ash

[soba]

Comments

[soba]

[



you can tell he is deeply debating on what to do next

but he, eventually, will step towards ash ]

[voidbreaker]

[ yeah suck it up kid. better to get him safely back into bed than have him bleed out and face the wrath of Luna ]

[soba]

[ it's fine, plum can clean up afterwards ]

This is so dumb...

[voidbreaker]

Getting clawed by fish monsters tends to do a number on you. [ dumb? sure. but get over it and get better. ]

[soba]

... well, at least he was still in there.

[ although whether or not that was a good thing for asch is a different story. he seemed like he was suffering. ]

[voidbreaker]

Tall, Red and Grumpy?

[ ... ]

Yeah, we need to not mess up like that again. Too much crap at stake to risk it.

[soba]

... especially since now we have a killer on the loose, and there might still be a new one next week on top of that...

[voidbreaker]

[ ... ]

Wonder if there's a way to track them down. Just because we didn't catch them then, doesn't mean we can't later. It's not ideal, but doable.

[soba]

We can try. The other problem would be what to do with them if we do figure them out.

[voidbreaker]

Split the vote.

[ He just stares down at the top of Toi's head. ] If it's possible to coordinate ourselves that much. But assume for a moment two people get the same number of votes -- what do you think they'd do?

[soba]

I don't know. I think it's something we'd have to confirm is even possible, since I wouldn't be surprised if they end up randomly choosing between the two to execute.

[voidbreaker]

Taking them out ourselves isn't an option, if we want to survive without losing more people. They'd probably just take out any killer, one way or another.

[soba]

Well, I'm sure someone might want to get all vigilante about it.

... except then we'd probably have to vote for them, so yeah, you're right. It's just giving us a different kind of mess.

[voidbreaker]

... If we can split the vote between two known killers, even if the result is randomised, we take out someone who killed. Not someone who didn't.

[soba]

No, I mean...

[ he sighs ]

Let's say someone finds out who killed Nia, and then kills that person. But then someone else who was infected with whatever is going on kills too. Which person do you think people will most likely want to execute between those two options?

[voidbreaker]

Context would be important. Maybe people would pick the obvious option out of fear, or the urge to catch someone out who had definitely done something.

... But you'd know why they did it. Which could change perspective.

[soba]

[ he nods his head. ]

Right. We can hope we don't get into a situation like that in the first place, but... we probably won't know how it goes until it's happening.

[voidbreaker]

[ i'm assuming they're en route to his bed now, and setting him down there. ]

Yeah. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst? We'll need to decide how to tackle this shit, sooner rather than later.

[soba]

Mm. And it's better if all of us are more or less on the same page about certain things.

[voidbreaker]

... If we don’t share out the info, then we can’t use it right. And if everyone knows, then the playing field’s level.

[ ... ]

If we had a way to dig into things ourselves, that’d be useful.

[soba]

I'm sure there might be some ways.

If we can figure it out.

[voidbreaker]

Looking at our last outing, that’s a pretty big “if”.

[soba]

... well, it's either figure things out or we get killed.

[voidbreaker]

No pressure, then.

[soba]

I'm sure at least one of us has to be smart.