot, can't remember how it was worded, but to the effect of being a veteran RogueOM. I'd be particularly interested in HolyApoc's, Daleen, and Mantus especially. Do you still have copies of those Dark?
|Lyaka||I waffle between my own crackpot theories (like half-Rogues) and the simple fact that if the confirmed Innocents are Innocent, the only rat in the foxhole is Prosperity. And it's not such a bad idea to lynch her and see, right now the town is shooting in the dark anyway.|
|Limeysmum||I could almost believe the half-Rogue idea if someone gets banned this time. That would certainly explain how one got in the innocent group. Otherwise, anyone not in the innocent group would be nuts not to ban from there. It doesn't make sense. Unless all of this is a ruse to make us not trust the innocent group. As for Prosperity, I just think she voted far too early to take out Sarbear. Maybe that was the plan, but Slasher would be more suspect wouldn't he? On top of that, everything Prosperity said rang true to me as I was in the innocent group at the time we were contacted by Drakes/RogueOMKilla. *shrugs* While everyone was jumping on her and quizzing her, and yes, she came across excited and trying to explain it all without being lynched herself, I understood exactly what she was trying to tell the town. Additionally, the Rogue(s) would most certainly leave the most suspect until last I would think. Vireyda, short list; Shaimus, replacement; Prosperity, knew identity; Hazarath, voting record. That leaves JoAnna, who I had on my suspect list from very early on for some reason, and PTG, who rubs everyone the wrong way. *chuckles* Very interesting to ponder all of this. I'm loving it!|
|Elliania||I keep confusing these two... Slasher was the one who found Sarbear, right? And Shaimus is the one who loves statistics. If that is true, let me FOS Shaimus as well, because although these statistics seemed very useful in the beginning, taking suspicion off him, they turned out not to help at all. Could be he was just overeager of course... JoAnna? Hmm, never really one of my FOSs... i vote for PTG for now ;)
By the way, mum, I agree with you about Prosperity. I thought everything she said sounded very plausible and she is not on my FOS list for now.
|Kinocha||I must say, I find it quite fun to read your thoughts on this. Personally, I think there is one Rogue left, and that that Rogue is Hazarath. But that is just me. As to lyniching PTG, it does seema likw that would satisfy a lot of people.|
|Limeysmum||Yes, Kinocha, this is fun to do. No glory, but no risk either plus the added bonus of having our crazy? speculations. The missed bans may have just been to draw it out more, but if Hazarath is the 4th Rogue I'll feel let down. I'm still waiting to discover the reason Aenor alluded to about the plan not working. I guess I'm just not totally convinced that those in the innocent group are all innocent. I also have a feeling that some know more than meets the eye and have yet to reveal it.|
|Limeysmum||Friday 6:36pm Ok, if we assume there are 4 rogues and all is legit, we can now ask, who amongst them would have the most fun dragging each ban out to the limit? If everyone is accounted for and no one is afk, I can only think of one (unconfirmed innocent) who would love to drag this game to its limits. Or is PTG being set up?|
|Lyaka||If I were a Rogue, I would already have given myself the satisfaction of sending PTG to the island. Regardless of his team affiliation.
If I may hijack the thread for a second- we have a new arrival on the island! Please welcome my brand-spanking-new monkey familiar! She's tan (best color for a monkey!) and currently goes by the name Cheeky, although I'm giving some thought to changing that (suggestions welcome). If I'd had her on my shoulder that night in the bar, she would have scented the lime right away.
Back to your regularly scheduled Rogue-finding now. :)
|Lyaka||Okay, this is lame. What's up with this? Is the Rogue just dragging out the inevitable as long as possible? I don't buy the logic that says they must not be lynching because they're a Confirmed Innocent. They should be using that to pick off the CIs, not lie low. It makes no sense. Does anyone have a remotely plausible idea to account for this? I'm fresh out.|
|Limeysmum||I would have thought as the numbers got fewer, Aenor would shorten the time allowed. Seems silly to have the Rogue(s) waste 2 days, unless they are just trying to rattle everyone. They could just simply email Aenor that they pass and let Aenor post as such to keep the game keep going.|
|Limeysmum||Possibilities: 1. Rogue(s) is/are unconfirmed innocent dragging it out because they take pleasure in doing so. They just want to see how long they can last.
2. Rogue(s) dragging it out to create suspicion and paranoia in the the innocent group. Afterall, there are several left who have never trusted it.
3. Rogue(s) part of innocent group somehow. Let the town kill off others. Then persuade wrong move (similar to last game where Red convinced Satin to go with him in voting off Synful and she wouldn't trust anything I said no matter what I tried).
4. Someone held back a clue and everything done so far was based on believing the 3 clueholders.
5. Aenor has a wicked sense of humor and has really tricked the town with his "unknown unknowns".
6. More Rogues than we ever considered? Rogue on shortlist banned to hide the fact?
We're working with cards missing from our deck so it's easy to have crazy speculations here. The simple thing to believe is #1. Not sure what I believe.
|Kinocha||One rogue left (of those who was at start of the game). Active. Posting. Not banning. Either there have been more twists than we know about. (and I know of one more than you). Synfuls clue was the wrong one. Vireida is not a rogue.|
|Limeysmum||What other twist do ye know about Kinocha?
I'm wondering if the PWS's powers were limited to the number of Rogues? If there are more left than we think, then they could pass on a few bans to let the pot boil longer and create more paranoia? Especially if the town provide suspects on their own. After all, Gldnstern and kewene were both highly suspect. The rest can all be clearly targeted by a townie for one reason or another.
|Lyaka||Kine? You've been holding out on us? Nooo! U giv clueses! ::cries::
I think 2 is more likely than 1, assuming that we know everything relevant. If we're missing something relevant, I think it's likeliest to be something that makes #3 true. Of course, this doesn't preclude #4 (The missing clue might be "One Rogue will show as Innocent to the PWS"). I don't buy 5; Aenor's made a few mistakes IMHO, but not malicious ones, just ones because he found it hard to sit by the sidelines not saying anything (we all know how that feels). 6 is possible, but unlikely at this point. Rogue on ShortList banning entirely possible; hiding more than 2 Rogues in the players remaining, difficult without adding another, like, 5 rules.
Kine? Share pleeeeese? ::puppy eyes::
|Limeysmum||LOL A townie can make a mistake even when all the cards are on the table. If cards are missing, it's extremely hard to analyze. I've always felt Aenor to be fair to both sides. If he's put in a crazy twist, I would expect him to also put in a way for someone/more than one to discover it if they read all the cards correctly. What I find hard, like you and many others, is if the town is not given this info, then yes, we are the blind leading the blind. It actually makes the game less fun? I guess that's why I look for so much in everything; I want(ed) to be a part of the discovery. And as Lyaka pointed out early on in the game, when the fun factor is missing, people won't play. I personally enjoy the good mystery, but one also has to feel like all the clues are there to find. Soo, Kinocha, what card do you have that we are missing in our tiny little group here?|
|Kinocha||The twist I know: (highlight if you want to see it) The Rogues had the ability to eliminate one of their own, and draft an innocent in its place. This trick was used to eliminate the Rogue on the shortlist. A confirmed innocent was drafted.
I'm guessing number 1 and last half of number 6 is correct.
|Limeysmum||ok, so that's how Aenor worked the twist. I must assume then, that ye were the banned Rogue and someone was drafted? Otherwise, how would ye know this? Or are ye just guessing this as a possible solution ? I guess ye need to explain more Kinocha. Earlier ye said one left and ye thought it was Hazarath. If this twist was put in, then if only one left, it couldn't be Haz.|
|Kinocha||(Yes, I was that rogue)The person drafted, got banned not long after being drafted, which makes me suspect another twist. Hazarath are the only rogue left of the original group.|
|Limeysmum||ROFL It's funny that when ye were banned, I suspected that ye were a Rogue only because to me, I knew who the PWS was, and if I was to trust the fact that Synful was an innocent, why would they help with the short list? So yes, I suspected ye early on. Just didn't know how a twist would work.
I'm still not certain why Haz hasn't banned 3 times. It was possible for him to persuade other lynchings while he banned from the innocent group. There was enough in his group to do so. As for who they drafted, ye said it was from the confirmed list. Why would they then turn around and ban them? Trust factor? Guess we'll have to wait and see if there's another twist to explain why the draftee was banned.
|Elliania||Wow, that is ... interesting. And a very nice way around that confirmed innocent stuff ;) But, yeah, it remains to be seen why the "innocent" was banned as s/he must have been the most valuable of that group. Maybe s/he refused to join ;)
Or more likely, there is another twist. This is getting juicy again.
By the way, can we agree on wether or not to share what Kinocha has told us? It was easy enough for her to hide the twist with white ink, but if we discuss it, it is bound to come up again...
|Limeysmum||Not sure who ye plan to share it with, but it can't leave this forum as that would undermine the integrity of the game. We're not allowed to discuss info with players still in the game. I must say, it's an interesting read to go back to when K. was banned, but I didn't have time to finish.|
|MeegerMary||So much revealed latley its staggering. I knew, well, strongly suspected Hazarath was a rogue for the reason I stated above. Now i really wish I woulda said something to go along with my FOS on him about our in game conversation during my lynching. If for no other reason that to have a clear conscious about possibly helping a rogue stay hidden. Do'h!
The rogue inactivity is making more sense to me. If they werent, with each round 2 people would be taken out of the game, and with only 11 people remaining (after gldnstern) that would thin the herd too much and make it even harder for the remaining rogue whose not in the confirmed innocent group to hide among the innocents, the whole group would be down to 9 players now otherwise. Looks like Hazarath might go this round. Hopefully soon the townies will realize theres a rogue hiding among them and turn on each other. Oh the bloodbath. LOL
|Lyaka||Aaaah! A Rogue! A Rogue! ::runs and hides::
But I'm really mystified as to why the Innocent they drafted was banned. (So the Short List clue was correct, hmm? Go me for pushing it!) Perhaps s/he was using those tactics I discussed earlier to stymie the Rogue team- refusing to vote so they couldn't reach a quorum, voting for fellow Rogues, sending FOS their way... etc etc. Their allegience would be pretty confused. But think how fun! That's really playing the game to its fullest. First you get to be part of the Secret Kids' Club, and then you get to join the Rogues too- at the same time! I'd be all over that. (Remember me for next game, Kine darling :))
Elliana - it's a condition of membership here that nothing said here be repeated outside the Dead Thread. So banish the thought, dear, or Aenor and I will have to have a little chat. :)
Kine - any idea why Hazarath might not be banning? Was he a proponent of a strategy earlier in the game with which this is consistent? Has he been afk? Or do you have no clue like the rest of us?
|Darkaardvark||Nope, nothing fishy going on in the innocent group. As for the PWS confirmations, almost all of them took the form of "<X> is not a Rogue OM" or a variant thereof, so not confirming or denying any other special roles. RedOgre's was slightly different but it still didn't leave open the possibility that he was a Rogue. I'm guessing there's still some sort of twist going on, because Synful acted way too suspicious before her death for me not to suspect something about her. But I don't think the Rogue(s) have a chance, unless there's some secret "don't ban anyone for 3 rounds and you win!" rule, which is just dumb anyways.|
|Limeysmum||If there is another twist, it might explain why they didn't ban from the innocent group. As for Synful, Dark, she acted suspicious all along. It was as if she was playing both sides, whether she intended to or not. I was mystified when she had the outburst regarding Aenor's post on the "plan" not working, but maybe it was due to the fact I never expected it to be that easy in the first place. I personally never felt what he said was that bad. Perhaps he shouldn't have said anything at all, but it just didn't warrant a total meltdown. *shrugs* Just me I guess. Also, Kinocha, I know ye said the confirmed innocent got banned right away. On the other hand, are ye sure of who they actually recruited? Ye all might have discussed it before your ban, but perhaps they chose someone else after your ban?|
|Lyaka||Heheh. Kinocha, I note you cast the deciding ballot for Sarbear- was that a 'make me look innocent before I post my death scene and conveniently forget the word Innocent in it' play?
Mum- I too was upset by Aenor's post, so Synful reacting to it didn't set off any alarms. He may have been right about what he was saying in his post, but that's not a good reason to say anything. I felt his place was to be silent and let us play the game, not try to play the game for us. I figured he got frustrated sitting around watching us do something he knew was flawed (because the Rogues could corrupt a Confirmed Innocent) and wanted to save us from ourselves. I get the same feeling when I'm training a midshipman all the time- I want to step in and make all their decisions for them because I can't believe how incredibly inexperienced they are. I restrain this feeling (mostly :p) because if they don't make their own mistakes they'll never learn. And you never get to say "And that's why you never cross a brigand's T for them while letting three jobbers laze, Shippie". Which really makes up for it. :)
The "X is not a Rogue OM" wording is perfect for the twist. When you checked, X was not a Rogue OM. The Rogues corrupted them after their PWS check, and the PWS never thought to check members of the Innocent group. Her power only working once a round made that impractical anyway. So it wasn't broken- it just didn't self-update, as it were.
Kinocha, how about the name of the Innocent you guys corrupted? Re-reading the game in light of this new information is nearly as fun as playing it was the first time!
|Elliania||I am terribly sorry if I caused any confusion. Of course I didn't mean to share it outside this forum, that would be dumb and would ruin the fun the players still have with this game. I was talking about whether to share and talk openly about that twist in this forum right here, because Kinocha used white ink to write the clue and thus gave everyone the chance to remain oblivious and guessing. Which is mostly what this game is about. So basically my question was, do we accept this spoiler and work it in our conversation, or do we have to have yet another forum where only those talk, that accept further information from the Rogues. Anyways, considering the discussion above my post, I guess that question is settled, as you all seem to have decided to read the hidden twist ;)|
|Lyaka||/e is spoiler ho.|
|Limeysmum||Hee, the suspense is killing me! One more vote---wish they'd just do it! Then we'll know if there is another twist giving us insight as to why the draftee was banned.|
|Kinocha||I know who we recruited, as I was the one sending them a PM informing them of it. Darkaardvark mentioned the name in his post. (here) And yes, Lya, it was sort of the point about that post. Only one player cought up on me not posting innocent or not, and that was Shaimus, and he sent me a PM, that I politely ignored.|
|Limeysmum||I assumed that's who it was, but just wanted to be sure they hadn't pulled a switch on ye. So if there's another twist, then it happened after they were banned, leaving ye in the dark with the rest of us. :) I caught the lack of pleading innocent in your death scene but sadly, was not in the game to say anything and actually might not have done so right away. /em continues to wait.|
|Elliania||I'm feeling dense... Who was the Rogue among the Innocents?|
|Kinocha||The one everyone have always been suspisious of. Synful|
|Limeysmum||Odd that the vote is taking so long. It would seem that the last 5 innocents are not working together at all. Maybe the rounds with no ban did its trick and they are now looking at each other? Or perhaps the Rogues get to tag team? Ban Synful, get another? HolyApoc has never voted for a Rogue and Mantus is like a broken record each round with a vote stuck on shaimus. And Daleen seems to be missing. /em goes to get popcorn.|
|Lyaka||who was it that said that Synful seemed to be playing both sides against the middle? Nice catch.
I still wish it had been PTG, though. Now he'll never go down. He'll be the guy left alive at the end of a skellie fight who gets a skull even though he fought with a foil and lagged everyone out by yelling "TEAM" every 5 seconds. >.>
But why pick Syn? She had a ton of FOS on her from the very beginning, nearly got lynched in some early round- like, round 1. She was a high-profile target, very likely to get lynched. Why? So you could have her say outrageous things, then ban her and have those things suddenly gain validity?
Wait just a darn second. Synful explicitly states her innocence in her death scene. How does that work? Was that a requirement of the ban/co-opting? Why wouldn't she take the opportunity to cry Rogue- which was true at the time of her banning- and help the town? She was on the Short List. If she outed herself as Kine's replacement, she wouldn't even have messed with the clues- we would have known the short list was correct, thanks to her conveniently not having repeating letters or numbers in her name. At the very least the townies would be sure of Vireyda's innocence right now. Why did Synful hose the town by not revealing that? Innocent-to-start or not, that's a jerk thing to do.
And I thought lying in one's death scene was forbidden. You don't have to say anything, but what you do say must be the truth. By claiming to be innocent at the time of her death Synful blatantly lied to the town. How does that work?
|Limeysmum||Selecting her as "the last innocent clueholder" actually was good as it would give the mob a reason to suspect others in the innocent group (provided she was discovered). Also, she played both games the same: intentionally or not, she made herself appear to help both sides. Note I used the term she loved to spout to everyone, as well as the term (or phrase) she used in her death scene. Technically she was I guess. She didn't proclaim her innocence, just used the phrase to describe herself. As for outing herself, yes, she had that option I would assume. Would ye have? On the other hand, maybe that's why they banned her. Maybe she was caught in the dilemma of not knowing what she was allowed to do, (maybe it was forbidden by Aenor to out herself?) and they banned her to keep her quiet? Again, all speculation.
Another thought as well: If they were allowed to trade her for another Rogue, they could choose someone other than Mantus or Vireyda. Then, if Hazarath was lynched and Aenor said there was still one more, the pressure would have been on them for sure.
|Kinocha||She was chosen against my wish. They wanted a clueholder. I wanted Dark becouse he got a devious mind. He had been confirmed innocent at that point, so it wouldn't be a problem to keep him hidden. They where pretty sure that they wanted one that was part of the innocent group, as we wanted Argemone.|
|Kinocha||Hazarath was lynched, lets see if this ends the game.|
|Limeysmum||I'm anxious to see too Kinocha. Especially since ye suspect another possible twist. Funny that Satin signed up here but has stayed quiet while still watching the other thread closely. And Daleen throws in a vote for Haz after he'd already been voted off. Coincidence, overeagerness, or foreshadowing?
Surely Aenor didn't put in a twist like they could swap one Rogue for one innocent, then swap that Rogue for 2 innocents? Would definitely extend the game to the very end at this point. How devious would that be?
I have a question for Dark or Satin: Could Synful actually have been feeding them the wrong people to protect the innocents, thus leading to her own ban? I haven't done a timeline but there was a short period after I was banned when the decision was made to keep the new ones hidden for their protection. (It might explain why RogueOMKilla and Lyaka got banned.) Then later she outed Daleen, and Slasher, I believe, outed all of them. I realize they still got Arge, but there are other ways they could have done it. I'm just curious mostly.
|Darkaardvark||Mum, I'm not entirely sure how that would've worked but somehow I doubt it. "Wait just a darn second. Synful explicitly states her innocence in her death scene." I've been saying this since game one, I really don't think there's any stipulation that you can't 'lie' in your ban scene. Say whatever the hell you want, it doesn't make a difference because being banned cannot confirm innocence or guilt. As I understand it. Maybe I'm wrong. But evidence says otherwise, eh?|
|Limeysmum||Aye Dark, I agree with ye. Since she was banned, Lyaka, she didn't have to say she was a Rogue. Only if we lynched her would she have to be truthful. Add in the fact that Aenor specifically said we couldn't divulge any "secrets" we had discovered in our death scenes.|
|Lyaka||If Syn was trying to help the innocents, she would have claimed, truthfully, to be a Rogue in her ban scene. It doesn't reveal secrets- we would blithely have assumed she'd been a Rogue all along. So why not do it?
Gah, the waiting is annoying. Haz, just post your scene already, waiting doesn't make you any less Rougishly dead.
|Limeysmum||Woo hoo! It's finally posted! /em waits for the living townies to start asking questions. ROFL|