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.

Fine, I am a cultistsss!!! that's like a quadruple plural so that means I am every single member of team cultist. Lynch me and you instantly win the game.


Yes inquisitor, you never said IG was innocent but implied it with your "theory". So your theory is bunk, you never had a theory, you just wanted to hide behind target numero uno, me.

Drk_O, paul, me, IG, LL, Bishop, Scott, etc. We all either defended me or allowed GND to be lynched so why aren't you going after them?

Oh, because my shadow hides you better.

halonachos wrote:Fine, I am a cultistsss!!! that's like a quadruple plural so that means I am every single member of team cultist. Lynch me and you instantly win the game.


Yes inquisitor, you never said IG was innocent but implied it with your "theory". So your theory is bunk, you never had a theory, you just wanted to hide behind target numero uno, me.

halonachos wrote:Drk_O, paul, me, IG, LL, Bishop, Scott, etc. We all either defended me or allowed GND to be lynched so why aren't you going after them?

Oh, because my shadow hides you better.

Look at you up on your high horse...

((Provides good shadow? xD))

Drk_O's okey-dokey in my book, as is Scott.

No. My theory is not bunk. Scott, and Ferrett seem to understand it. I forgot Stynier voted for IGL, so, my theory isn't bunk, yet again. Stynier voted for IGL, since you two were going horribly off-topic.

Sorry I was away. Interview. Have we decided on anyone besides me yet?

Hopefully...

Inqu, you seem to ignore anything suspicous about Scott. Some of which was aimed at you.

Does him agreeing with you mean that you're ignoring this?

I guess it all depends on when it happened.

Day one hating on me;

No problem.

Day two before I put up my theory;

No problem.

After I put up my theory;

Heresy!

I'll go search for the offending posts.

Meh just read them.

One was "...fabrication by cultists..."

I will admit, it was the first big post of day two.

"...How do you know Lann is possessed?..."

Which I had no way of knowing, it was a *gasps* joke.

I still think the ""psyky (sp?)"" is a 'lil suspicious from you.

You shouldn't discard things just cause it's in Day One.

You seem to think that Day One means nothing. It means alot. What happens in Day One affects the entire game, it's what fuels Day Two and it's very important.

I know, my whole theory was based on day one.

A cultist wrote:Fine, I am a cultistsss!!! that's like a quadruple plural so that means I am every single member of team cultist. Lynch me and you instantly win the game

He said it, get voting!

EDIT- Forgot to put my part in!

It's a violation of the rules to edit your post and not say why it was edited...

Dammit he did say why. Statement retracted.

Lord: Was hoping I wouldn't need to explain my absense and lack of voting A) a second time and B) at all.
A) I stated back in day 1 that I found day 1 voting a pointless excerise that must be done that I find distasteful (see - oh look a shadow KILL)
B) Currently just had the last exam for a semester I can't afford to fail. While yes I had the time to write up a few tactica, I didn't have the willpower to post here more and stress myself out with mindless accusations.
That's for my silence.

Why am I cryptic? Because I always am, so many past games have shown that nomatter how basic I try to state my language, my need to state the entire truth as I know it leads to a language that borderlines on the absurd.

As for why am I voting Nachoes? Cause of silly things like the top of this page.

Ferrett, I'm sorry if the only way to get anything different out of syphonius is to act unorthodox. I tried using straight logic with him and he pretty much just ignores it.

I also think that my last two pages worth of grilling may of had gotten something from him or are you forgetting about those?

From what I've done I gather that syphonius is most likely one of the possessed or at least on team demon and is attacking the townies that were the most suspicious during day one. You come along and say ou vote for me for "silly lthings like the top of this page" and seem to forget that I have been wearing a nice little chefs hat for a couple of pages.

So, ferrett, if I am listing my suspicions of Syphonius and you cast a vote for me with the only logic behind it being "silly things like the top of this page" you're just voting for me because I put Syphonius in the spotlight.

Cept don't the daemons have to beat both the cultists and the Townies to win? And you've just admitted you look most cultist like, daemon hunting or no.

Nope, demons win if the cultists win. Its just that even if all of the cultists are lynched, the remaining demons must be banished before the pro-town can win. Demons and cultists are on the same team, but demons know whos a cultist and who isn't. In theory, the demons should be trying to point out who is town to the cultists while managing to avoid being lynched by cultists.

As we saw with stynier, demons can be night-killed by cultists, but them being night-killed just means that they can possess another player. Those players being cultists and psykers, with there being 4 or so cultists, 1 rogue psyker, and 1 pro-town psyker I think that stynier possessed the pro-town psyker in order to give his team an advantage.

Which also goes into my points about Syphonius's failed logic. If he thinks that Stynier was voting against pro-town targets then IG would be pro-town. He also indicated IG as being the one possessed, and also indicated bishop as being the pro-town psyker. All in all, this is impossible unless he believes one of these statements to be untrue.

He considers the one about stynier voting against town to be untrue, yet why would a demon risk voting out a cultist if doing so would hurt his own chances of success?

Syphonius indicated that Stynier voted for IG because IG went OT, but like I said the votes were tied and doing so would sentence IG to death as others began voting for him as well. If IG died and was a cultist then Stynier would lose a potential possession victim and would hurt team anti-town in voting. So, I believe that IG is innocent because of the fact that Stynier was a demon and tried to get IG out using OT as a shield.

I'm going to get mighty suspicous of Nachos if he doesn't stop saying 'grilling'. It's making me hungry!

Well yeah, you can't grill nachos though so I should be safe. However, bishop was grilling nachos so he's lucky thi isn't the RVS anymore.

pardon nachos, one little question. You do know the rules say the daemon can only possess someone once, after which they are killed like any cultists? Or was that rule removed?

I'm asking because you mentioned earlier wishing to refrain from killing symph until stynier is bannished from him.

Hold on, i'll quote the rules. BRB

Ah, here we are:

Possession works like this, after a Daemon player dies they have the option to try to latch onto someone's mind before they fall back into the warp. A Daemon can attempt to possess someone once they are dead, they can only possess one person. They also have to PM me who they wish to possess, I will then PM the person they possess if it goes through. Once a possession is successful, the two may communicate freely via PM throughout the game.

The Daemon players will know who the cultists are, but not the other way around. If the Daemon tries to possess a person who is unable to be possessed, then it fails and they leave the game as normal. If the player they possess is on the innocent side, they join the chaos side until the Daemon is removed. If the person the Daemon is possessing is killed the Daemon leaves the game, as they may only attempt to possess someone once.

Okay then Paul.

unvote: No lynch

Not sure what Syphonius is, but the ratio of possessable pro-town to possessable anti town favors the anti-town.

So Syphonius should be a rogue psyker or cultist in terms of probability.

@Anyone who says I agree with Inq_syph.
I am not agreeing. If I agreed with his accusations I would have voted according to them. I have not.

VikingScott wrote:@Anyone who says I agree with Inq_syph.
I am not agreeing. If I agreed with his accusations I would have voted according to them. I have not.

halonachos wrote:Okay then Paul.

unvote: No lynch

Not sure what Syphonius is, but the ratio of possessable pro-town to possessable anti town favors the anti-town.

So Syphonius should be a rogue psyker or cultist in terms of probability.

So... now I am a rogue psyker? Why? One million times why?

"Becuase Stynier possessed me?"

Wrong, you yourself said that there were two other people with his voting style, you then stated that it would be illogical for him to possess him, since it would be "obvious"...

You proceeded to accuse me of being possessed, for I was not like his voting style.

You then rambled off a list of people not like his voting style, and said it would be illogical for them to be possessed by him.

*psst, look at the above two lines*

halonachos wrote:Syphonius indicated that Stynier voted for IG because IG went OT, but like I said the votes were tied and doing so would sentence IG to death as others began voting for him as well. If IG died and was a cultist then Stynier would lose a potential possession victim and would hurt team anti-town in voting. So, I believe that IG is innocent because of the fact that Stynier was a demon and tried to get IG out using OT as a shield.

Or... He didn't want the game to be an off-topic jumbled mess, as you said, it would have killed him, though he had plenty of time left, so he simply could have scared him, without putting him in any real danger...

halonachos wrote:Nope, demons win if the cultists win. Its just that even if all of the cultists are lynched, the remaining demons must be banished before the pro-town can win. Demons and cultists are on the same team, but demons know whos a cultist and who isn't. In theory, the demons should be trying to point out who is town to the cultists while managing to avoid being lynched by cultists.

As we saw with stynier, demons can be night-killed by cultists, but them being night-killed just means that they can possess another player. Those players being cultists and psykers, with there being 4 or so cultists, 1 rogue psyker, and 1 pro-town psyker I think that stynier possessed the pro-town psyker in order to give his team an advantage.

Which also goes into my points about Syphonius's failed logic. If he thinks that Stynier was voting against pro-town targets then IG would be pro-town. He also indicated IG as being the one possessed, and also indicated bishop as being the pro-town psyker. All in all, this is impossible unless he believes one of these statements to be untrue.

He considers the one about stynier voting against town to be untrue, yet why would a demon risk voting out a cultist if doing so would hurt his own chances of success?

Not failed logic, see above quote.

You honestly think you're grilling me?

*Takes a long drag from a bubble pipe*

^^^^ As to the top quote, 'tis a shame... ^^^^

Syphonius are you aware of the story of Goldilocks?

Your "hole" in my logic is complete rubbish.

BrotherStynier knew he had enough time to unvote IGLannister, and he also knew that voting for Lann would scare him straight.

So, are you defending Stynier's vote post mortem?


But yes, Goldilocks, this may seem trivial and childish but I think it works.

Bishop, LL, Drk, and I were incredibly talkative and even though Bishop and LL played similarly they were "too hot". A person who talks a lot is often targeted by town as hiding something so why would he go there?

Paul, Fifty, scarper, and Vadem played too little and hardly talked, making them "too cold".

IG, Ferrett, scott, and yourself talked often but not too much and used logic in your postings. You guys managed to be "just right". As to why I don't suspect IG is because of the voting, Stynier was just trying to fit in with the town by removing someone who was OT. Now, there may have been a day in between Stynier's vote and the deadline, but in that time many people had made up their minds, or had voted for him and may not revisit the vote until after the end of day one.

As to why I don't have suspicion on ferrett, I do, but I don't believe him to be possessed. Your mood swing is what made me think that you were now stynier's puppet. Ferrett has yet to change his posting style and scott is still acting like scott. Scott hasn't said too much, but that is probably because he is afraid to push anyone's buttons and wants to act as pro-town as possible.

I am pro-town so I'm not acting I'm being

Would you act like a heretic if you were pro-town? The answer is probably no, so you're acting pro-town. The way you flip on your votes is almost not pro-town, but as I said: Indecision is the key to flexibility.