Ragnarök Now - Day Two

[badboytje88]

If you were worried that we would end up lynching one of our own, why didn't you say something? It wasn't too late to change your vote. It wasn't too late to say something in Danr's defence. Looking over the reconstructed transcripts of the last day's events, it seems that you completely disappeared in the second half of the day. Indeed, your last recorded words are you placing your vote for Danr. And susbsequently, when votes were levied in your direction, you did nothing to answer your own accusers. What happened? Were you scared that if you unvoted Danr you would have to face those who voted for you? That if you did one but not t'other, then you would be chastised for not answering? Were you afraid to unvote Danr, knowing that the bandwagon against him might turn on you? Or did you just look at the lynch mob forming on the horizon and think to yourself, "Welp, I've sent an innocent man to the gallows. Might as well call it a day"?

I'll admit, this isn't as solid a case as I'd like it to be, but my scumdar is going mad nevertheless.

I didn't say anything because it was either he dies or I die and I don't know about you but I do not want to die. I know for certain that I am town. I didn't know if Danr was town or scum. So him dying looked to me like the better option because we still had a chance that he would be servant of Loki.

About not answering my accusers, I told everyone what had to be told. I worded myself in a bad way. I was under the influence of a lot of alcohol and took my role a bit too serious. After that I addressed the matter. I told the truth. I am not going to repeat myself over and over. If you don't believe my explanation, or it doesn't 'satisfy' you enough, then you should vote for me.

Your scumdar is off and not by a little bit but by a lot.

[Rick]

Artemis's story seems convenient. It's one of those roles that can be claimed by someone who knows both sides and even if Artemis can target two people, it's a convenient story in case they're tracked. Why else would someone have two targets? Bus driver? Some weird sort of framer where it switches the reading?? Most worrying is how much help Artemis was expecting with the role. Why would anyone rely on someone else so much on Day One? People have different tactics, some people do need help and perhaps these things don't necessarily mean that Artemis is foul.

Irrespective of the side Artemis is on, it's very odd to roleclaim to you, someone far from confirmed as Einherjar, on Day One. If she's (one of) our investigator(s), she should have verified you first and, indeed, I would have done that by targeting myself and you. My evaluation of the whole situation would depend on how experienced Artemis is in these kinds of situations and I'm pretty surprised you didn't consider that. If she's on our side, she might have been confused about her role and, rather foolishly, sought help from you. On the other hand, if Artemis is a Servant of Loki, or some other scum faction, first of all, again, I see no reason to come to you on Day One, but I think she'd only do so if he was afraid of being scrutinised that night, either because of her actions on Day One (before contacting you) or because of her experience. So, when exactly on Day One did she come to you?

Hervi: (aside) Day Two, for reasons I do not want to reveal, Artemis seems more helpful and definitely more Townie to me. Doesn't mean it is, of course!

Yet you expect us to evaluate the situation? I understand you don't want to share certain information and I'm not fishing for details, but I hope you also see that, after our input, you essentially have to do the evaluation for us, because, as I explained, a lot depends on who it is, how experienced they are, and how and when they approached you.

Poseidon: Silence, pig boy! Let us consider the possibilities of this situation:

-Both presumed investigators tell the truth, and the game is oddly balanced. Considering the complexity of his action, I doubt that (Artemis) would be naive. On the other hand, there's always the chance that the second investigator (Demeter) has a modifier.

I don't think you can judge the balance of our situation at this stage. We know nothing about the numbers we're up against or even the number of evil factions we're up against.

Poseidon: -Both are scum, and the second is covering up for the first. Probably very risky, because it's easy to find out whether there is an authentic Town investigator in the game. It's called putting all your scum in the same basket!

Hervi: Very possible. Sloppy Scum play, but definitely possible...

Why contact you on Day One only to try and remedy it on Day Two? If Artemis is scum, does she have any reason to suspect she was uncovered last night? If you had evidence against her, would you not lynch her anyway to find out her true affiliation and confirm the second investigator?

Poseidon: -(Artemis) is scum, the second investigator (Demeter) is Town. Unlikely, unless (Artemis) is the Godfather and immune to investigations, or that the second investigator is insane/naive.

Hervi: Don't forget the framer/tailor. Artemis could've been tailored by another Servant of Loki. Servants? Why would they want to be servants? Stupid Servants...

How did the scum make sure Demeter would investigate Artemis then? Again, this would only make sense if Artemis was a likely target, either by her actions on Day One or her experience.

Poseidon: -(Artemis) is Town, the second investigator (Demeter) is scum. It could be a way for the latter to infiltrate the Town.

Hervi: Yes, the "ScumbaRadish" nom nom nom.

... and would implicate you.

So, Hades has claimed neutral according to Steinvoir Meatshield. Others were around when he claimed this to me. We were in a pub. So why would there be a neutral out there? A Serial Killer? We only saw two kills. Did our vigilante stay home and it was a serial killer who slayed Jormund? If there is no serial killer, why would there be a neutral? A cult? The words of the Day One opening speak of a Cultist at one point. Could there be a cult among us? Shall we rid ourselves of Hades to be sure? If there is a cult, that would make sense why Artemis's role works the way it does and why we would have two types of investigators!!!!!

If there's a third faction out there, having both claimed investigators on our side would make some more sense, but it would also make it more likely that one of the scum factions has an investigator. So, I'm not sure we learn all that much about the credibility of the investigators.

That's a really obscure roleclaim from Artemis. If it's true, then could it be she is part of a cult that has a conversion that will kill if they try to convert scum? That seems like the biggest reason for this kind of investigation, since it doesn't tell if people are scum or not it makes it pretty weak for any other use.

That's pretty much how a Cult works. They recruit from the Town and, in some situations, the Cult leader dies if they try to recruit from the Scum. It'd make sense for them to have an investigator like this, because there'd be some risk involved in relying on the investigation.

According to Hervi it could work like an ordinary investigator on our side. So why have such a complicated role? The only use I can see for it (on our side) is to use it as a risky way to confirm Einherjar more quickly. If you pick two people who you think are Einherjar and you confirm they're on the same side, it's likely they're both innocent. This comes at the cost of not knowing which one is scum in case you can't confirm they're both on the same side though. If we indeed have those two investigators on our side and they found each other already, they could quickly form a powerful town block this way. Demeter could follow up on unconfirmed pairs Artemis finds.

The seeming reluctance to target herself makes me think that if she is neutral then she would know all the other neutrals and wouldn't want to waste a night on that.

Doesn't a neutral always work independently from other factions? If Artemis isn't Einherjar, I'd be inclined to think there's more than one scum faction and he's on one of them.

I too am reluctant to lynch one of the investigators at this stage. So, it looks like Hades is our best bet.

[WhiteFang]

This is just madness... Losing two of our innocent fellows... but at least I am damn glad that we had nab the pesky servant of Loki! I will need to catch up on the earlier cases that were presented before.

[Dragonator]

Personally I think mister oink-face over there is being a tad manipulative in his cliche use of plays. The biggest issue I have is why an investigator would roleclaim to him on the first day. That sounds ridiculous, let alone a second turning up and the original investigator turning that guy over to him too. But what I find more interesting is his relatively useless analysis of his play, and the rather open questions he has left us. basically oinkyboy has given us some options, and told us to pick who we want to list from them, so that he can't be seen to be taking the lead while subtly controlling who is being considered for the vote.

I find it very convenient that our dear manly brother-in-arms, Meatshield, said what he supposedly did and then died so he couldn't confirm it. Well oink-boy I know you are trying to set me up to be your Hades and I'll have none of it thank you; it's a blatant fabrication. Firstly because if I was a neutral I wouldn't be a moron and claim to the guy that I murdered visciously the last time it happened (in our D&D match last weekend, that is, he was still bearing that grudge!), and secondly because it's so blatantly an "oh that dead guy said this guy is neutral let's lynch him" moment. An easy way to first throw suspicion away from yourself for leading the dud lynch yesterday, and then to be able to point the blame at the dead guy when I turn up town. Then there is the fact that we don't use the pub for discussing Mafia; clearly you are not a regular enough patron to understand the socially accepted norms there. Nobody is going to back you up, and I can assure I have the logs of your conversation from the pub myself so I know exactly what was "said". And it is not what you claim, which makes things even more awkward for you. Trying to use a joke based on a previous crap role as a valid basis for voting now is rather lame.

I also note you are bringing up the cult story again, much like you did when we had that Asylum (the second one) play a while back. Personally I think the truth is much simplier; we have a standard set of evildoers, and you are one of them. That is made pretty clear from the fact that the hall was raided by several servants of Loki.

Well I think it's pretty clear who we should vote for today, he's making himself pretty obvious as usual when he strays to the dark side. He led the lynch on day one, immediately apologised and then proceeded to step off again as if nothing had happened. That and his laughable attempt to use his own failed metagaming logic, on top of an attempt to play on fears from the recent unfortunate incidents in Springhaven, is rather sad really. I would have expected better, I think. Don't be fooled, he isn't manly like the rest of us and he isn't town.

Vote: Hervi Pudding-Head (Hinckley)

[Scubacarrot]

Can I ask why the identity of this Hades is not already out in the open?

[Hinckley]

Not surprisingly, Hades is Dragmall.

vote: Dragmall (Dragonator)

[Dragonator]

Can I ask why the identity of this Hades is not already out in the open?

Because he wants to see who everyone is most keen to vote for before revealing the name of that person so that they can't defend themselves properly, and so that he looks like he is helping while not being the one making the decision. It's pretty blatant manipulation of the collective voting body though, and he tries the same trick far too often when we play Monopoly.

I think it's clear that Hades is meant to be me however, as his only evidence is a lie fabricated on a joke from a past "game of life". Pretty poor attempt really, as I noted above.

Not surprisingly, Hades is Dragmall.

vote: Dragmall (Dragonator)

Nice reasoning, good job. I think the kids down below call it WTFUS right?

[CorneliusMurdock]

Can I ask why the identity of this Hades is not already out in the open?

Um, Dragmall just admitted to being Hades, dude.

Accusing your accuser, Dragmall? It's nice to hear you speak, though. Normally you seem so quiet and mysterious, it's awesome to have some lengthy statement to analyze.

That being said, you come off as desperate. I don't think someone claiming to Hervi is all that far-fethed depending in the person doing it. And I don't find a situation with you and Stenvoir all the far-fetched either.

I'll Vote: Dragmall the Dangerous (Dragonator) for now.

[Dragonator]

Um, Dragmall just admitted to being Hades, dude.

Accusing your accuser, Dragmall? It's nice to hear you speak, though. Normally you seem so quiet and mysterious, it's awesome to have some lengthy statement to analyze.

That being said, you come off as desperate. I don't think someone claiming to Hervi is all that far-fethed depending in the person doing it. And I don't find a situation with you and Stenvoir all the far-fetched either.

I'll Vote: Dragmall the Dangerous (Dragonator) for now.

Mmhmm, well I've said what needed to be said, think of it what you will. I think it is obvious what piggy is up to though, it isn't like it is a new tactic from him when faced with tough opponents.

[Hinckley]

Irrespective of the side Artemis is on, it's very odd to roleclaim to you, someone far from confirmed as Einherjar, on Day One. If she's (one of) our investigator(s), she should have verified you first and, indeed, I would have done that by targeting myself and you. My evaluation of the whole situation would depend on how experienced Artemis is in these kinds of situations and I'm pretty surprised you didn't consider that. If she's on our side, she might have been confused about her role and, rather foolishly, sought help from you. On the other hand, if Artemis is a Servant of Loki, or some other scum faction, first of all, again, I see no reason to come to you on Day One, but I think she'd only do so if he was afraid of being scrutinised that night, either because of her actions on Day One (before contacting you) or because of her experience. So, when exactly on Day One did she come to you?

Please appreciate that analysis of the person's playing style could give their identity away and if the Scum can identify this person, we'll lose our investigative ability. Yes, I have weighed all the possibilities concerning timing and playing style.

Because, as it turns out, Demeter has contacted me and was "using a personal idiom" when he told Artemis that "a little birdie told him". So, I do apologize, but I inferred way too much and Demeter is not, in fact, an investigator. Why she (because Demeter is female) would be so vague or misleading should still be under scrutiny, but for now I think the identity of Artemis should stay protected.

[Scubacarrot]

Um, Dragmall just admitted to being Hades, dude.

Sorry, I completely missed that post above mine.

[Fugazi]

Oh, I knew that throwing this case in the open would lead to interesting results!

Hervi: (aside) Odd that the role has to target two people, me thinks. Perhaps this person is worried that if they are tracked they'll be seen targeting two people which would normally mean they are a bus driver. Or maybe this person is actually a Servant of Loki and the role actually switches two people's affiliation as some sort of framer. Otherwise, I hope if it's true, this isn't our only investigator. It sounds rather convoluted...

It is odd indeed, though perhaps as you mentioned privately not totally unexpected given the eccentric nature of Odin, our host. Technically, this role is very similar to that of a regular investigator. If Artemis compares her allegiance to that of her target player every time, it works just like a normal investigator -- except that Artemis doesn't know if the target is scum or neutral, or whether there are more than one scum factions. It does suggest that there's a third faction amidst us, and for a Town investigator it doesn't make any difference if the target is Red Scum or Blue scum -- since presumably in this example we need to get rid of both Red and Blue. Where this type of investigator is weakened is their inability to distinguish neutrals from scum. But if the neutral(s) are evil anyway (say Serial Killer) then it's actually a bonus for town and a handicap for said neutrals, as if they're investigated we would never believe that they're neutral and not scum. So the take home message is that if Atemis is Town (as the second investigator implies) then it's more likely that there are

Scene Two

Artemis: I was unsuccessful.

Unsuccessful like in blocked, or unsuccessful like in... unreadable targets? If Artemis was blocked, there's a worrying chance that scum are already on her. If she wasn't able to get a good reading, it would be interesting to know who she decided to investigate in the end.

Artemis's story seems convenient. It's one of those roles that can be claimed by someone who knows both sides and even if Artemis can target two people, it's a convenient story in case they're tracked. Why else would someone have two targets? Bus driver? Some weird sort of framer where it switches the reading?? Most worrying is how much help Artemis was expecting with the role. Why would anyone rely on someone else so much on Day One? People have different tactics, some people do need help and perhaps these things don't necessarily mean that Artemis is foul.

This is where your judgment and your previous experience with Artemis must be taken into account. You understandably didn't hint at who this person might be, so it's difficult for the group to decide for themselves.

Act Two

Artemis: Hi, Pig-boy. Demeter came to me and said "A little birdie told me you were Town."

Hervi: So, Demeter is also an investigator?

Did Artemis, or Demeter, actually answer the question? Did Demeter actually tell they were an investigator, or rather something else? They could be Role Cop, Lover, or possibly other roles that would help them confirm Artemis' allegiance. A different role would be more believable than a second investigator, though as mentioned earlier one could be naive or scum or third-faction. It's important to have some details before we decide to lynch a potentially valuable role (or two).

Hervi: (aside) I wish there was another character for me to talk to so I didn't have to keep relying on asides. It's hard to use asides without iambic pentameter. Anyway, why is Artemis telling me Demeter's name? That's rather sloppy Mafia play. Protect the identities of people with Power Roles, people. Come on!!

Indeed, when an experienced Viking reveals PR names like that without any proof that they're talking to someone they can trust, it's really worrying.

So, Hades has claimed neutral according to Steinvoir Meatshield. Others were around when he claimed this to me. We were in a pub. So why would there be a neutral out there? A Serial Killer? We only saw two kills. Did our vigilante stay home and it was a serial killer who slayed Jormund? If there is no serial killer, why would there be a neutral? A cult? The words of the Day One opening speak of a Cultist at one point. Could there be a cult among us? Shall we rid ourselves of Hades to be sure? If there is a cult, that would make sense why Artemis's role works the way it does and why we would have two types of investigators!!!!!

I don't get it. A Cult is a third-party, not a neutral party. What difference does it make that Artemis' role works like it does? As I mentioned earlier, Scum and Cult would be revealed as a different allegiance from Artemis, and we would lynch either with equal enthusiasm. The only difference would be the surprise in the morning when an unexpected allegiance would be revealed.

That's a really obscure roleclaim from Artemis. If it's true, then could it be she is part of a cult that has a conversion that will kill if they try to convert scum? That seems like the biggest reason for this kind of investigation, since it doesn't tell if people are scum or not it makes it pretty weak for any other use.

I disagree -- it's almost as powerful as a regular investigator, as long as the investigator compares to a known allegiance -- themselves. Does it really matter if the target is scum, cultist or neutral?

The seeming reluctance to target herself makes me think that if she is neutral then she would know all the other neutrals and wouldn't want to waste a night on that.

Who told you that Artemis was reluctant to investigate herself? She had no clue, maybe, but reluctant? I didn't read that in Hervi's play. Besides if she's not what she claims to be, she doesn't need to tell Hervi or anyone who she's really targeting. I think we're jumping to conclusions much too quicky, on the basis that there would be 'neutral cultists' among us.

Neutrals are never good but that does not always mean they are useless, our main objective is to eliminate the servants of Loki, If a neutral stands in our way, then we take them down, otherwise let us not lose our perspective.

I'm am also confused as to why we would have two individuals that are able to see into the hearts of our fellow warriors and learn their allegiance. This is too good to be true in my book, so I highly doubt that they are both on our side. If Artemis is not lying about his/her action and if we assume their is no secondary party with a large number of members, I am of the mind that he/she is of the loyal Einherjar. It does not seem sensible to me, for a servant of Loki to make up such a complex role, when they could simply claim to be a plain "investigator". Furthermore if Artemis is a servant of Loki, why claim to be an investigator, when the chances are high that their is a Einherjar counter-part that could easily contest their claim?

Any form of investigator claim is pretty risky for scum, considerign that claims can be countered by the actual Town investigator. It's not something that most scum would do on Day 1, to an unverified yet experienced Townie, without a very good reason.

I find it very convenient that our dear manly brother-in-arms, Meatshield, said what he supposedly did and then died so he couldn't confirm it. Well oink-boy I know you are trying to set me up to be your Hades and I'll have none of it thank you; it's a blatant fabrication. Firstly because if I was a neutral I wouldn't be a moron and claim to the guy that I murdered visciously the last time it happened (in our D&D match last weekend, that is, he was still bearing that grudge!), and secondly because it's so blatantly an "oh that dead guy said this guy is neutral let's lynch him" moment. An easy way to first throw suspicion away from yourself for leading the dud lynch yesterday, and then to be able to point the blame at the dead guy when I turn up town. Then there is the fact that we don't use the pub for discussing Mafia; clearly you are not a regular enough patron to understand the socially accepted norms there. Nobody is going to back you up, and I can assure I have the logs of your conversation from the pub myself so I know exactly what was "said". And it is not what you claim, which makes things even more awkward for you. Trying to use a joke based on a previous crap role as a valid basis for voting now is rather lame.

Has anyone else overheard this conversation and be able to support Hervi or Dragmall in this?

I also note you are bringing up the cult story again, much like you did when we had that Asylum (the second one) play a while back. Personally I think the truth is much simplier; we have a standard set of evildoers, and you are one of them. That is made pretty clear from the fact that the hall was raided by several servants of Loki.

The only mention on a cult in these walls has been made in relation to the events during the night before Day 1:

But he was soon put out of his misery, as another cultist gave him a nudge over the railing.

It is pretty obvious that cultists and servants of Loki are one and same, and even Hervi agreed with that assessment:

Are you a them? One of these conspiratorial cultist Sons of Loki?

I don't think the Cult theory holds much water, as the servants of Loki wouldn't also be called cultists if there's another Cult at play.

Because, as it turns out, Demeter has contacted me and was "using a personal idiom" when he told Artemis that "a little birdie told him". So, I do apologize, but I inferred way too much and Demeter is not, in fact, an investigator. Why she (because Demeter is female) would be so vague or misleading should still be under scrutiny, but for now I think the identity of Artemis should stay protected.

Oh great. At least this has been cleared up.

[Scubacarrot]

Dragmall, to get this clear, you deny ever claiming to be a neutral, and you claim to be town, correct?

Just explain to me, Hervi, why would anyone claim neutral? What would be the point? Did he claim neutral with a role attached? If not it absolutely makes zero sense, making me question the truth of your statement. Also you are using a dead man as proof, not vey convincing. I am in doubt.

Dragmall, you come off to me as actually annoyed, which I find odd if you are innocent though, if you are truly town, you just caught yourself a scum, as Hervi would have to be lying.

[Dragonator]

Dragmall, to get this clear, you deny ever claiming to be a neutral, and you claim to be town, correct?

That is correct.

Dragmall, you come off to me as actually annoyed, which I find odd if you are innocent though, if you are truly town, you just caught yourself a scum, as Hervi would have to be lying.

I am annoyed that anyone would even think to believe such a crappy argument, I am definitely happy that he has given himself away so easily. I am looking forward to lynching him.

[Hinckley]

Just explain to me, Hervi, why would anyone claim neutral? What would be the point? Did he claim neutral with a role attached? If not it absolutely makes zero sense, making me question the truth of your statement. Also you are using a dead man as proof, not vey convincing. I am in doubt.

If you choose to believe Dragmall's defense of metagaming and posturing, feel free. However, there are at least two witnesses to the pub incident with Steinvoir and I do hope they'll come to the forefront and backup my statement. As to your question why would someone claim neutral, perhaps you are unfamiliar with the relationship between Steinvoir and Dragmall. It is not surprising at all that this would happen. Much stranger things have happened in the past, but that is the past. I can't help but feel something is definitely up judging by past experience and the fact that Steinvoir said this to me. More interesting however, and not based on the past, is the fact that Steinvoir was killed on Night One. Was he killed by the serial killer, a neutral serial killer? Were the Scum then blocked? We don't know this for sure yet. But considering a serial killer as a possibility, if he claimed to Steinvor, which is exceedingly common, (even if the two of them do explain it away as some elaborate game) we know (and we've seen before) if their claims don't match up, it turns out bad for one or the other. Steinvoir told at least three of us that Dragmall claimed neutral. Steinvoir was killed. Is Dragmall neutral? If he's Scum it's likely that he even claimed neutral to excuse some Nocturnal activity. Maybe he's actually Scum and was trying to pre-empt Steinvoir targeting him. Dead Steinvoir + Dragmall claiming neutral and only having metagaming to defend himself = trouble.

[Scubacarrot]

Hervi, stop trying to look for something behind Steinvoir's death. It's a very smart thing to kill him early on. He has a tendency to have an aura of untrustworthiness around him which makes him hard to work with, why there's not much chance he would be watched, and what is the chance for that with so many people anyway? 1 in 25? I'd take that chance to kill one of the strongest players, and that's even assuming there is a watcher. Leaves us with two things the scum would have weigh. Either kill him since he is good, or leave him alive because a lot of people don't trust him or find it hard to trust him. I know which I would choose.

Dragmall, your last statement is unconvincing. "Annoyed someone would believe that crappy argument" I don't think you believe that yourself.

[Hinckley]

It is odd indeed, though perhaps as you mentioned privately not totally unexpected given the eccentric nature of Odin, our host. Technically, this role is very similar to that of a regular investigator. If Artemis compares her allegiance to that of her target player every time, it works just like a normal investigator -- except that Artemis doesn't know if the target is scum or neutral, or whether there are more than one scum factions. It does suggest that there's a third faction amidst us, and for a Town investigator it doesn't make any difference if the target is Red Scum or Blue scum -- since presumably in this example we need to get rid of both Red and Blue. Where this type of investigator is weakened is their inability to distinguish neutrals from scum. But if the neutral(s) are evil anyway (say Serial Killer) then it's actually a bonus for town and a handicap for said neutrals, as if they're investigated we would never believe that they're neutral and not scum. So the take home message is that if Atemis is Town (as the second investigator implies) then it's more likely that there are

If there are neutrals out there, as you suggested earlier, that could win with either side, their numbers could count against the Town anyway. I don't want that. In my experience, any neutral should be dealt with because the probability of them being up to no good is too high.

Unsuccessful like in blocked, or unsuccessful like in... unreadable targets? If Artemis was blocked, there's a worrying chance that scum are already on her. If she wasn't able to get a good reading, it would be interesting to know who she decided to investigate in the end.

Just unsuccessful was the only result.

Did Artemis, or Demeter, actually answer the question? Did Demeter actually tell they were an investigator, or rather something else?

I think you've already seen the answer to this one.

Who told you that Artemis was reluctant to investigate herself? She had no clue, maybe, but reluctant?

This is a good point. Artemis was actual totally willing to investigate herself against another target once she checked for clarity.

It is pretty obvious that cultists and servants of Loki are one and same, and even Hervi agreed with that assessment:

It still bugs me, though. Why choose that wording? It did originally stand out to me. I purposely used the term in that quote to draw attention to the fact that it was used. I'm poking a bit of fun at the host there. Maybe I'm just hung up on the word. Why are they cultists as well? We don't know much about them except that they don't like magic boar and they're doing the bidding of Loki. It's just something to look out for. Judging by the way Artemis's role works, I still think it's possible some sort of third-party or second Scum faction is out there.

Hervi, stop trying to look for something behind Steinvoir's death. It's a very smart thing to kill him early on.

Is it? So, you're fine to just explain it away with metagaming and not consider other possibilities? It is possible he was killed because of something he revealed or discovered.

[Scubacarrot]

Is it? So, you're fine to just explain it away with metagaming and not consider other possibilities?

Yes. Absolutely.

[Sandy]

Hmmm, it is not surprising that people seem to be gathering around Hervi - he seems to like being in the center of attention. With these revelations, and Dragmall's retaliation, I believe we're on the verge of finding out something essential.

My biggest doubt with Hervi being a scum is that he voluntarily made up these plays to let the public know what he knows. Why would a scum do that, as early as on Day Two? To lead us off? From what? Nobody had brought up anything concrete until Hervi, so unless there's some really hot gossips going on in the potato messages, a Scum!Hervi would have no reason to put himself into the limelight.

Then on to Dragmall: everything he says about Hervi's methods ring true. We all know this is how Hervi operated in his past life, whether he was scum or not. But it usually happened in a more pivotal point in the game. If Hervi is scum, maybe he was just bored and wanted to take a risk to get rid of some power-roles?

No matter how I look at it, I can't believe that Dragmall and Hervi are on the same side. One of them is lying, and they both know which one. But if Dragmall is neutral, why bother voting for him if we can nail a scum instead?

This is a troublesome situation, where a normal party-goer such as myself can only guess what is true and what is a lie. I took a chance with my vote yesterday, and I failed, but I don't think I have any other choice but to take another chance today.

Thus, I shall vote: Dragmall the Dangerous (Dragonator). This is not written in stone, though. I will observe how things advance from here-on out.

[Bob]

From what I can see, both sides bring up arguments worth exploring in depth, so I'll hold off on my vote for awhile until I've been able to analyze this further.

[Scouty]

I can say I have had a suspicion of Hervi since he first contacted me on Day One.

Hidden is my interactions with Hervi, which has made me suspect him throughout the ordeal.

Way early when I spotted Bergulf's "slip of the tongue", Hervi has been talking to me. We discussed the actions of Bergulf and the actions of Danr and that much falls in line. From what I can recall from that discourse, I remember suspecting that Hervi was shifting focus from Bergulf, certainly with a miraculous break from Danr acting so foolishly.

I thought it odd that Hervi contacted me so early, I was surprised he did, actually, and I’ve been suspicious of the fact since. If he was an einherjar, he would be bolder than usual to contact me so early. I know him to be very paranoid when talking to each other…and this time he was different. I was chalking it up to other factors, but I should not be so blind and forget the possibility that he is a servant of Loki. Day one is over and he manages to have us lynch Danr. He said he was suspicious of Bergulf, but he hasn’t mentioned Bergulf in our talks since Day One. I would think he would take that lead, too, but no, he doesn’t.

Day two comes along and Hervi tells me he has something to post. We know this as the play that’s come forward. Hervi said he thought somebody who claimed to him is lying about their role. I took this as a play against the person lying about their role. What we get instead is a play that doesn’t incriminate anybody but “Hades” (It seems that Hervi is even protecting “Artemis”, who is the one who could be lying about their role. The play doesn’t make much effort to pursue that thought). If the town decided to go after Artemis or Demeter, I’m sure Hervi would have obliged in incriminating them, but it is Hades we are after now and Hervi is being protective of the former two (or at least of Artemis). What's the truth in the former two? I don't know, but I'm sure Hervi would be happy to help get rid of them if he could...or gain their trust in other situations.

Hades. I was there when this discussion was taking place. I don’t know how Hervi can take this as any certainty of fact and use it to lynch somebody. It was a joke, it was declared a joke at the time, Hervi should have known better. An einherjar Hervi would have known better. I’m shocked that Hervi is using a joke for his case against Dragmall and I can only suspect that this is the act of a scum to get rid of Dragmall. If Stenvoir was alive, I doubt this claim would come forward, where Stenvoir could easily point out its ridiculousness. No, I think Hervi wanted Stenvoir dead so he can use this ridiculous claim to get rid of Dragmall, and because, I think, he knows the strength of Stenvoir and how well Stenvoir knows him and wanted him gone early. Why else should Stenvoir be killed?

There is doubt in my mind that Hervi is innocent. If you don’t believe Hervi is scum because of this play, believe Hervi is scum because he got Danr lynched. Why have I never seen this reciprocal action take place? Because the scum have to take the offense and prevent such a reciprocal action take place. If X lynches Y and Y turns out to be town, X should be scrutinised next. This rarely happens and we happen to go off on a stupid tangent that leads us to lynch another townie. This happened in our most recent previous life in the Black Forest. This wont happen again.

Vote: Hervi Pudding-Head (Hinckley)

I’m sorry my friend, I enjoy your company, but I now know it to be manipulative and evil. I wont let you manipulate me like times past.

[Darkdragon]

That's pretty much how a Cult works. They recruit from the Town and, in some situations, the Cult leader dies if they try to recruit from the Scum. It'd make sense for them to have an investigator like this, because there'd be some risk involved in relying on the investigation.

[...]

Doesn't a neutral always work independently from other factions? If Artemis isn't Einherjar, I'd be inclined to think there's more than one scum faction and he's on one of them.

I think that's how they work, but I've read that it doesn't always kill them if they try to recruite a scum. Also the other thing is that I've read sometimes when investigated they would come up as neutral and that's why I thought what I thought.

Who told you that Artemis was reluctant to investigate herself? She had no clue, maybe, but reluctant? I didn't read that in Hervi's play. Besides if she's not what she claims to be, she doesn't need to tell Hervi or anyone who she's really targeting. I think we're jumping to conclusions much too quicky, on the basis that there would be 'neutral cultists' among us.

It was just something that I infered from reading the play, that she couldn't or wouldn't target herself. This is something I've not seen before and just trying to figure out what it could mean and how much it's helpful or detimental to us. Targeting herself and somone every night would be the best way for her to use the role though, it would be safest way to find out who is the enemy and who is the friend.

If you choose to believe Dragmall's defense of metagaming and posturing, feel free. However, there are at least two witnesses to the pub incident with Steinvoir and I do hope they'll come to the forefront and backup my statement. As to your question why would someone claim neutral, perhaps you are unfamiliar with the relationship between Steinvoir and Dragmall. It is not surprising at all that this would happen.

I was also in the pub during this conversation and a previous one with a similar statement being made. Was it a joke, a trick, or the truth? Only two people know for sure. I think it is half truth and half trick, that's my opinion on it. Just because something is said in a joking context where things "shouldn't be taken seriously" does not mean they aren't true.

[Hinckley]

I do not understand the use of spoiler tags...

I can say I have had a suspicion of Hervi since he first contacted me on Day One.

I contacted several people on Day One as that has become the new norm. It's a game, I've been really excited about playing this one, I wanted to have fun. We usually talk. Most of the original PMs I sent were just fun banter, talking about mathematics and loving pigs, etc... There was no exchange of information, nor did I fish for information. Since you contacted me during Day One of a previous game...of life, I thought I'd "return the favor" and reach out from the beginning as well. Contacting the people you've worked with in the past is a good way to get information from people eventually. If your buddies are playing against you, you will eventually catch if they are lying. The more interaction you have with people you're used to interacting with, the better chance you have to figure out if you can trust them. We talked about Bergulf's slip of the tongue, which I thought was a good catch. If you were being that analytical that early, I thought it would be an asset for us to speak to each other.

Day two comes along and Hervi tells me he has something to post. We know this as the play that’s come forward. Hervi said he thought somebody who claimed to him is lying about their role. I took this as a play against the person lying about their role. What we get instead is a play that doesn’t incriminate anybody but “Hades” (It seems that Hervi is even protecting “Artemis”, who is the one who could be lying about their role. The play doesn’t make much effort to pursue that thought). If the town decided to go after Artemis or Demeter, I’m sure Hervi would have obliged in incriminating them, but it is Hades we are after now and Hervi is being protective of the former two (or at least of Artemis). What's the truth in the former two? I don't know, but I'm sure Hervi would be happy to help get rid of them if he could...or gain their trust in other situations.

This is disappointing to me because I've been nothing but honest with you about this. You were annoyingly pressing me to come forward with something. Why would I tell you everything in private when I don't have you verified? I wanted to come forward with a lot of this earlier, but unfortunately I'm not made out of time. and I had other things to consider. I sought advice from Poseidon about when to reveal these things and wanted to watch what people would do first before it was revealed. I had every reason to be patient and let it unfold slowly. All the information I have is true and out on the table for the Town to figure this out. I've had other things I've been dealing with and put a great deal of time into putting the case together. Judging by our personal interactions, you know why I wouldn't suspect Bergulf at this time. I'm surprised you would expect me to. And why would I be protective of Artemis? She may be our only investigator and you'll have to lynch me before I verify who she is.

Hades. I was there when this discussion was taking place. I don’t know how Hervi can take this as any certainty of fact and use it to lynch somebody.

Yes, you were one of the ones I was referring to. Steinvoir seemed certain to me. It's certainly interesting considering he's dead now, and yes I do think there could be reasons Steinvoir was killed. The discussion we had revolved around Dragmall claiming to be neutral.

It was a joke, it was declared a joke at the time,

Our memories differ there, because at no point in time do I ever remember Steinvoir saying "I declare this a joke." Or "just kidding" or "I was just messing with you guys." I'm surprised you would dismiss it all considering it didn't seem conclusive to me, at all, that it was just a joke.

Hervi should have known better. An einherjar Hervi would have known better. I’m shocked that Hervi is using a joke for his case against Dragmall and I can only suspect that this is the act of a scum to get rid of Dragmall.

And now you're re-defining what I've brought forward. I don't see it as a joke. I see it as something that was legitimately told to us in the context of the game. It certainly was with enough certainty that the Town deserves to know what was said. Your analysis of my behavior is unfortunately off, but I'm bringing the information to the Town that we need to figure out what we're up against. I think Dragmall's defense is empty metagaming and posturing and shows he has something to hide. I'm willing to die to prove that.

There is doubt in my mind that Hervi is innocent. If you don’t believe Hervi is scum because of this play, believe Hervi is scum because he got Danr lynched. Why have I never seen this reciprocal action take place? Because the scum have to take the offense and prevent such a reciprocal action take place. If X lynches Y and Y turns out to be town, X should be scrutinised next. This rarely happens and we happen to go off on a stupid tangent that leads us to lynch another townie. This happened in our most recent previous life in the Black Forest. This wont happen again.

I take responsibility for starting the lynch on Danr, as I said, but we've had private conversations about this. If you think about what we talked about you know I had a reason for doing it. You know it, you're just not thinking about it. One might think that you are pushing me to reveal things to you. I hope you are just a concerned and overly paranoid Townie and not trying to manipulate me into telling you all of the Townie roles that I know.

I’m sorry my friend, I enjoy your company, but I now know it to be manipulative and evil. I wont let you manipulate me like times past.

Honestly, no worries. If you are doing what you think is right, that is how we should play. Play hard, find out what you can. If I go down fighting for the Town, that's a good game for me. If I get lynched, just promise me you'll take out the trash tomorrow. If you are trying to get me lynched because you're Scum and you feel I'm a threat, no hard feelings either. You do what you have to do according to what God has ordained.

I was also in the pub during this conversation and a previous one with a similar statement being made. Was it a joke, a trick, or the truth? Only two people know for sure. I think it is half truth and half trick, that's my opinion on it. Just because something is said in a joking context where things "shouldn't be taken seriously" does not mean they aren't true.

Thank you. Again, it's interesting to hear you thought of it as a joking context at all. My response to it was something along the lines of "Noooooooooooooooo! I want to live! Why? Why is he the serial killer again? I wanted to play this one. " I was pretty certain I was being told the truth and suspected that Dragmall might come after me, due to extenuating circumstances that did not happen in this lifetime, namely that during a previous D & D simulation, I pissed off his close friend and thought if they were working together and Dragmall was a killer, I would certainly be killed Night One. I'm alive on Day Two, but the information is still out there, given to us by Steinvoir and it's worth considering, at least. I think worse is Dragmall's reaction. I believe he has something to hide based on that, especially considering it's a defensive posture. He offers no help for the Town, no insight into our situation, just "I'm not neutral, you're Scum." Seems like typical Scummy behavior to me, or the behavior of someone who is hiding something, but I can only see things from my perspective.

[fhomess]

I understand why my vote for Danr, especially considering that it appears that I was following the crowd could seem scum-like so allow me to explain. My vote was originally for Wilhelm because I wanted him to speak up and voting for him seemed to send the strongest message.

I'm sorry, but you were the third vote for him.

Once I realized that he was gone, I decided to vote for Danr. Danr was already condemned, voting for someone else would have been foolish

How would it have been foolish? Were you afraid you might not blend in with the crowd? If he was already condemned, you vote for someone else might've been meaningless for that day's lynch. It's only foolish if you're trying to hide.

, and I was under the impression that Odin required all of us to vote each day. Had I realized that Odin never made such a rule, I would never have voted for Danr.

Instead you would've voted for no one? That would also have been a nice spot to hide, I suppose.

I’m keeping my mouth shut because I have nothing productive to add to our conversation. I didn’t learn anything last night. I do have some ideas as to who is innocent but as none of them have been accused, I don’t see any reason to defend them.

Good. Keep your thoughts to yourself until they're demanded of you. That's a good way to show that you're here to help us find the Servants of Loki. I've a mind to put an arrow in you right now.

　

Vote: Gerrid (Captain Genaro)

　

　

　

Way early when I spotted Bergulf's "slip of the tongue", Hervi has been talking to me. We discussed the actions of Bergulf and the actions of Danr and that much falls in line. From what I can recall from that discourse, I remember suspecting that Hervi was shifting focus from Bergulf, certainly with a miraculous break from Danr acting so foolishly.

From this, you would infer that Bergulf and Hervi are scum buddies if you really think that Hervi's intentions are to protect Bergulf.

　

I took this as a play against the person lying about their role. What we get instead is a play that doesn’t incriminate anybody but "Hades" (It seems that Hervi is even protecting "Artemis", who is the one who could be lying about their role. The play doesn’t make much effort to pursue that thought). If the town decided to go after Artemis or Demeter, I’m sure Hervi would have obliged in incriminating them, but it is Hades we are after now and Hervi is being protective of the former two (or at least of Artemis). What's the truth in the former two? I don't know, but I'm sure Hervi would be happy to help get rid of them if he could...or gain their trust in other situations.

I could see Hervi trying to get into Artemis' good graces if they are not on the same team and Artemis is indeed Einherjar. It would also be possible that Hervi is trying to protect Artemis and setting up an elaborate ruse here, but if Artemis wasn't on anyone's radar, what would be the point?

Hades. I was there when this discussion was taking place. I don’t know how Hervi can take this as any certainty of fact and use it to lynch somebody. It was a joke, it was declared a joke at the time, Hervi should have known better.

I'd really like to see some more detail around this pub conversation. It is possible that Hervi is super paranoid, although his calm in previous battles would suggest to me that is somewhat unlikely.

　

An einherjar Hervi would have known better. I’m shocked that Hervi is using a joke for his case against Dragmall and I can only suspect that this is the act of a scum to get rid of Dragmall. If Stenvoir was alive, I doubt this claim would come forward, where Stenvoir could easily point out its ridiculousness. No, I think Hervi wanted Stenvoir dead so he can use this ridiculous claim to get rid of Dragmall, and because, I think, he knows the strength of Stenvoir and how well Stenvoir knows him and wanted him gone early. Why else should Stenvoir be killed?

But if there were others present in the conversation that knew Dragmall's joke was meant in jest, why would Hervi risk himself in this way. This is the one point that concerns me about your case.

[Scubacarrot]

You know Finn, I was worried about you, your behaviour seemed off to me yesterday, but here's how I know you, good catch. Gerrid lied. Someone once said lynch all liars, and it worked out right for them. Real vikings don't need lies. I say we leave the Hervi/Dragmall thing. It's actually a possibility both are town. (A joke's a joke and Hervi overreacted?).

I'd really like to see some more detail around this pub conversation. It is possible that Hervi is super paranoid, although his calm in previous battles would suggest to me that is somewhat unlikely.

This statement is funny for all kinds of reasons. Hervi is the most paranoid person here, I'm pretty sure.

Vote: Gerrid (Captain Genaro)