There's also the whole concealing of the information today as well. Eli comes off as being opportunistic with revealing the info after having already posted something else. I'm sure you'll agree that the info he revealed had a huge impact. I can't help but question why he wouldn't lead with it first as opposed to slinging slander to start.

@Scar:

Garen actually had a chance to do something. Given that I spoke up about killing, and if he was possessed, he could have easily said his result was on me which would have "fixed" a lot of things and put the suspicion on you, Eli, or himself (or just himself if we go with the whole repossession doesn't happen -- but given that his ability hit you again I don't see why it isn't possible for repossessions to retarget granted it's not an ability coming from a player although even Garen can't control who he targets). Still seems more likely to me that it is Eli who is possessed.

Not to mention the chance of him being repossessed is quite high if you focus on just the 3 of you. 33.3% if I'm not mistaken.

Im tempted to just voe for myself and go enjoy the dead chat before town officially lose tomorrow, since with 'Im not changing my vote no matter what, its essentially I get lynched, or a no lynch. Lose-lose.

But lets humour everyone.

You asked for my unpossessed message details, without providing your own for comparison. I mean this is pretty obvious. "Hey Eli, you think your message was different, mine gave x information, what did yours say?"

You are upset you havent had any scum buddies to chat with, in a game where you believe its down to one scum buddy. So if you cant have a chat no one can? And there was no open indication of NeoSilk's role. He acted as if he was also a player freshly possessed and unawares. There are things that led me down my path of believing whatever he was, it wasnt standard...but we're talking minute details of a chat that no one has even seen, so I am not going to go into it until post game. So yeah, you're whole 'But then the cultist would be exposed!' isnt really on point, since it was reasonable for him to give away nothing, and act like a befuddled player free of possession. We also did not exchange names in the QT, but Neo is the one player I have consistently played with and and can recognise.

I do not think possession works on a once only basis. Stop misrepresenting me. I think I specifically am immune to possession, because I opted not to kill. I believe the act of having the power, and opting out, marked me as an unsuitable target. Think about the flavour for a moment. Its a spirit, looking to kill its way out of here. A host who will not kill, is not a host worth revisiting.

That also leads into my uncertainty about whether possession still rotates - If I believe I expelled the spirit by reaching a previously unknown puzzle mechanic, then it throws doubt onto whether I believe possessions are still naturally rotating. Hence entertaining both possibilities.

Moving on to Garren. You're seriously asking why, when presented with the opportunity, Garren would act in a way which narrowed the suspect pool to two?
To recap, this involves
Garren confirming to one town player, that they're town, buying credibility.
Narrowing the field of players to two players, lets break down the overall game of those two players.
Garren: Mostly been spectating, has provided useful information each day, but has not gotten more than incidental involvement in any conflict.
Elijin: Has spent every day locking horns with the other most active player remaining.

You're right, he totally put himself at risk, by serving up the player you've been at odds with, the whole game.

Back to my original point though, either the possession has moved on kill to Garren, or the possession is no longer mobile, and can only be expelled, according to my thoughts about a prisoners gambit. If you're wondering why this isnt an auto-win for town, you havent done the math. If we've stumbled onto this solution, this late in the game, there isnt enough time for each remaining player to opt out.

The only real path, is to dismiss my assumptions and work on what I know to be true. The possession has been capable of moving, and there is no solid evidence that capability has stopped. I could be making a huge misplay here, but I really dont think it matters, since KoD 'wont change his vote'.

Vote: Garren




Still pretty tempted to vote for myself and go get my questions answered by Alt in dead chat.

It's pretty much you get lynched. I doubt Scar will let a no lynch happen. Besides, you're not doing a very good job of convincing me you're not the best candidate for lynching today. I mean, take a look at this:



Because I'm totally the one under suspicion and must provide something for you to work with, right? That's horrible. You're the one under suspicion. You need to convince me. Since you came out well past the day you claim to have been possessed, you need to prove to me that what you are saying is true or at least convince me it is true. So far, you get a F as a grade.

Tell me, what was his name in the QT then? Is there anything relevant that he said that you can give us to look at? Because I find it hard to believe that not knowing his name you were aware of who he was in that chat. Recognize indeed.

Again with the immune to possession bull. You claim that having not committed a kill makes you immune. Based on what? What concrete proof or reasonable proof/evidence can you put in front of me that gives credit to what you're saying? Flavor? What flavor? I saw nothing that indicated the spirit wouldn't go back to you at all this game. I see nothing different about you that makes you "marked" in any way, shape, or form. As far as I'm concerned, you're just spewing bs like how I was doing when trying to convince people to NL.



And what exactly leads you to this? What sign this game gives credence to what you are saying? And how do you explain me being possessed after you then? Because if you no hitting supposedly changed how rotation works, then why was I possessed and am now not possessed? Oh, you're saying that after you did that and it made one more regular rotation to me it then changed and makes me a liability, right? Nevermind that what you are saying completely contradicts how things have fallen into place with Rubik saying he was no longer possessed, you (later) claiming to be possessed, finally followed by me becoming possessed and it passing on from there. Obviously something happened with me specifically. Do you want me to let you in on a secret? There is nothing that gives credit to what you are saying. All you're doing is spinning a story without anything to back it up.That's worse than what I did because I at least was able to back up what I was saying as a PLAUSIBLE possibility which led to people not going after my death D3. You? You're claiming that your no-hit has changed the nature of the mechanic in a way that it took effect after it acted normally one last time.

As for Garen:

Credibility was never an issue with him. Ever since D2 when he claimed, he's been accepted as having that role. Similar to Numbers and Rubik. So before I go into the rest of your silly post, I must openly wonder at why you want to throw dirt at Garen now. Probably to try and convince me he may be possessed? Alright, let's look at your reasoning. Credibility has already been addressed and is a nonissue. It has no factor into whether or not he is possessed. His role is known to us and we expect him to give us a result to help us narrow the pool of people down. The only question that remains, as voiced by Scar in a way, is ***who*** he confirms as being no possessed. Scar pretty much voiced the question, so I'll go no further with it. If you don't grasp it, that's your own fault.

Narrowing the field to two players. Garen, as scum, has to give us a name. There's only three of us left and he can't name himself. He names Scar. Going with Scar's idea about not being able to be repossessed, then scum-Garen is the only person able to be possessed making him the obvious choice for lynch. To our knowledge Scar was never possessed. He could have named me and have left open the possibility that scar is possessed. He could have named you again. But he didn't. He named Scar and, in the event people believe repossession is not a thing, leaves himself as the only viable person to be lynched. That puts him at unnecessary risk. You'd realize that if you reasoned it out.

Oh I see what you're doing now. You're backtracking about me being possessed due to it stopping on me.

FYI: Rubik killed and possession switched. You didn't kill and possession switched. I killed and possession switched. There is no reason to doubt that possession changes each night regardless of what happens. There's also no reason to believe that you're immune to possession.

I'm going to help you. Do yourself a favor and do what you're tempted to do. Vote yourself so you can show me how wrong I am. We may lose, but at least you can hold that over my head due to how stubborn I am being. At least then you'll get a minor victory in having been right.

I really dont care anymore. I hope scarlet comes back and votes me soon, so we can lose and I can have my questions with Alt answered. I will enjoy knowing that your arrogance and butthurt at me offending you in our initial interaction, led to you being so single minded that you tanked (Or won as scum, I guess) the game.



(Im not going to hammer myself because thats poor sportsmanship.)

Well, since you're opening the door...

Let's be honest. You've done a poor job trying to convince me. Everything you said has a definite degree of uncertainty to it more so than the arguments I fielded during D2. Hell, because of your actions in not coming forth to save Rubik (and you were around long enough to do so) created a very unique and awkward situation for us as town that led to many speculations. Your coming out today has drastically changed things this game in how everything is viewed. And all you can do is field arguments that just do not hold enough water to take seriously.

If you actually made good arguments, I might actually listen to you. Maybe. Problem is is that you haven't made good arguments. I can see no real reason why I should follow what you're saying, and making harsh comments that attempt to make me feel doubt does nothing to aid in your argument either. Am I arrogant? Sure. Am I offended by you? Well, if I am, then I certainly am unaware of it. None of that has a bearing on the arguments presented though. So if you're going to talk bad sportsmanship, perhaps you should review your choice of words.

Self-hammering is hardly bad sportsmanship compared to your words. Regardless, I am content to wait it out till you get hammered by Scar if you don't want to end it yourself.

Or perhaps Scar will do a better job of making valid arguments that make me reconsider my stance given that you haven't been able to.

You've not accepted a thing I have said, all game. Im not going to lengths, because arguing with you is a pointless and tedious chore. Even on day 2, literally everyone except for you said they may not agree with my line of thought, but they understood it. While you ranted about how totally without basis it was.

I have done today, what you did yesterday. I have presented new, unverifiable information. The key difference? You seem to believe leaps of faith in you are totally acceptable, and anything that comes out of my mouth is wrong. There hasnt been a moment where you havent been at odds with me, even when you knew I was town. Yet you think the idea of Garren feeding you the exact player you'd show no hesitation to lynch, isnt worth scrutiny. You also have continuously stated that you dont believe in people being immune to possession due to past possession, then used people being immune to possession to try take away attention from Garren. Well done.

Im not arguing with you, because its a fruitless task. You're too convinced in having everything right, that you wont consider possibilities. I already gave you information that leaves you with no doubt whatsoever that I have seen a possession first hand, yet you in return say I should be giving everything, and that you see no reason for you to volunteer anything first. Right, like Im going to give the player who has tried to lynch me every day it was feasable, the chance to shut me down without anyone else accessing the information.

When scar comes back, if he's interested in a discussion, I will gladly have one with him. But Im tired of watching you act like you're the only one capable of making deductive leaps, assumptions or guesses. And that when anyone else does it, its evidence of scum or bad plays.

If I don't agree with it in the slightest, then I won't even offer something as simple as, "but I understand." D2 with Rubik you were all about lynching him despite the fact that we could have proven him innocent with no problem. There was just one problem. You. You were possessed that Day as per your own words. You wanted Rubik lynched because he may be scum. Could he have been scum? Yes. Everyone in the pro-Rubik group recognized that possibility. We just choose to ignore it in favor of seeing him proven innocent the next day. But even as town, supposedly, you did not bother in the slightest to keep him alive by verifying to us that what he said was the truth. Your actions directly hindered us.

Also, you were the first person to bring up the issue of repossession. I hadn't thought of it. Scarlet didn't think of it (voice it at least). You were the only one to voice it which opened the discussion about the possibility of repossession. Only reason I can see for that is you honestly fear you could get lynched and sought to divert suspicion away from you in some way. After all, there is no proof to offer that you are immune to possession. Unless you're withholding information again. Care to offer any proof? I'm all ears.

And you wonder why I'm at odds with you. Geez.

You've offered information, yes. You very well could have been possessed. It, very likely, is the case given the way possession works. That says nothing about you currently being possessed right now though. Proving you were possessed D2 does not equate to you not being possessed today. And, since you don't understand it, on the off chance you do have inside information about possessions for w/e reason, it is bad form for me to volunteer information that you can use to fabricate an explanation. You not understanding that is strictly not my problem. And as for shutting you down, unlike you I haven't played in a detrimental way to the town as town. You have. We usually take things town people say at face value until they give us reason not to. PopPa may be a very good example of this. You? You actively withheld information about Rubik, allowed him to get lynched, and now use an excuse such as me shutting you down as a reason not to put forth information? Spare me. It is very possible I could shut you down. Not that I have to with you pretty much being the solid lynch for today, but hey if you want to withhold more information I won't cry about it. Matter of fact I expect you to withhold information since you've shown that's what you will do.

I prefer Numbers to you anyway. I should have just killed you and spent the time arguing with him. At least then it would be interesting for me.

My only regret this game is actually trying to further town by refraining from killing. I should have put you in the ground for funsies.

And honestly you definitely should have held off on pulling the trigger. Numbers had already revealed his cop variant could only catch someone out when they acted. You could have safely passed the night without taking an action, to see if you were still possessed come today. This is one of the reasons I suspected you at the opening of today. Because you threw the game into lylo. I mean jesus, you were arguing that we'd won. A second night without a kill would have made your own argument more and more likely. So yeah, if you're not scum right now, you threw the game.

Also just for the hell of it, when I was possessed there was no flavour or information. Just a new role card PM'ed to me.

When the possession lifted, I was informed that..

"You have chosen to refrain from killing tonight.
You feel slightly different tonight."

To me, that seemed an odd distinction, rather than just another PM telling me my new role.

You guys (KoD and Eli) keep going with past days analysis, but you both keep forgetting a pretty crucial point.
Both days you both were on opposite sides of the game.
So using D2/3 discussions to paint each other bad is kinda not working because of course those things were scummy, you both were scum and the other town at D2/D3.

@KoD:
If Eli wanted you dead, he would not have mentioned to have been possessed D2. I was leaning to you because of the timing Cult death/no kill and Elis confession basically saved you.
Therefor I think Eli is not scum.
If scum Eli kept quiet, I could probably convince Garren to vote for you.

Can I be horribly wrong? Of course. I have a not so good track record as a lylo townie. But I'm still leaning more towards Garren.

VOTES (3 to lynch)
(2) Elijin - KingofDominaria, Garren_Windspear
(1) Garren_Windspear - Elijin


DAY ENDS: Tuesday/Wednesday Midnight 87.75 hours from this post

@Eli: HEY! If you wanted flavor to your possession, you should've complained to me, and not in public! Your flavor was strawberry.

Um.

Why is one of the votes against me not counting?

Because I didn't want it to! ... Sorry. I fixed it

@Scar:

And if Eli has been repossessed? He's opportunistic with his confession. I've got zero reason to trust him. Garen, at the very least, hasn't given me reason to distrust him. Or trust him aside from, you know, not lying (by omission or otherwise).

And I don't know Scar. That's a scenario that would have to be played out in its entirety. Eli could have kept silent, but I doubt that would have guaranteed my lynch. Especially since there was reasonable doubt being flung around. As far as I'm concerned, Eli speaking up now is just him trying to earn bonus points for being "honest" after the fact. Besides, it's not like he's had much luck swinging votes in the direction he wanted previous days (such as trying to lynch Rubik or me). I don't see it as far flung that he'd use his previous act as a positive mark to help grant him support.

Also the doubt I have for Eli having been possessed D2 is minimal at this point. The true issue is just believing him that he's not possessed today. And that's rough considering how negatively I view him.

Just to be ultra clear, you're committed to stamping your little booties and saying 'My lynch or no lynch!' ?

Not that it matters. If Scar doesnt believe Im scum, then lynching me is no different than not lynching me. They both immediately result in a loss.

Yeah, we have to lynch. It is confirmed that there is a possessed alive. So a NL will be followed by a no kill, door opens, possessed wins.
If KoD won't change his mind, I'll pretty much be forced to vote Eli.

All I have on Garren today is my theory. And KoD already made it clear that he acknowledges that it is possible, but he does not think it to me less damning than the past days with Eli combined with Elis claim today.

Oh, how I will enjoy this.

First though -- Scar your theory strictly hinges on the belief that Garen has to be the next possessed due to the viewpoint on repossession I assume you hold, right? Elis just confession to what he did is just a supporting thing. Like your theory, although it isn't a theory, my belief is that repossession is possible, and Eli's behavior is what drives me to believing he is possessed.

But...

There is another way to look at this in which you'll have to agree with me about Eli's death.

You and I are obviously divided on who we want lynched (although you've shown signs of caving and voting Eli which means I could wait you out, but I'll convince you instead). Consider that no matter what we do today, we won't actually lose. If we mislynch today by lynching Eli, Garen, if he's possessed, won't commit a kill. Why? Because the next day he'll be town. Killing will just ensure we lose as town which means he'll lose with us. So Garen will opt not to kill and become town the next day with his ability to give us who is not possessed. Plus, if Eli truly is the possessed, then we hit him now.

Now consider the places switched. Let's say we do lynch Garen on suspicion of being possessed. As I just stated above, Eli won't kill because it will cause town to lose (granted he may be extremely upset with me and kill me out of spite causing town to lose anyway). Problem with this route is that we'll be left with three... One of which isn't Garen. So this is a direct reason why we should not lynch Garen. Eli should, for all intents, be the prime lynch today. Tomorrow, coupled with Garen formerly being possessed and his ability, we'll know who the remaining possessed is.

Also, even if a no lynch happened we wouldn't lose yet. Remember all my ramblings about when possession occurs in relation to the win condition? Well, Neo said the puzzle has to be solved by no deaths day or night. Day has to complete with no deaths. Night has to complete with no deaths. Even if we no lynched, Garen would be forced to kill or lose as town. Why? Because someone else would become possessed before the night would complete itself meaning someone else would win at random as scum along with PopPa and Neo. For this reason, Garen (or Eli) would be forced to kill.

I prefer a scenario without Eli simply because he's too volatile. He's shown he'll withhold relevant information, and I do not want him screwing something up in the last stages of this. Plus, as mentioned before, Garen's ability will be invaluable.

So what do you say Scarlet? Help me help you kill Eli today?

The 'if Garren is scum calculation' is based on the assumption that a 1-1 won't end the game immediately like 99% of other mafia games.
Same with this line:
Pure speculation. Also, it is terrible design that you would make the winning scum move and the win going to another player. It's really not fathomable that this would be the case.