Drk_Oblitr8r's Genestealer! Game 1: Over, Imperials Win.

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Arctik_Firangi**

Thor665 wrote: That said I still think we'd do better lynching Sister Joan then lotg.

Sorry about that, I misinterpreted your intent because you should have 'than' rather than 'then'.

**ghosty**

i change my opinions.

i unvote thor

and i vote LoG

**SagesStone**

Lord-Loss wrote:Not_U has been constantly shifiting his vote and opinion of people.

I will unvote: Thor665

Vote:Not_u

OCC: I always change my mind, it's normal for me. Just look at the topics I make asking advice about starting an army only to end up with something else entirely different. Or even look at the Inquisitorial Rolepaly on this forum, I couldn't make up my mind and went through so many character changes the person running it told me to stay with the one I have. Sometimes I've even considered playing Tzeetch just because of this

So I will change my vote back to what it was and not change it even if I change my mind now. Because if I don't you'll see it change many more times. Basically I'm going to limit myself to three votes per day now so as to not be so annoying with my vote constantly changing.

Vote: Lord of Ghosts

**Arctik_Firangi**

Unvote: Lord-Loss

Vote: n0t_u

[OOC: Damnit, you'd better be innocent, Lord-Loss.]

"n0t_u, I am now very suspicious of you. You are unable to explain any of your motives, and you lapse into irrelevant self-narrative when asked to do so. In response to being challenged, you change your mind... your brown-nosing is noted, as is your unconstructive voting. I can clearly see that no one is defending you, but it matters not should you turn out to be a traitor - it will simply indicate that your allies are more clever than you have been."

**SagesStone**

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Unvote: Lord-Loss

Vote: n0t_u

[OOC: Damnit, you'd better be innocent, Lord-Loss.]

"n0t_u, I am now very suspicious of you. You are unable to explain any of your motives, and you lapse into irrelevant self-narrative when asked to do so. In response to being challenged, you change your mind... your brown-nosing is noted, as is your unconstructive voting. I can clearly see that no one is defending you, but it matters not should you turn out to be a traitor - it will simply indicate that your allies are more clever than you have been."

I voted for LoG originally because he seemed suspicious and now I keep it as my vote because, I am also tired of changing my vote all the time. My motive is that he just seems suspicious to me and I am voting just because of that. He just seems like one of the traitors to me. Brown-nosing? I've never intended to use such a crappy tactic, if I did it could be a traitor and end up bad for me. Which is why I don't

It might not matter if I turn out to be a traitor, but it would matter if I was an important Loyalist character. Whenever I have changed my mind it has been because the new vote seemed better than the old one. When I unvote and do not vote for a new one it is because I'm not 100% and don't want to accidentally lynch the wrong person.

OCC:This is the first time I've ever played a game like this though so I might just be explaining my vote poorly. I don't know, my reason for changing my vote seems fine for me. Don't you change your vote if you are unsure or think you might be making a mistake? Am I playing the game right if I see everyone as a traitor and just vote for the most likely at the time? Like I've mentioned I've never played a game like this before so I kind of suck at it

**Arctik_Firangi**

n0t_u wrote:
It might not matter if I turn out to be a traitor, but it would matter if I was an important Loyalist character.

[OOC: That is a valid point, but since you are new to the game, excuse me for reminding you that you should keep it to yourself if you are an important character. By all means reveal yourself should you be on the brink of a lynch, but don't hint at it beforehand. You do us no favours with ambiguity if you are indeed our Inquisitor or Priest, and you do us less should you end up dead. If you are neither, then I find the claim that you 'might' be pretty scummy indeed. Now you've thrown this handful of dust into the air, it's very hard to be sure about anything, but one thing is certain - if you aren't a traitor, then the traitors already know. For that reason alone, and apart from my other suspicions, I hope that you are neither of import, nor traitor. My vote stands for now.]

**Thor665**

n0t_u wrote:So I will change my vote back to what it was and not change it even if I change my mind now.

::chokes on chaw slightly and has to spit out the whole glob upon the floor.::

The hell?

That is by far one of the worst ideas I've heard offered here thus far. Your vote is basically perma-locked (and while we're at it, perma-locked on someone I don't think is a good option for Day 1 lynch also) and if you change your vote you'll come across as a liar. But at the same time you have to choose to do either that or possibly ignore strongly compelling evidence later. How can you possibly believe this is a good idea simply from a bit of pressure from Lord-Loss? Why would you set an arbitrary number on the amount you would want to switch votes?

@Lord-Loss - how do you consider n0t_u's vote hopping (which I will not deny exists) as particularly different from your own? As we progress in discussions isn't it to be expected that opinions might change and consequently votes?

@Arctik - me am english right gud (my bad, I understand where you got that from now).

@Drk_O - I Request Vote Count

((OOC - I think we're getting very close to a lotg lynch right now and I still think it's a bad idea as everyone who's voting for him is barely bothering to even explain other then he seems "flaky" while ignoring the fact he is basically as "flaky" in his regular, non-game postings. I think we have a couple much more viable options for scum.))

**Lord-Loss**

Thor, I have switched my vote from LoG, to you and to Not_u.

Hardly vote hopping.

You have switched from me, to LoG and then to Manchu.

**Thor665**

Lord-Loss wrote:You have switched from me, to LoG and then to Manchu.

You are wrong. I have never voted for lotg. ((Drk_O mistakenly listed me as such in one vote count and I had to correct him)). I voted you via an openly declared random vote.
I have also not intrinsically said going through multiple votes is itself scummy - you have said this. I asked why you thought it was scummy in his (n0t_u's) particular case and you came back trying to tell me who I have or have not voted for.

How does that answer the question?

**Thor665**

Lord-Loss wrote:Thor, I have switched my vote from LoG, to you and to Not_u.

Hardly vote hopping.

Besides his last switch back to lotg hasn't n0t_u only gone through 3 people?

**Lord-Loss**

He votes for me cause I believe the Eldar that there are two traitors. But then votes for LoG cause the Eldar said something......

**Thor665**

Lord-Loss wrote:He votes for me cause I believe the Eldar that there are two traitors. But then votes for LoG cause the Eldar said something......

Well, not entirely true as I recall ((read)) it.

His vote for you was (and I will agree this is poor logic, FYI) based on the concept that you agreed too readily with the Eldar that their were traitors aboard and that the Eldar didn't somehow kill Smash ((as n0t_u outlines on page 5 where he suggests the only person who wouldn't suspect the Eldar equally was probably one of the actual killers)). I think this is silly, as we can all verify that the holy seals and locking mechanisms on the entrapment chair are intact - therefore it is clear that the Eldar didn't kill Smash. However, his vote for you was more in line with how readily you ruled the Eldar out, not with how readily you agreed with it or didn't (he did accuse you, erroneously, of sympathy with it, maybe that's what you're recalling?)

I'll agree with you on his vote towards lotg - he accepted the Eldar's ((Drk_O's out of game threat for preventing Eldar abuse)) line about how people shouldn't hurt him or they will be trying to cause all of our doom. lotg hurt the eldar, was locked in the closet, and has had one or two votes turned against him for that reason.

In any case, I'll agree with you on both counts that he used poor logic, no doubt. But does using poor logic equate to vote hopping? Almost certainly lotg has changed his vote more then any of the rest of us - if vote hoping is scum behavior why not vote for him instead of n0t_u? Clearly there's something drawing you to n0t_u that isn't just vote hopping (I define vote hopping as changing one's vote around a lot - if you're using a different definition let me know)

**Lord-Loss**

He just seems like a traitor. He doesnt seem to want to contribute to the discussion and stated that discussion somehow 'gives the traitors a upperhand'.

Now If he was a traitor, then to him we would be traitors. He always seems like he cant pick a strategy to root traitors out and is constantly switching his opinion. From one person to the next, then back to the first person.

**Thor665**

The shifting isn't worrisome to me particularly in and of itself. I would note that his shift often seems to coincide with whoever appears to be the easiest to lynch at any given time, which can be a bit more suspicious.

But then again we have a few people who are voting in a somewhat similar manner - and of course to some extent such shifting is natural as some people will pick up on and agree with the same tells as someone else. (one of the [many] reasons I feel it's important to have people state their reasoning is because it helps track this habit).

I'm still not sure I see him doing any "constant" switching that is any more or less constant then a couple other people.

When did he state discussion gives the traitors an upperhand? I do seem to recall something like this being said by someone, but I couldn't find it in the transcripts.

**Drk_Oblitr8r**

Thor665 wrote:@Drk_O - I Request Vote Count

(OOC: Now that there's been some changes certainly)

pg#13=+=Voting Count

-Ultrafool (-)
-Orkeosaurus (-)
1-Thor665 ( Manchu)
-Arctik_Firangi (-)
1-Manchu ( Thor665)
-Lord-Loss (-)
1-n0t_u (Lord-Loss, Arctik_Firangi)
-Ghosty (-)
-Mekboy (-)
4-Lord of Ghosts- (ghosty, Owain, Orkeosaurus, n0t_u)
-Owain (-)

No Lynch-
Not Voting- Ultrafool, Mekkboy

6 to lynch
96 hours remaining

"With a little more focus, we might actually GET SOMEWHERE" facepalmed the Eldar

Thor665 wrote:I have said we should lynch Joan.

(OOC: AND LYNCH THE ONLY WOMAN ABOARD???)

n0t_u wrote:So I will change my vote back to what it was and not change it even if I change my mind now. Because if I don't you'll see it change many more times. Basically I'm going to limit myself to three votes per day now so as to not be so annoying with my vote constantly changing.

Vote: Lord of Ghosts

"No, vote alot" The Eldar communicated "You Mon Keighs might actually get somewhere"

[EDIT: I accidentally had Arctik down for two votes]

[EDIT2] I'm starting to do this more regularly, so I'm going to leave this friendly reminder here

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:5) If you anticipate being unavailable for more than 3 days, please post a notice to that effect in the thread. Treat this game as a commitment. Be considerate – don’t leave us hanging.

Prods aka 'That guy hasn't posted in a while'

1)A player will get prodded if they have been inactive for three days.

2)Weekends count as one day. (ie If your last post is on a Thursday you will not be prodded till the Monday following)

3) If you do not pick up your prod/post in game within 48 hours of it being sent I will start to look for a replacement.

4) Please post in game if you are going to be unavailable for more than 48 hours.

**Lord-Loss**

Not_u wrote:it's not the time to debate this. If we do it mearly gives the enemy an edge over us./quote]

OOC: Top of page 6

**Thor665**

Arctik Firangi wrote:"An Imperial Commissar watching me study xenos is surely shirking his own duties,"

Not_u wrote:Chaos can take root anywhere, he would keep watch on all in his presence. But, I digress, it's not the time to debate this. If we do it mearly gives the enemy an edge over us.

He appeared to simply be saying it wasn't the time to debate about whether or not the Commissar in question was shirking his duties - the implication being that we should discuss matters more at hand, like finding traitors.

It feels like you're taking his comment out of context.

**Lord-Loss**

Oh, didnt see that.

Well then:

Unvote: Not_u

But we must make a decision soon, its better to lynch anyone then no-one.

**lord of the ghosts**

ghosty wrote:i change my opinions.

i unvote thor

and i vote LoG

Why?
If you give no reason, I will vote for your death.

In fact, vote ghosty
No reason, I think you don't care who dies, making you a genestealer.

Owain wrote:I maintain my vote for lord of ghosts. He bluntly declares his innocence, begs and grovels when cornered, and his excessive abuse of the Eldar is an overplayed attempt at appearing xenophobic when he is a xeno himself.

You act like you would kill me as if I was a xeno, I am trying to kill the REAL xenos also. I am cornered, but I think we should focus on somebody else, I am distracting your xeno-killing cause.

**Lord-Loss**

LoG, earlier this age, you voted for thor without a reason.

**lord of the ghosts**

Lord-Loss wrote:LoG, earlier this age, you voted for thor without a reason.

I did?
sorry thor.

**Orkeosaurus**

ORKEO STILL DON'T KNOW WHO ALIEN IS.

ORKEO NOT THINK JOAN OR THOR ALIEN, BOTH TOO PARANOID. ORKEO HAVE NO OTHER IDEA.

**SagesStone**

OCC: You shouldn't look too much into my lack of contribution at times. Firstly I live in a different time zone so there will be fairly big gaps at times if there are multiple people in the same time zone (diffrent from mine same for them) having a discussion. Other than that either I have nothing to say and don't feel like simply writing up random space filling crap or I'm busy as my finals actually end tomorrow.

I simply thought that restricting my voting would help with how much I change my mind at times, but I guess it was a pretty stupid idea

**Drk_Oblitr8r**

lord of the ghosts wrote:
Lord-Loss wrote:LoG, earlier this age, you voted for thor without a reason.

I did?
sorry thor.

That was due to an error on my part, remember?

**Arctik_Firangi**

In these last desperate few hours, I really must insist that we put an end to petty matters of "you voted for me, you're a traitor". It is an idiotic line of argument, and anyone who continues, without further justification, to do so is being a deliberate distraction.

**Owain**

OOC: Just a notification; I'll be leaving for Thanksgiving on Tuesday night and may not have Internet access while I'm there-- If not, I'll be back on Sunday at the very latest.

**Thor665**

Drk_Oblitr8r wrote:
lord of the ghosts wrote:
Lord-Loss wrote:LoG, earlier this age, you voted for thor without a reason.

I did?
sorry thor.

That was due to an error on my part, remember?

((OOC my recorded vote on him was due to your error - his vote on me was an actual one. I hold no grudges in any way shape or form, of course. This is a game and people will vote for other people - that's part of it. I will note lotg, that Lord-Loss might not have been seeking an apology for me, but perhaps more of an explanation from you.))

::scoops out a fresh wad of chaw and inserts it into his mouth and sighs deeply as he begins to chew.:: We are starting to get closer to the deadline and I don't see much activity in the Sister Joan area. This is probably my fault for not managing to properly or clearly convey how scummy I feel her actions have and continue to be. However I will admit I am at a loss as to what else to say and no one has asked for any clarification on my thoughts either - so I presume you all feel I'm grasping at straws or somesuch. As we approach our deadline it becomes fairly clear that I'm not going to manage to convince any sort of plurality of you to vote for her. Since I feel a no lynch is our worst possible vote choice I feel it's important at this juncture to take steps to assure that we at least lynch somebody even if it's not who I think is most guilty.

The two available candidates with any particular traction are lotg (4 votes) and n0t_u (1 vote). (My vote on Sister Joan has garnered no support, and since I know I'm innocent I have little interest in supporting the vote on me). Though I managed to talk Lord-Loss out of his vote for n0t_u I am hardly convinced of n0t_u's innocence. Also, in the most simplistic sense, though I don't particularly think n0t_u is overly scummy I do think he is more scummy looking then lotg.

Unvote
Vote: n0t_u

For the record I am not happy with my vote. To be honest if anybody else wanted to vote for the Sister ((Manchu)) or someone who never bothers to explain their vote but often hops on active seeming lynch targets ((ghosty)) I will happily back that play as I feel those I have listed are more likely to be scum then n0t_u. But, due to the lack of voting and the fact I feel lotg is less scummy than n0t_u that is where my vote is going for the nonce.

We really need to get some votes on the table and hopefully some final discussion soon.

**Thor665**

Owain wrote:OOC: Just a notification; I'll be leaving for Thanksgiving on Tuesday night and may not have Internet access while I'm there-- If not, I'll be back on Sunday at the very latest.

((OOC - enjoy the feasting upon various foodstuffs whilst you are gone.

But, with your departure are you comfortable and confident with your vote on lotg as the most likely scum? In my assessment we have seen a paucity of true evidence for that particular bandwagon.))

**Thor665**

((Re-reading I realized that lotg has a vote on ghosty that came in after Drk_O's last count - therefore))

Unvote
Vote: Ghosty

**lord of the ghosts**

nevermind.