The Resistance: Avalon - 2019 Match 2 Game Thread


#222

Which leaves me with the possibility that we could have a Dave, Casey, and Scott evil trio. But Casey could have given the OC to Dave then Dave could have vetted Casey as Good.

I could have really used that 2nd OC card here. As is, I’m not sure if there’s a logical way to proceed, which means I’ll have to make a guess on card distribution. I’ll wait for more input though as that NC needs to be in Good hands.


#223

If he doesn’t get outed, he’s protected an evil on the first team. Himself.


#224

Then all of team 1 would have been suspect, and that would hurt if there were 2 evils there. By outing himself, he gave you a half-trustworthy status since it was less likely that there were 2 evils on team 1.


#225

Purely from the facts we have, the possible evil teams are:

Label Kane Casey scott Dave Snebmi rowe rho / soon Team 1 Team 2/3
A X X X 3 1
B X X X 2 1
C X X X 2 1
D X X X 1 2
E X X X 2 2
F X X X 2 2
G X X X 2 1
H X X X 1 2
I X X X 1 2
J X X X 1 1
K X X X 1 1

I’ve combined myself and soon as neither of us has been on a mission and we can’t both be evil so it cuts down the number of rows.

Edited to remove a few impossible rows: I’d forgotten to remove ones where Casey and Snebmi were both good.

Edited to add row labels and team counts.


#226

How does him being declared good by someone make him suspect? I’m really not following that line at all.


#227

That may be too cunning for me, what does it mean?

Edit: Some of them seem wildly unlikely.


#228

Sorry. Horizontal rows are different possible situations. X indicates that player is evil in that combination.

And yes, some of them are wildly unlikely but they all still fit the absolute facts we have.

Edit: I’m hoping it’ll make a good checklist from which we can start to cross off the ones that really don’t fit with incidental evidence such as voting records and choices of who to reveal to. Also I’m about to go and edit it as I realise I’ve failed to remove some definitely impossible options.


#229

Getting yourself (falsely) declared good carries a good amount of risk early in the game, since that next person would be the logical target to get a chain of trust going. You risk exposing 2 evils, and it doesn’t really clear your name, it just casts a pall over the entire team 1.


#230

What’s the evidence for 2 evils on team 1?


#231

Maybe you should label these for discussion, and rank them. E.g. I’d discount row 1 — having all 3 evils present on team 1 and then only 1 evil present on team 2 and 3 doesn’t really fit well with what’s happened. How did team 1 avoid double or triple fail, and why didn’t team 2 fail?


#232

OK, I’ve given them labels and added a count of evil players in each of the quest teams so far.

I’ve deliberately not ordered them to keep everything as fact and avoid adding any of my own bias.


#233

The 1-2 scenarios make the most sense to me right now. I can’t imagine a scenario in which there was only a single evil on mission 2.


#234

Sorry for my late response, my schedule means I am unable to do anything or even read for hour intervals, and I had a five minute break to respond but ran out of time.

I leave for an hour, the mission fails, and some people say I signaled for that to happen?

I mean, I don’t have much of a defense, but here’s my main one (albeit one that other people have brought up): If Dave and I are Evil, when the spotlight pointed at me, why the hell wouldn’t Dave fail it while there was no chance of a double, it would sow confusion, we would be up 2-0, and I would have the next set of plot cards?

That’s something I wouldn’t be able to wrap my brain around.

My two most likely scenarios:

  1. Two Evils. They didn’t manage to single-fail M2 but succeeded this time.
  2. One Evil trying to cause confusion.

Edit: My post is out of context because of my absence. Sorry.


#235

I’m inclined to disbelieve any team where Kane and Casey are both evil. Firstly they managed to avoid the double fail. Secondly a conflict there will tend to take them both off the next team. Then if good lucks into a successful team, that’s pretty much game over for evil.

Also to me.


#236

This is really helpful rho, thanks.


#237

And to me. Note that Dave is evil in all the 1-2 scenarios.


#238

I agree there was probably two Evils on M2, but are we automatically discounting 2-2 situations? Not that it’s likely but I’m curious if there’s some piece of logic I’m not seeing. I’m not defending Dave - if it was 2-2 he can still be Evil - but I want to know.


#239

If there’s a Dave-Snebmi combo though, I still don’t understand why mission 2 passed, with the Spotlight in play. And if the evil combo on that mission was Dave-Scott, Scott could’ve put the Spotlight on Dave instead, and he could have failed it.

Note that I’m discounting any scenario in which I’m evil. Obviously I know I’m not, but also I don’t think good could possibly win if I was. Or at least it’d be ridiculously more difficult than it is now.


#240

I don’t understand the question.


#241

It’s entirely possible it was 2-2, just seems a lot more unlikely. Did anyone note any signaling for mission 1?