[S] All The King's Men - Loyalists win!

[weiyaoli]

All The King's Men

The king lies on his bed. Dead. Onlookers shuffled about the room. It’s hard to say that any of them didn’t know this day was coming. On a small desk beside his bed a piece of paper sat. It was blank. The king’s cold hands could no longer write the name of his successor. In his last days the king had no strength to speak, let alone write. Eleven men are in contention for the crown. These same men are the ones who must name the new king. But it’s not all that simple. Within the walls of the city rumors of a revolution are growing. These revolutionary sentiments are spreading to the highest levels of command. Of the men in the king’s highest court, some are likely taken by these lies. And you know that not all of you have the kingdom's best interests in heart.

The servants were bustling about the enclave making preparations for the discussions of naming the new king. Something was odd though. Someone was missing. The late king’s financial advisor Dudley Ames. Of any person it would be the least like him to miss these discussions. He is likely dead.

“Gentlemen. As I’m sure you are all aware it is now our duty to name a new king. Also you may also be aware that Dudley Ames is missing. I can only guess that he has been murdered. This revolution is going to pick us off one at a time until every man loyal to his majesty will die. While evidence might be scarce we cannot, by any means, allow a revolutionary to be named the new king. If the revolutionaries are not found and executed I’m afraid we are all likely to be murdered. Now... shall we begin?”

General Rules:

Spoiler:

1. Spoiler any posts about the game in the discussion thread and DO NOT READ SPOILERS IF YOU ARE STILL ALIVE. You are still alive until the mods say you are dead. You may PM if and only if explicitly stated in your role description.

2. All PMs must be CC'ed to both mods (ahippo and weiyaoli). ahippo has yet to read my PM to him about the game so you can send PMs just to me if you want.

3. Please stay (at least mostly) on topic.

4. Don't lurk through the whole game; if you need to drop out, tell the mods. You can be replaced or modkilled if it comes to that.

4a. if you don't post in the thread for 5 consecutive days, you will receive a mod prod with 48 hours to respond. If you don't respond in 48 hours you will be replaced or modkilled.

5. If you aren't part of the game, please post in spoilers in the discussion thread for outside analysis. (*grabbing popcorn* is okay, just don't be too disruptive.)

6. If you die, don't say anything for the rest of the game except a simple, "Bah, you got me," which reveals no information.

7. You may not post verbatim or quote from your role PM. Paraphrasing is fine.

8. You may not edit your posts.

Special Rules:

Spoiler:

All players will have the following powers:

1. A one-shot lie detector that can be directed at any one statement in a post by the following format:

Lie detect bolded statement

I'm the cop, NotARaptor is scum

And the mods would respond either

True

or

False

2. A player can choose any one statement to show up as "true" to a lie detector by the following format:

Truthify the following post:

I'm the doctor, don't lynch me. I know it looks bad but you've gotta believe me.

NOTE: To avoid situations in which the second rule could be undermined once a statement that was in a post chosen by a player to be subject to the 2nd power, has been lie detected it is "Golded" which means if that that statement is lie detected again in a different post written by the same player as the original post the result of the lie detect will be the same.

IE:

Truthify the following post:

I'm the doctor, don't lynch me. I know it looks bad but you've gotta believe me.

Lie detect the following statement:

I'm the doctor,

True

NaR posts in thread:

Like I told you before, I'm the doctor

Lie detect the following statement:

I'm the doctor

True

The same idea applies to PMs as well.

Also, statements that the player has not "Truthified" and does not actually know the answer to show up as false to lie detects. Analyzation statements or "I believe" statements (essentially anything opinionated) shows up as true to lie detects.

Player List:

Spoiler:

1. Misnomer (Le Roi est mort, vive le Roi!) Revolutionary, modkilled D2
2. slbub (nex ut proditor, porro ago imperator) Modkilled D2.
3. webby Doctor, killed N1
4. Silknor (Inter arma enim silent leges)
5. mpolo (signing up to see if this wakes up) Mavketl
6. BoomFrog
7. Adam H D3 Jester, lynched D1
8. Angua

PMs all sent, please confirm in thread and PM me if you have not yet received a role PM. D1 will start when enough of you have confirmed.

[Angua]

Confirming

[Misnomer]

Confirming.

[mpolo]

I have read my role, but I won't be here until next Sunday. I leave the decision of what to do about this in the mods' hands.

[BoomFrog]

Confirm

[slbub]

cOnFiRm

[webby]

Confirming!

[Adam H]

Confirm

[weiyaoli]

Silknor has read his role PM so I'm calling a start to D1. I'm setting a tentative deadline of 1 week (i.e. D1 will end sometime Monday 26th) but this is very tentative.


D1 starts now. 8 alive, 5 to lynch. Deadline Monday 26th.

[Silknor]

Confirm.

[ahippo]

Yep I actually am here to do this. Ready, willing, prepared to mod.

[BoomFrog]

Yep I actually am here to do this. Ready, willing, prepared to mod.

Yeay! welcome back ahippo.

Alright, so let's get down to business. This king isn't getting any deader.

The truth detecting thing is interesting and I think I've found a way to break it. We each make a single post stating "I am a Loyalists". Then later if you are suspicious of someone you can lie detect on their old D1 statement. Yes, the scum can use their Truthify on the D1 statement but that means they've used up their one Truthify for the game. So later if we have to make power role claims the revolutionaries cannot safely falseclaim.

I don't see any downside to the plan, but I'll wait for discussion just in case.

[weiyaoli]

Mavketl will be replacing mpolo.

[Angua]

Boomfrog - that sounds like a fairly good idea, but do you think you would run into problems with scum saying that they can vouch for each other because they lie detected those statements earlier (which obviously runs the risk of if they are both loyalists then the rest of us waste a lie detection on them).

[Adam H]

I'm not sure that the damn rebels vouching for each other is a downside, since we'd have a nice tidy connection between 2 people (or 3? I assume there's only 2 damn rebels...). And anyways could we just arrange it so that no one lie detects their lie detector?

Perhaps an improved plan would be to say multiple statements that are all true for town, so not every statement can be truthified. For example, "I am a Loyalist" and "I am not a damn rebel" are different, and if you truthify one you can't truthify the other. The damn rebels wouldn't know which one to truthify, and probably would bother truthifying either of them.

Unless the point was to sucker the damn rebels into truthifying their original statement just so they can't power role claim.

***find 'scum' replace all 'damn rebel'

[Mavketl]

Quick confirm post from my ereader while I travel home from work.

Because it can't hurt: I am town. I think we should hold back on the lie detectors for a while, though. seems silly to blow them all in a big circle thing that won't give us much.

More later.

[Mavketl]

Mod: we can truthify statements from other players as well, correct?

Usually I'm into trying to game the system with mafia games, but I don't think this set-up works very well for that. I've been playing quite some The Resistance lately (IRL), and what you can see there is that the 'cop-like' powers are much more effective when they are used relatively unpredictably and based on personal judgement. It makes the bad guys uncertain of when they can get away with stuff, so they will go out of their way to not (in this case) have to lie. Which means they should be a lot easier to talk into corners.

I think everyone should do the "I am town" thing for sure, but we should not commit to actually lie-detectoring any of them. There is no reason for not saying it just in case, though, so a very minor FoS for everyone who has posted and has not claimed town. How is "waiting for discussion" at all relevant for that?

Lastly, I tend to think that if you lie detect something, you should publically announce your detection and result, maybe with some rare exceptions. Everyone knows that everyone has a detection power, so it's not like being a cop where you have to 'play it safe' all the time. Opinions?

[weiyaoli]

You can indeed truthify statements from other players.

[Adam H]

Yeah, I am town.

Lastly, I tend to think that if you lie detect something, you should publically announce your detection and result, maybe with some rare exceptions. Everyone knows that everyone has a detection power, so it's not like being a cop where you have to 'play it safe' all the time. Opinions?

Agreed... The lie detection does no good unless we get something useful out of it. However, off the top of my head, an exception would be if everyone but a few people have announced their lie detection, it might be advantageous to pretend that you have not used your detection.

Perhaps an improved plan would be to say multiple statements that are all true for town, so not every statement can be truthified. For example, "I am a Loyalist" and "I am not a damn rebel" are different, and if you truthify one you can't truthify the other. The damn rebels wouldn't know which one to truthify, and probably would NOT bother truthifying either of them.

fixed...

[webby]

I am a loyalist.

One other useful thing to do if we're suspicious that two players are scum is to get one to say about the other 'X is scum'. This will come up false unless the player knows that the other is scum. Possible drawbacks are that someone else could truthify it and (a smaller one) that we might have a cop who knows for sure the other player is scum. But I think this could be a good lategame method.

Adam H is correct that claiming using your lie detection is sort of like claiming vanilla town - it narrows down the power roles for scum. I think in general, however, the benefits of claiming are likely to outweigh the negatives.

[Misnomer]

I'm afraid I'm going to need a replacement. I simply don't have enough free time to play mafia atm.

[BoomFrog]

I am town.

Perhaps an improved plan would be to say multiple statements that are all true for town, so not every statement can be truthified. For example, "I am a Loyalist" and "I am not a damn rebel" are different, and if you truthify one you can't truthify the other.

Are logically equivalent statements "Golded" by a Truthify? For example if a Rebel truthifys "I am a Loyalist" and later says "I am not a rebel", would the latter come up true or false under detection?

One other useful thing to do if we're suspicious that two players are scum is to get one to say about the other 'X is scum'. This will come up false unless the player knows that the other is scum. Possible drawbacks are that someone else could truthify it and (a smaller one) that we might have a cop who knows for sure the other player is scum. But I think this could be a good lategame method.

We should always make statements that would be true if we are town that way scum can't mess with the statement (unless one of the scum has a falsify power...) So for example you could say, "I do not know for sure who is a Rebel." We could also make this claim D1 so that any cops won't be making a false statement. Although if a cop finds scum he'll obviously claim immediately anyway.

Adam H is correct that claiming using your lie detection is sort of like claiming vanilla town - it narrows down the power roles for scum. I think in general, however, the benefits of claiming are likely to outweigh the negatives.

Unless someone catches a lie I don't think anyone should claim using their power. It just makes scum's life easier to know who has used up their detect. The benefits of claiming are that no one else will check the exact same statement. But if we all make a wide variety of statements to check then that is an unlikely problem anyway. The situations that I think you should claim in are:

1) If someone is close to being lynched then anyone who has results on their statements should come forward. If we have two positive results then it's likely that person is really loyal.
2) If you get a false result reveal it
3) If you yourself are about to be lynched you should use your power and reveal the results.

[slbub]

Perhaps an improved plan would be to say multiple statements that are all true for town, so not every statement can be truthified. For example, "I am a Loyalist" and "I am not a damn rebel" are different, and if you truthify one you can't truthify the other.

Are logically equivalent statements "Golded" by a Truthify? For example if a Rebel truthifys "I am a Loyalist" and later says "I am not a rebel", would the latter come up true or false under detection?

if you could only truthify one of those statements then the game would sway much more for townies, like: everyone say both of those, then scum could only truthify one the other would be false if detected. if i am wrong please correct me, by the way i am happy to anounce

i am a loyalist! i am not scum! (just in case, that is the case)

[slbub]

EBWOP: the bold was boomfrog's words as well

brain is fried, i sleep...

[Angua]

I am a loyalist.

I'm sort of getting confused by all the ins and outs of what is the best way to beat the lie detector, truthify thing, so I'll probably just go with what people are saying. I do think it is a good idea for any townie about to be lynched to use their power (and that no one hammer until we've had a chance to hear from them, and they've had a chance to hear from roband). Also, regarding potential cops or people who have successfully used their lie detector - webby said that it would be a good idea to have a statement from D1 saying that we don't know who scum is, so:
Would a statement from D1 keep it's trueness if other information later changes? ie if someone says that they don't know who are scum, but find out later, or are not scum, but get turned later - does that mean that the D1 statement counts as true, or is it false if used after the person making the statement gets new information?

I put the turning scum thing in, as it could be possible that the rebels might be able to recruit people to their cause, and I've been in a few games like that so don't want to get caught out.

[Angua]

Would a statement from D1 keep its trueness if other information later changes? ie if someone says that they don't know who are scum, but find out later, or are not scum, but get turned later - does that mean that the D1 statement counts as true, or is it false if used after the person making the statement gets new information?

ebwop

[Mavketl]

In addition to those (useful) questions: can we use our lie detectors on quoted hypothetical statements such as slbub's recent loyalist/not a rebel statements?

Also, an experiment. Do NOT lie detect these unless you are scum. I dont claim that they are true.

I am a sane cop.
I am an insane cop.
I am a mason.
I am a tracker.
I can write anonymous flavour.
I have a one-shot vig kill.
I am your worst nightmare

[Mavketl]

ebwop

damnit those were boomfrog's not slbub's>.<

[weiyaoli]

Are logically equivalent statements "Golded" by a Truthify? For example if a Rebel truthifys "I am a Loyalist" and later says "I am not a rebel", would the latter come up true or false under detection?

The second statement in this case will not be "Golded".

Would a statement from D1 keep it's trueness if other information later changes? ie if someone says that they don't know who are scum, but find out later, or are not scum, but get turned later - does that mean that the D1 statement counts as true, or is it false if used after the person making the statement gets new information?

All statements will be taken from the time they are made. If any new information comes to light for that person, then the lie detector will still only detect what was true/false at the time the statement was made.

can we use our lie detectors on quoted hypothetical statements such as slbub's recent loyalist/not a rebel statements?

What do you mean by hypothetical statements?

[Mavketl]

Clarification:

Perhaps an improved plan would be to say multiple statements that are all true for town, so not every statement can be truthified. For example, "I am a Loyalist" and "I am not a damn rebel" are different, and if you truthify one you can't truthify the other.

Are logically equivalent statements "Golded" by a Truthify? For example if a Rebel truthifys "I am a Loyalist" and later says "I am not a rebel", would the latter come up true or false under detection?

BoomFrog is talking about examples of statements. Can we lie-detector them as if he actually made those statements?


And just in case: I'm a loyalist. I'm not a rebel.

[weiyaoli]

No. Statements cannot be taken from questions to the mod, but other potential hypothetical/example ones are fair game.

[Angua]

Ok, I'm a loyalist. I'm not a rebel. I don't know who any rebels are.

I guess we might as well just say all this stuff, and see what happens later if/when we decide to use them. I can't really think of much else to say at the moment, so I'll wait until everyone has said a bunch of different statements so that we can use them for later.

I guess 2 scum is the most likely set up, unless town has some good powers? What does everyone think?

[webby]

I am a sane cop.
I am an insane cop.
I am a mason.
I am a tracker.
I can write anonymous flavour.
I have a one-shot vig kill.
I am your worst nightmare.
I know who the rebels are.

It feels like this game would be broken if there were six town and only two scum, so I reckon there's most likely either 5 town and 3 scum, or something like 4-2-2.

I don't think I've quite grasped this game yet - can't we get past scum's truthify by making false statements?

I'm going to be very suspicious of anyone who doesn't make the statement 'I am not town'. 'I know who the rebels are' isn't good enough on the chance that the rebels actually don't know who the other rebels are, or that there is a serial killer or similar.

The other question is the possibility of there being independents. Do we want them to claim now, so that anyone who comes up true to 'I am not town' can be lynched?

My one worry is the possibility that we don't have all the information - what if scum have an ability like a 'falsify', by which they can make a true statement come up false? My recommendation would be to make as many statements as possible that are true if you're scum and false if you're town. Sure scum can truthify one of them, but it wastes their truthify and if you have a lot of them, then when we come to lie detect you, we can pick one at random.

My faction has a kill.
I have a kill.
My faction can talk at night.
I am a rebel.
I am a serial killer.
I am not a loyalist.

[Angua]

Ok, I'll add in the other stuff.
I am a sane cop.
I am an insane cop.
I am a mason.
I am a tracker.
I can write anonymous flavour.
I have a one-shot vig kill.
I am your worst nightmare.
I know who the rebels are.
My faction has a kill.
I have a kill.
My faction can talk at night.
I am a rebel.
I am a serial killer.
I am not a loyalist

I think we've covered all possible bases there. I agree that 5-3 is the most likely set up if there aren't any independents (which, I guess it's possible given the flavour that someone is trying to grab the crown for themselves rather than anyone else, even though it wasn't specifically mentioned in the flavour text). I don't know how it would work with independents though - 5-2-1 or 4-2-2 could both work.

[Angua]

Ok, reading the flavour text more closely, I think it is quite likely that we have at least one independent, it mentions both rebels and 'not all of you have the kingdom's best interests at heart'. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if they have some sort of serial killer role or other type of kill as murdering people for the crown is a pretty common trope.

Of the men in the king’s highest court, some are likely taken by these lies. And you know that not all of you have the kingdom's best interests in heart.

I am not an independent <- added to my list of statements.

[slbub]

i can easily see the 5-3 working out the easiest, but a mislynch and a scum kill would mean an easy win for them,


I am a sane cop.
I am an insane cop.
I am a mason.
I am a tracker.
I can write anonymous flavour.
I have a one-shot vig kill.
I am not an independent.
I am an independent.
I know who the rebels are.
My faction has a kill.
I have a kill.
My faction can talk at night.
I am a rebel.
I am a serial killer.

Luke, I am your father.

[Adam H]

I am a sane cop.
I am an insane cop.
I am a mason.
I am a tracker.
I can write anonymous flavour.
I have a one-shot vig kill.
I am your worst nightmare.
I know who the rebels are.
My faction has a kill.
I have a kill.
My faction can talk at night.
I am a rebel.
I am a serial killer.
I am not a loyalist

I feel like we just broke the game...

5-3 seems like an auto-victory for spies... unless you all have some serious firepower roles. I'm vanilla town*, though... so I am more inclined to think it's 4-2-2 or 5-1-2 with strong rebel roles and weak loyalist roles.

*lie detection needed


Silknor, you there?

[slbub]

even the 4-2-2 seems a little out matched for the town, even with a successful lynch the mafia could win just by each lynching a townie, then over very soon, either 5-2-1, or 6-2 i think any way,

I am legend.

[Angua]

Just realised - misnomer hasn't been replaced yet I don't think. While though I guess we do have until Monday for that to happen.

[Silknor]

We should always make statements that would be true if we are town that way scum can't mess with the statement (unless one of the scum has a falsify power...) So for example you could say, "I do not know for sure who is a Rebel." We could also make this claim D1 so that any cops won't be making a false statement. Although if a cop finds scum he'll obviously claim immediately anyway.

While there aren't any independents mentioned in the OP, we can't assume there aren't any. Depending on the mods, that could screw up lie detectors, as any scum who makes that statement would only be speculating that there are not independents.

I am a Loyalist.

Also I'm going to agree with Webby here, I do not believe it should be assumed that the scum (or possibly an independent) has no way of messing with the Lie Detector besides Truthify.