Category 5 Hurricane

@TheIrishman I was wondering what you were talking about when you decided I must be town because of what I said. I didn't think there was anything I said that could be taken as proof. Why couldn't scum know that they will lose if all the evidence is collected? (And "all the evidence" might mean "place all correct evidence in the truth box" and not just "find all the evidence") Personally, I doubt that Jeod's action is responsible for the tension increase, or at least not a significant part of it. I think that either three different actions added 3%, or 9 actions added 1%. The latter would mean everyone's action adds 1% when used. We might be able to learn over time which of these it is, and if we do, we might be able to catch out liars. This reminds me of something else that FRAYDO said: Now, I have to ask, does anyone else know that their action adds to world tension, because I sure don't.

Why are you asking this? You didn't even confirm if the information is true or not. Is there anyone else (besides allegedly FRAYDO) that did not do an action last night?

As far as my cases go, FRAYDO's case is effectively unchanged, because he hasn't said anything. I also don't know if Jeod's information is proof (e.g. mod confirmed information) or just a claim (e.g. a message that could have been written by anyone). I'd probably lean towards not investigating FRAYDO either way, as we probably can't know the status of that information and may as well move on as if it's true, until we have reason to believe otherwise. I'm pretty sure there hasn't been any evidence found yet, so I'll go ahead and say that I do not want to be nominated today. Let's get someone else in there so they can verify what I saw.

Can you guarantee that source as accurate? Is it confirmed information, or a note that was just dropped on your lap?

I effectively already did my night report. The only thing I could add is that nothing happened to me. @TheIrishman OrangeP47's merry malicious murderous malefaction was carried out in first appearance with us, in the Death Note game. Given that it was his first impression, it sticks with me. Similar to this game, other players gave him access to investigative powers which handed him a Death Note, which he then used to great effect. Everybody trusted him, he never really had any scummy behavior. He was able to play the innocent, helpful guy long enough that we only figured out the puzzle after the master plan had already been put into effect. We caught him, but it was nearly too late. If it weren't for a gift that was given to me that nobody knew about, it probably would have ended in total victory for him. It still was a victory, just not a total victory. @VERTi60, I didn't notice it. When looking through the rules of the vault, the rules did not specifically mention placing an item in the vault when taking from it was mentioned. I thought it was natural to expect a mention of placing an item in there as part of the list of actions. I didn't think to go back and cross reference my role PM, which I read much earlier, to see if I could pass to the vault. I did know you could pass items to other players. though it didn't stick with me that you could pass to the vault even without having access to it. Jeod's ability would have been more useful if it wasn't clear who was doing it. Maybe even better if there was more than one person doing it. Perhaps it could still be useful if there are other secret channels of communication. Don't really know what could be done with that, though.

Regarding the questions I said I'd ask about, you can't use items taken the night you take them. You can use it the next day if it's a day-use item, or next night if it's a night-use item. If you wish to take something from the vault, you can only take one piece of evidence or one item. Nobody can clean out the vault and run, so that's good. (You can completely reorganize everything that is in the vault, though) You can leave an item in the vault. Apparently you can pass items to the vault without having access to it.

Alright, so as I expected, currently there is nothing in the Vault. Not even Jeod's Typewriter is in here, so either he kept it or it won't be in there until later. Being nominated gives you access to an item vault and evidence locker, and a place to put evidence that you think is true. You can take anything that is in the item vault using a night action. It isn't clear to me if the item can be used right away or if you must wait until the next phase. It also isn't clear if there is a limit to the number of items you can take at once. I also don't know if you can leave an item in the vault. There doesn't seem to be an action for it, but it seems like something that might make sense. None of those questions have specific answers, though I will be sure to ask them tonight. For the evidence locker and truth sections, most things are pretty clear. There will be a list of evidence that you can peruse. As we've determined so far, there must be real and fake evidence. I have no idea how that works yet, as I have no examples of evidence to get an idea from. You can move around evidence between the locker and truth sections freely, without limits. You can also take evidence just like an item. (Again, I don't know if there is a limit to the number of things you can take.) I apologize, OrangeP47. I had visitors over, so I only took a moment to make that post and went right back, so I didn't see your reply. Regarding FRAYDO, it isn't much of a case. Main points are that he's only posted twice, and both of his posts repeated the things we had been talking about, without generating a new point of discussion. Except for this part, in his second post, which included a disagreement with himself. "While I agree that the person who is investigated should also be nominated for the evidence vault and I have my investigation vote on Jeod, I actually want to propose nominating Orange to visit the vault. I'm reading him as trustworthy and I would still like for Category5 to be investigated before being allowed access to the evidence locker." In two sentences he went from saying that the investigated person and the nominated person should be the same person, to nominating someone different from the person he wants to investigate. He also wants me to be investigated before having access to the locker, but why isn't that a problem for OrangeP47, who has a history of going on a murderous rampage after being given access to a similar mechanic in the Death Note game? This disagreement with himself looks like an attempt to promote a new idea without seeming to be against the original idea, so as to not stick out too much. As far as Mojoman, he looks like he's repeating the "I'm going to say things about people looking suspicious without actually pushing hard in any direction" behavior he had last game, and he looks suspicious to me as a result of that. He's my #2 or #3 right now. Despite that, I think he has a point. Innocent, Suspicious and Hostile look like they will be entirely independent from side. There may be mafia that we're looking for that are currently innocent and may only turn suspicious or hostile depending on how the game goes. For example, maybe we need enough evidence on a suspect before we can make them Hostile and therefore use investigation to arrest them. Alternatively, fake evidence might be used to make town players get removed by investigation the same way, so we must always be careful.

For the purpose of placing votes, I'm going to mark my top suspect for investigation. I don't actually want him investigated, but I don't want to early hammer either, but I still want to place a vote. So ##voteinvestigate FRAYDO, and ##nominate @VERTi60 because he hasn't said a word and I want to tag him.

I'm ok with that. Hopefully I can pass in the same night as I have access.

I suppose there is a chance that the locker already has evidence in it that hasn't been placed in a box, or there are already confiscated items, but at the moment I have to imagine both are empty.

Hmm, I don't exactly mind being nominated, as it would be nice to see what that does firsthand and then I can report to everybody else, but I'm concerned that all I can do with it is place evidence that I might have in boxes, and look through confiscated items. If that is correct, there won't be anything I can do. I have no evidence of any kind. That said, I wonder if anyone has evidence right now. It might be better if someone else has evidence, as long as we can trust that person.

I don't know about this doubling up on the investigation/nomination idea. I don't think that's how it works? If you're being investigated, you can't have access to the vault, right? I think doubling up would only be an effective tactic if we agreed that we want nobody to have access to it.

Yeah, I know. I won't be taking that information itself one way or another. It's interesting that you chose to say it, though. I would expect players from Serbia to keep rather quiet about it.

Of course, you could plant evidence on someone you think won't be investigated, and therefore it can't be found. That's probably the right way to think about it.

I think that might make sense, as I think it is possible for the investigation to be taken off track. On the other hand, planting evidence just means it can be found, and one of our win conditions is to find all evidence.

Is that a claim of nationality, Mojoman?

"Innocent players will be freed immediately but will leave behind any evidence they might unknowingly carry." Does this mean we have to investigate innocent players to get certain pieces of evidence, or would this be a result of someone passing an item to someone else?

Should be the Victoria 2 flag. That's what the Paradox forum called this image, anyway.

I've only played Victoria 2's campaign a couple times, but I've always done so as Switzerland. I learn all Paradox games by playing Switzerland first, before turning on Churchill mode to manage Great Britain. Probably should have picked that flag for this, actually. Oh well. That said, I have no idea how Switzerland would play into this, at all. They yell "STAY OFF MY LAWN" so much that Hitler had to send them some of his best fighter aircraft just to get his experimental jet fighter back...which the Swiss then used to shoot down German aircraft that flew into Swiss airspace.

You know, before the game started I was already thinking about doing just that, for that exact reason. Haven't yet decided if it's something I really want to do, though. Unlike the last time I used that tactic, I'm unsure it makes tactical sense for this game.

Screw giving Voe D1 Lynch protection. Give FRAYDO RNG protection.

I haven't read all of the post yet, but it sounds fascinating so far. Sign me up!

I saw someone posting in the dead doc that they prefer to have proof before making a case. Thing is, most of the time in mafia, you aren't going to have proof. Even things that seem to be proven might actually have been faked instead. Hell, the only time you had solid proof of anything in this game was when the mafia revealed itself. Proof isn't generally just handed to you on a plate like that. Even investigative roles sometimes have to consider how their results might be falsified. Most of the time you have to go digging for proof. Come up with a scenario and then go see if you are right. My case on Mojoman started mostly on a repeat of the same behavior I saw Alstar do a couple games ago, where he kept making "jokes" about how other players looked scummy for this or that reason, seemingly egging on others to start a vote on someone, anyone. Didn't want to put himself out on a limb by being the first to vote, but was eager to make somebody look suspicious for any reason that might stick. Scum players want to control the lynch while not looking like they are doing so. They don't want to start the wagon, for fear of being caught in the spotlight, but they do want to pick which wagons gain traction. I read Mojoman's posts as fitting into this basic scum thought. This part of the case was spot on. Nowhere do I have proof of anything, but this weak case with no real leg to stand on wound up being one of the strongest cases of the game. When I tried to look deeper into it and guess his partners based off his interactions, that's where I went wrong. However, had I survived to Day 2, I would have lit him up. That reaction to the "second nightkill" was such a bad slip that I'm shocked that people like Chaos_Knight or ChopBam didn't make him pay for it. (Hell, Chaos_Knight not catching it was the big reason I suspected him while sitting in the dead doc. At least ChopBam tried to continue my crusade.)

I'd actually rather see ALL buildings be reduced to one-time lynchproof, regardless of side, as I've suggested after previous games. VERTi60 could balance the game with that in mind if he wanted to, but he doesn't, so he won't. He's heard all the arguments before and he's shown no interest in changing his mind. We'll continue to have this problem every time until he stops. And every time it happens he winds up hearing this:

The police will want the photos submitted as evidence. (Cue setup for Jeod's Ace Attorney game)