I think that tracability is important - the Amnesiac submitting the Confrontation should be able to chart the full history of the information in order for it to qualify.

I think without the full history the Confrontation wouldn’t meet “leaves no possibility for their Role to be anything other than the Role named in the private message” anyway.

In fact, even with a full history, there’s still the possibility that somebody along the way was lying.

Traitor is active, after all.

Someone could just be mistaken about something, as well.

Those issues exist in the current rule as well.

If any part of the confrontation is wrong, the confrontation fails. At least, that’s how I understood it being handled in the current rule, and I don’t see how this change creates a new problem.

Oh I see, you’re saying this basically doesn’t do anything because we can’t use information from other Amnesiacs either way.

Even in the current version of the rule, it’s possible that the one person I got the information from was lying or mistaken. In this case, that would not be information from that Amnesiac from the Past Memory, because the information I got from the other Amnesiac, and the information that Amnesiac got from the Past Memory are different.

The same logic can be applied here, with a longer link chain. If any of the people in the chain lied or were mistaken, that information did not originate from the Past Memory. Thus, this Rule implicitly requires traceability in the same way that the previous version of the rule does. That is, now I need to show that my information originates from the Past Memory, whereas before I needed to show that I got it from an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory.

This phrase, “originates from the Past Memory”, in other words means the same thing as “given to that Amnesiac by the Past Memory, or by an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory, or by an Amnesiac who got it from an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory, or by an Amnesiac who got it from an Amnesiac who got it from an Amnesiac who got it from the Past Memory…”

Hm, I don’t agree that as written this says that - I think that it opens up some room for guessing/fishing, as the Amnesiac could say something hoping that the Past Memory has given supporting evidence to another Amnesiac without having to prove that they have actually acquired that evidence themselves.

I’m happy that “justification for their belief leaves no possibility for their Role to be anything other” rules out a Confrontation of “I am the Gardener because it’s just a guess and I’m guessing such information originated from the Past Memory at some point”.

The whole deduction system does need to be broader, though, for players who can deduce their Role logically from the gamestate.