34 minutes ago, LTD said:@Visovics - roll call!
{there is no night phase because there is no phase - all the action in this game is going to happen in the space of a few minutes / hours at most. No one is leaving the ready room until the Saboteur is found, or the loyal smugglers are defeated.}
{unless you guys would rather play card games...}
Visovics confirmed on page 2
8 hours ago, Visovics said:##role confirm
who needs nights when you’re always half-asleep... **** space always looking like nighttime
My mistake and apologies!
*tannoy crackles*
Still looking for two more players who want to be in the magnificent 7 for roulette
So anyone have any reads? Aside from cards, of course.
Visovics and GNIPs seem quiet, which is suspicious, but could be the time zone thing. Visovics also specifically asked for talking, but then did a fade away.
On the other side, our card players have sort of dominated the conversation, much like our good friend EbonHawk last game, and we all remember how he turned out.
Not really sure how to read Vivovics and GNIP. I thought their silence was suspicious, but maybe they just don't have anything to discuss. We did go off on a serious rabbit trail.
I am sort of into the gambling, because before the cards and roulette stuff no one was talking, and no information was out there. On the other hand, I don't know if it is wise to give up your vote due to a game of chance. There are seven smugglers and four baddies. A random vote is more likely to kill an innocent smuggler* than an Imperial loyalist.
For this reason, LP and Pod are not above my suspicions.** I have a feeling Matt is OK, although he did "sabotage" (ha ha) this mystery by suggesting Pazaak, he was also the first person to stick his neck out and start the conversation.
I will vote for someone before the countdown is up.
*An oxymoron, I know.
**I mean, Pod lured four of us into playing a roulette game where we don't even know what the stakes are. How suspicious is that?
Now that I think about it, I think I will have to opt out of your roulette game, @PodRacer , until I know more details.
I was hoping to find 'the seven' I know you are one of us so you are taking a seat like it or not!!
Any ideas who the other 5 could be?
Im not sure about Matt being one of the seven... why do you think he is?
29 minutes ago, PodRacer said:
Im not sure about Matt being one of the seven... why do you think he is?
Actually, I just thought of a reason why Matt may be suspect too. But I don't want to say it until I sleep on it and have time to think.
My initial thought was that Matt basically spoke up first once the game started, when we were all like "role confirmed" nervously, he started talking about Pazaak and got the conversation started. It made him stand out, which doesn't seem like something you want to do if you're a baddie.
However, it's just a hypothesis. With holes. Ovino and LTD were also talkative last game.
27 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:Ovino and LTD were also talkative last game.
And both were scum. There are holes, but that's not one.
What the h e l l is going on in those last few pages?...
##vote Lord Preyer
the Pazaak is a massive distraction from our actual objectivw
Oh Vis! Where you see a distraction, I see a way to embrace the spirit of our venture and add spice to what is usually the RNG of D1!
With this in mind, I classify both Pod and Matt as lower probability suspects.
I’d also defend my actions on grounds of logic too. Knowing I was Town I saw a chance to trust to the cards to double my voting power and potentially reduce the power of Scum. The game didn’t work out as I hoped but the odds were good when I made my call. Still, I’m real sorry to be missing the roulette wheel!
As for who I suspect, the quieter the scummier! But I await our reigning Taris Memorial Champion to choose where I’m going to vote - and yes I know that’s a bad look for me but dems da breaks when you gamble and lose!
Yeah, I'm going to
##vote Lord Preyer.
Gambling away you vote is ridiculous with so many scum still around.
1 hour ago, Lord Preyer said:I’d also defend my actions on grounds of logic too. Knowing I was Town I saw a chance to trust to the cards to double my voting power and potentially reduce the power of Scum. The game didn’t work out as I hoped but the odds were good when I made my call.
Odds were good of what? Not you winning, obviously. Of you stealing a vote from a scum? The odds were greater that you stole it from a townie. And if you lost? What if you lost it to a scum? In my opinion it was a dangerous chance to take, if indeed it was a chance.
Granted, it seems odd that a scum would risk losing his vote, but then again, maybe he only lost it to a scum. . .
It's not a solid case, but it's the best I have today. All the talk has revolved around gambling, which has caused a distraction from the main point. I therefore am suspicious of all those who started anything to do with gambling. However, Lord Preyer was the one (IIRC) who suggested the whole 'Give up my vote' scheme, which Pod and Matt immediately accepted no question. I am therefore voting for LP, but am keeping a close eye on the other two.
Dang I missed the roulette game, oh well. hmm a couple of early votes I see too.
7 hours ago, The Jabbawookie said:And both were scum. There are holes, but that's not one.
That's what I meant. I initially suspected talkative people = town in this game, but now I have my doubts. Sorry I wasn't clear, I was sleepy.
I like how as soon as vis and gnips are called out for being quite they both come on and vote for LP,
I'm gonna go ahead and use me and LP's vote on the one who seconded and created a trian.
##vote GNIPS
##vote GNIPS [from LP]
I think we were both willing to gamble our votes because we were good allowing if anything more power gained in a very unique way.
It seems a reacuring theme for baddies to try and kill LP early
Also this game of randomness seems to produce some individuals as scum quite frequently almost like its destiny.
19 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:I like how as soon as vis and gnips are called out for being quite they both come on and vote for LP,
That was a coincidence. Nothing had happened when last I checked that was worth commenting on. Had you not begun gambling votes, I would have remained silent, despite being called out, and had I not been called out, I still would have voted for LP on account of his gambling votes.
As for why Vis and I voted the same, that too is a coincidence. I cannot account for his actions.
I also agree that LP is usually a good player and worth taking out, from scum's point of view. However this time he seems to have dropped the ball, and hence I have voted him.
Would have been pretty fun if me and Gnips were scum buddies again considering last game, even funnier if LTD were too ?
I have to say, gambling away a vote does seem pretty reckless.
We smuggle for a living boy's!! risk reward it's in our DNA!! All of us!!
Except maybe those calculated loyalists who cant break the mundane oppression of the Empire!!!
27 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:Also this game of randomness seems to produce some individuals as scum quite frequently almost like its destiny.
This is a very annoying argument. It uses a misinterpretation of randomly generated numbers to prove someone's innocence or guilt. You are not the only one to use it, and other have used it to indicate that they can't be scum, because they were scum last game. Please, stop using it. It has no basis in how the roles are chosen, and only results in the encouragement of irrational suspicions.
32 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:
I think we were both willing to gamble our votes because we were good allowing if anything more power gained in a very unique way.
I dunno. Maybe you both are scum (Agent + Agent, or Saboteur + Agent), and were going to vote the same way anyway. Maybe the Pazaak vote was meant to conceal a vote.
2 minutes ago, Matt3412 said:We smuggle for a living boy's!! risk reward it's in our DNA!! All of us!!
Except maybe those calculated loyalists who cant break the mundane oppression of the Empire!!!
That isn't quite true. At least, while risk-reward may be something we are used to, no successful smuggler gambles his well being on impartial chance. Those who can, cheat. Those who can't, avoid it. Look at Mr. Karrde, after all. You think he gambles? Sure, he balances risk and reward, as you said, but he doesn't do so recklessly. He weighs all the pros and cons very carefully, tries every angle and tries to shift the balance as much as possible.
Don't excuse your proclivity to gambling as a result of your career choice.