Kane whispers to CraigM.
Aye45
Sorry, clearly can’t read on my phone this morning.
For those who want it, this is my day 1 summary:
Day 1
Perky (Fortune Teller?) suggests that one of Lantz / Scott is the Demon
Craigm / Perky
Rowe / Lantz
Scott / Perky
Craigm / Juan
Jostly (Investigator?) says one of Rowe / Craigm is the Poisoner
Kane / Perky
Kane / Scott
Kane / Jostly
Rowe (Washerwoman?) says he knows one of Lantz / unnamed is a certain role
Kane / Scott
Matt claims to be a Recluse
Juan / Matt
Matt nominates Perky
Juan supports the nomination
Yes: Matt, Juan
Rowe volunteers for execution
Scott nominates Rowe
Yes: Jostly, Juan, Kane, Lantz
Lantz nominates Craig and is immediately executed
Juan whispers to Craig
Lantz whispers to CraigM.
Kane whispers to CraigM.
Perky also fills up Craig’s message list.
But really you’re betting a lot on the idea that I could be the imp, and killing me would win the game. If it doesn’t, you still have the possibility of a poisoner that calls into question anything you learn during the night.
i guess I just prefer the methodical approach. Get rid of the poisoner first, so you eliminate the risk of the undertaker being poisoned when they report the result. Added bonus: if perky is the fortune teller, we have a chance to get a trustworthy reading out of him. Delaying the hunt for a poisoner just reduces our chances of ever trusting any info.
That was my argument for executing a possible poisoner on the first day, and I don’t think it’s any less urgent now.
The thing is that by killing you (if you are not the Imp) we can confirm Rowe is the poisoner and other stuff (that there’s no spy, which would validate the undertaker info from now on, specially since he’s still hidden and thus an unlikely target for the poisoner). This is huge and will possibly give us pretty much the evil trio due to other inferences.
By killing Rowe we get rid of the poisoner if he’s one, but there are permutations where Rowe is not the poisoner. Specially a Spy pretending to be an undertaker. So we would be still be in doubt about pretty much everything we are in doubt now.
If we are to be methodical, it’s you who needs to go first, since it resolves more unknowns. Specially because it’s early and we can afford another night with Rowe as the poisoner (if you are not the Imp) if it means starting to nail down a lot of roles. Specially since the evil team gave us one extra turn by not killing anyone.
Again, even though I suspect Rowe more than you, we have more to win by killing you.
I mean, I get the argument you’re making. I disagree about the certainty as well as the relative importance. If you execute me and you don’t win, I can at least see some more permutations that I don’t think you could discard. Off the top of my notepad:
- Rowe is not the poisoner, but someone else is, and I was poisoned the first night (low probability, not neglible)
- I was the imp and there is a scarlet woman instead of a poisoner
And I don’t see any way that my killing will help you distinguish for sure between those two. Even if the latter were true, and the undertaker reported “imp”, would you trust it? How do you know that they are not evil or poisoned?
I mean it will only “resolve more unknowns” if you make some assumptions that I at least have not seen anything to warrant assuming those.
So no, I think you’re wrong in that we have more to win by executing me. And it’s frankly a bit frustrating that we’re thinking about leaving a prime poisoner suspect alive for the second night in a row, when it puts everything we learn by information abilities in doubt.
No Scarlett woman, or if there’s a scarlet woman, we know we can trust the undertaker. The undertaker having guessed Lantz role could only be the spy if he’s evil, and we have a Baron.
Yes, but you wouldn’t know if there was an imp/scarlet woman combo, or the undertaker lied about seeing the imp executed, would you?
And 1- you being poisoned the first night would confirm a poisoner, even if it’s not Rowe, again, clearing the undertaker, perhaps the best information giving role while he remains hidden and thus unlikely to be poisoned.
Killing you will give us some definitive info: we can trust the undertaker, and some very likely info (it’s unlikely you were randomly poisoned, so likely Rowe is the poisoner).
I think Craig should be able to confirm I’m not the poisoner without killing anyone, unless I was given faulty information by Lantz or our gamemaster.
We would.
First, you claimed a role very early, without consulting. That means that if you are evil you are the Imp or the Spy (only way to know who to claim so early).
So you could be evil and the Spy. That means the undertaker is good (because there’s no other way he could have guessed Lantz), and again no Scarlet woman since there’s no evil slot ready, there being a Baron in play.
So we kill you and one of:
1- We win, you are the Imp and there’s no Scarlett woman in play.
2- You are the Imp and there’s a Scarlett woman. That means no poisoner and a cleared undertaker (who identifies you as the Imp. He can’t be the spy because there can’t be scarlet woman, baron and spy in play at the same time). This also means Perky’s information is either good or he’s flat out lying (and is likely the Imp if so). But he can’t be confused.
3- You are the Spy. This also clears the undertaker. No scarlett woman. Also, no poisoner, so the above about Perky applies.
4- You are good. This means we have a poisoner and this also clears the undertaker. It also means there’s a high likelihood rowe is the poisoner.
There’s no scenario in which we execute you and we don’t learn a shitton of stuff.
I think that at this point Craig can deal me into the info repository but I am going to let him make that determination as he sees fit.
If you are not the poisoner, then jostly’s chances of evilness are 6/7. And the above applies. This would mean either jostly is evil or he was poisoned, again, clearing the undertaker.
Yeah, I see you’re still making assumptions that don’t follow from what’s been posted publicly, so I’ll drop it. Perhaps we’ll all learn what you’re basing them on, and it’ll make more sense. For now it feels like you’re building a narrative to either get me killed specifically or delay the killing of the poisoner.
What assumptions, please do tell? Craig has very clearly stated there’s a Baron and that the drunk can be nailed down to two roles. What other assumption have I made in the above?
It does feel that you are defending yourself when we have a lot to learn from your execution.