Werewolf CXII - Dueling Wizards III - The Living Thread

[Kuruharan]

~~~~~~~Our Tale~~~~~~~

Guests again thronged the Halls of Kuruharan. This time he promised that there would be no surprise movie starring the guests screened at this gala.

His pet, Chrysophylax, having bad memories of the last time Kuruharan hosted a party, declined to put in an appearance.

Yet again, to the delight of one and all, there were more fireworks, bouncy castles, and water balloon fights than at which one could shake a stick. Alas, no dragon rides for a nominal fee as Chrysophylax was off on a dudgeon.

After a feast of gargantuan proportions (I would describe it in excruciating detail, but I'm not George R. R. Martin and I really need to get on with the writing of our tale), the revelers retired for the NIGHT, secure in the knowledge that nothing like last time could possibly happen again…could it? I mean, other than some of the food tasting a little odd, there surely couldn't be anything to worry about...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

General Rules:

There will be no multi-lynches on the Living Thread or multi-vote granting from the Dead Thread. Vote ties in the Living Thread will result in no lynch and vote ties in the Dead Thread will result in no bonus vote being granted that DAY.

Voting should be done as follows: ++Kuruharan. Failure to vote three DAYS in a row will result in murder and sending the player to the Dead Thread. Participation in the Dead Thread is optional as you are already dead and I won’t kill you again.

Voting is non-retractable.

Dead Thread:

After there are TWO residents of the Dead Thread, every DAY the dead get to vote on giving one of the living an extra vote. The dead are subject to the same deadline as the living. The living will not know who among them will get an extra vote until it is revealed in the closing narration of the DAY.

The Dead Empowerment vote is a simple (+1) to the vote of the empowered individual.

For example, let’s suppose that Nilpaurion Felagund has voted for himself to be lynched that day. The residents of the Dead Thread think this is utterly hilarious and vote to empower him. Nilp’s nilping of himself has now gone from a single vote for Nilp to two votes for Nilp.

Since in the anteroom of the afterlife it is hard to hide one’s true nature from one’s fellow residents, every NIGHT after there are TWO residents the dead get to vote for one among themselves to determine their true nature. The voted player will be described as either PREDATOR or PREY.

Please Note: The threshold for the Dead Thread voting has been reduced to two since the Dead Thread will (presumably) not be filling up super-fast like the last Dead Thread game and I wanted to give the dead something to do sooner in the game. Yes, the first two residents of the Dead Thread will probably reflexively vote for each other for the role reveal…but then again, maybe they won’t.

The living may not look in the Dead Thread. The dead may continue to read the Living Thread but may no longer post there or interact with the Living in any way except through the mechanism of the Dead Thread Bonus Vote. The dead can read the whole of the Dead Thread, not just what happens after one dies. For those that resurrect, it is permitted for them to read and participate in the Dead Thread until the time that I post the narration announcing their return to the Living Thread. After that post, the resurrected player may no longer read any further in the Dead Thread until such time as they return to it. For those who resurrect, they may only paraphrase but NOT directly quote or cite posts in the Dead Thread. However, the dead may quote and cite posts from the Living Thread.

Please note: It is NOT ALLOWED for a Living Player to click on the post count link of the Dead Thread to check and see how many times Dead Thread player have posted. Obviously you will be able to see how many posts there are in total and who the last poster is, but that is all that is allowed. Do not check who has posted how many times, do not cite who has posted how many times, do not base arguments on it. You are the Living and they are the Dead and you don’t know what they are up to…and quite possibly neither do they.

Living Thread:

This is going to be rather different than last time.

First off, there are no hidden roles in this game and there is only a single wolfpack.

The Next Party (also known as the Village in normal parlance…)

Ordos – ordinary players with no special powers. They will stay in the Dead Thread after death.

Hunter – The Hunter may send me one name every DAY and NIGHT of somebody they would like to kill if they themselves are killed during that specific time period. Once they have sent me a pick they cannot change it until the next time period. They are not required to send me their pick at any particular time of the DAY or NIGHT, just as long as it is before I post the closing/opening narration. They may pick the same person over and over again or they may pick a different person each time as they wish. If they are killed they remain in the Dead Thread.

Ranger – The Ranger can protect players from being killed or turned during the NIGHT phase. The Ranger can self-protect and protect the same person multiple times in a row. The Ranger can deflect probes/attacks on the person of the Good Wizard. So let's say the Evil Wizard and Wolves try to kill the Good Wizard but the Ranger is protecting the Good Wizard. The Evil Wizard will receive the same message they would in any other circumstances of a Ranger save. However, unlike previous Dead Thread games, the Ranger does not have the power to resurrect. If the Ranger is killed they cannot return from the Dead Thread. The Ranger does not stop the Visitor who Leaves from leaving. The Ranger could, through some gargantuan screw up prevent the Visitor who Dies from dying…I imagine the Good Wizard will be very angry at that point.
I made the changes to the sequential protection of the same person rule and granted the ability to protect an ordo from being turned into a wolf because taking away the resurrection ability made the role seem very lackluster.

Good Wizard – The Good Wizard will be discussed in the Wizard section.

Visitor – The Visitor will be discussed in the Visitor section.

The Wolves

There is a single wolf pack. It is a standard wolf pack in almost all respects except for how it is generated. The maximum number of wolves is three.

The Wizards

There is a Good Wizard and an Evil Wizard. They are the driving force behind much of the game. They are the only two roles that are assigned by me at the start of the game. They cannot be killed by normal means; they must be killed by each other in a Wizard’s Duel (which should be thought of as being pronounced Weeeeeezaaaaard’s Duuuuel in a ridiculous high pitched voice) in which both of them will perish. The specific mechanics of the Wizard’s Duel are as follows:

First, the challenging wizard must possess confirmed information (as in, I the Mod know that they know) as to the identity of their opponent. That way the phantom could not just spam challenge everyone in the thread and then claim that he has successfully taken out the opposing wizard.

Second, the challenge must happen during the DAY and cannot happen before DAY THREE.

Third, the challenge MUST be bolded in red and state the name of the player you are challenging to a Wizard’s Duel.

For example, the Evil Wizard could say Kuruharan, I challenge you to a Wizard’s Duel!!!.

At that point the Evil Wizard will feel quite sheepish because I’m not playing the game and they just revealed themselves to the Good Wizard.

However, placing the correct name in the challenge will trigger the challenge.

Once a challenge has been issued by either Wizard, neither the Good Wizard nor Evil Wizard may post in the Living Thread again! They both immediately go to the Dead Thread…where they will (hopefully) continue making life for the inmates there as amusing as possible.

I will do my best to post the Duel Narrative as quickly as possible. Cooperation from the Wizards in this regard by notifying me the NIGHT before they intend to challenge would be appreciated.

If the Good Wizard and Evil Wizard target the same person, nothing happens.

The Good Wizard – The Good Wizard creates the Hunter, the Ranger and the two Visitors. The picks do not have to be made sequentially but may be made in any order the Good Wizard chooses. On NIGHTS when a Gifted is not created the Good Wizard may scry the role of a player. The Good Wizard is informed of the current role of the target exactly.

If the Good Wizard picks a wolf for converting into a Gifted that pick is deterred but the Good Wizard keeps that pick for future use; the pick is not lost. There is one exception to this, but that will be discussed in the Visitor section.

If the Good Wizard attempts any sort of action (scrying, Gifting, etc.) on the Evil Wizard, the Good Wizard is informed of the identity of the Evil Wizard. This opens the door for the Good Wizard to challenge the Evil Wizard.

The Good Wizard is never in direct communication with the Gifteds, nor are the Gifteds ever in communication with each other. The Good Wizard may send messages via the Mod to the Gifteds. The Good Wizard may not share their own identity or the identity of the other Gifteds. If they wanted me to do that I would just not include that part of the message. This communication is RPed as dreams that occur during the NIGHT phase. If a Gifted is killed the Good Wizard cannot replace them.

The Good Wizard may not PM with either Visitor either in the Living Thread or the Dead Thread.

The Good Wizard cannot communicate across the barrier of death. However, inside the Dead Thread the Good Wizard may PM freely with the Hunter and the Ranger if they are in the Dead Thread. The Good Wizard also can no longer scry when in the Dead Thread.

The Evil Wizard – The Evil Wizard may pick up to 4 wolves in total during the NIGHTly phases. The Evil Wizard is under no obligation to expend all wolf picks on sequential NIGHTS but may use NIGHTS for scrying even if they have wolf picks still in reserve. However, there may be no more than three wolves active in the Living Thread at any one time.

On NIGHTS when a wolf is not created the Evil Wizard may scry the role of a target in quest of finding the Good Wizard. That is the only information the Evil Wizard will learn. If the Evil Wizard scrys a Gifted the Gifted role is not revealed to the Evil Wizard.

If the Evil Wizard scrys or attempts to convert the Good Wizard, the Evil Wizard is informed of the identity of the Good Wizard. This opens the door for the Evil Wizard to challenge the Good Wizard.

If the Evil Wizard picks a Gifted for converting into a wolf that pick is deterred but the Evil Wizard still keeps that pick for future use. It is not lost.

Generally speaking, the Evil Wizard is the only one of the wolves from whom I will accept a kill pick. There might be a situation where the Evil Wizard might designate somebody as a spokeswolf to me but we will hash that out ourselves if it arises.

The Evil Wizard may make kills solo once they have created a wolf (in a scenario where the Evil Wizard has lost all their wolves). This rule applies even if the Evil Wizard has wolf picks in reserve that have not been used yet but is for some reason on his/her own.

The Evil Wizard and wolves are able to PM each other during the NIGHT phase. Their identities are not a secret from each other and there are no re-conversions from one side to another in this game. If a wolf is killed in the game and the Evil Wizard has expended all four picks in creating wolves, no further wolves may be created.

The Evil Wizard cannot communicate with the wolves across the barrier of death, but may continue PMing the other wolves at any time if they are both in the Dead Thread.

The Visitors

There are two Visitors: The Visitor who Leaves and the Visitor who Dies. Their winning conditions are ambiguous.

The Visitor roles are the only ones who may resurrect to the Living Thread from the Dead Thread.

Both Visitors are created by the Good Wizard. Once the Visitor enters the Dead Thread they will remain there for a DAY/NIGHT cycle. They will then return to the Living Thread at the next available DAY cycle, assuming the game is still ongoing. This is not a Lover role. The Visitors are guaranteed to return if the game continues.

When the Visitors return they are now classified as Ghosts. Ghosts do not count as part of the final tally for victory condition purposes. The Visitors remain in the Living Thread and can vote for one DAY but then they return to the Dead Thread permanently.

The Visitor who Leaves – The Visitor who Leaves is sent by the Good Wizard IMMEDIATELY to the Dead Thread. Obviously they will discover their new role pretty quickly.

The Visitor who Dies – The Visitor who Dies remains in the Living Thread until death comes by some other means. They are NOT informed of their change in role until the narration announcing their return from the Dead Thread to the Living Thread.

There is nothing preventing the Good Wizard from inadvertently picking wolves as either Visitor. If this happens this does not change the alignment of the wolf. That wolf is still a baddie and victory and defeat for that player is still determined on that basis.

Neither Wizard may be selected as a Visitor. Neither may either the Hunter or the Ranger be selected as a Visitor.

Order of NIGHTly Activities:

ALL actions possible to be taken during a NIGHT are assumed to have happened. This is important to understand because, for example, the Good Wizard picks a player as the Visitor who Leaves and the Wolves kill that Visitor that same NIGHT that player is still the Visitor who Leaves and would still return to the Living Thread even though the narration will initially imply a wolf kill.

---------------------------------------------

NIGHT 1 has now begun! Those of you who have NIGHTly roles may now fulfill them. If you have not been notified that you have a NIGHTly role toNIGHT then you are an Ordo.

Players
Nerwen
Inziladun
Loslote
Boromir88
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Morsul the Dark
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Legate of Amon Lanc
Mithalwen
Eönwë
Nogrod
Pervinca Took
Brinniel

This thread will be open for posting at 8 PM US Eastern July 10...or more accurately when I get the Opening Narration for DAY 1 posted, which will be at approximately that time. ;)

The Ordos sleep now.

EDIT: Added Ranger rule clarification.

[Kuruharan]

~~~~~Our Tale~~~~~

The guests awoke, groggy in the early morning light. Wait…early morning light? The guests realized simultaneously that they were outside and had been sleeping on the ground.

What had happened? Why were they not in the main hall of Kuruharan’s Halls?

They looked around to find themselves on the floor of a narrow canyon. All around them were mine shafts and chambers carved into the canyon walls.

After exploring the area, the guests discovered there were exactly enough chambers for each of them and each one of the chambers had one of their names posted on the outside.

In the middle of the canyon, they discovered that same old guillotine from the last time Kuru hosted a party. Beside the guillotine was a sign that read:

“At least I can be grateful that this time there was only one of you who came to my home with murder in your heart! The rest of you will have to find out who it is and dispatch them before I let you back in my house. Be warned, I suspect this foul varlet can convert more of you to their cause!

You will note that I am not letting you stay in my house this time and make a mess of things that I have to clean up later. You’ll manage just fine out here.”

“We won’t stand for this,” shouted several of the bolder guests. They agreed it among themselves that each would set out in a separate direction and find their own ways out.

Half an hour later they were all standing in a circle facing each other around the guillotine. The canyon had turned out to be a labyrinth with no way out.

“If at first you don’t succeed,” the guests said to each other. They set off again, this time in pairs.

When they had reached, “If at seventh you don’t succeed,” even the doughtiest among them began to feel a bit discouraged.

“This is ridiculous,” one said, “we may be stuck here, but there is no reason for us to start killing each other just to find out who allegedly might have come here to kill us! There’s no proof of any of this!”





But what if Kuru was right? What if somebody had come to the party intending to murder them all?












What if…one of them had already joined them..?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is now DAY 1. You may all post.

The Living
Nerwen
Inziladun
Loslote
Boromir88
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Morsul the Dark
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Legate of Amon Lanc
Mithalwen
Eönwë
Nogrod
Pervinca Took
Brinniel

[Morsul the Dark]

Obligatory first post list.

Wolves:
Nerwen
Inziladun
Loslote
Boromir88
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Legate of Amon Lanc
Mithalwen
Eönwë
Nogrod
Pervencia Took
Brinniel

Not Wolves
Morsul


There I did it. Did I won?

[Inziladun]

Well, I have no memory whatever of the prior event Kuru alluded to, but I'm doubtful that knowledge would be much use now.

So. We're looking at a Good Wizard, an Evil Wizard, and, I would think likely, one Wolf and a Gifted.

So, which of you did it? :rolleyes:

[Loslote]

This is a much more interesting Day One than most, I think, with a lot of variables to take into consideration.

1. Has the wolf had a change to talk to the Evil Wizard yet? They can pm during the Night phase, but the choice is also made during the Night phase. If the wolf is flying blind, we might look to see shifts in behavior or attitude toMorrow, after the Evils have had a chance to talk to one another. We should be keeping an eye out for shifts in attitude towards other players in general, actually - the Gifteds probably won't have as much reason to change how they behave towards specific individuals.

2. Our chances of hitting either a baddie or a Gifted are really low toDay, which means this might be one of the few situations in which a no lynch Day One makes sense. Plus, since there aren't many wolves, they'll have to be a lot less careful about pack behavior, which means one of our standby clues won't come into play at first.

3. That being said, I have the feeling the Good Wizard will populate the Gifteds faster than the Evil Wizard will populate the wolves. Unless the Evil Wizard themself is in danger, I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck with just one wolf for a few Nights, to give themselves a chance to get the lay of the land before making their other two choices. Whereas one wolf is just as good as three, if the Evil Wizard can just make another when the first dies, the Gifteds are individually valuable, so I think the Good Wizard is a more motivated seller, so to speak. In which case, our odds of hitting a wolf might not increase after Day One, whereas our odds of hitting a Gifted might.

I haven't played a Dueling Wizards game before, so I've probably missed several crucial implications, but I'm excited to see how this game plays out.

[Morsul the Dark]

2. Our chances of hitting either a baddie or a Gifted are really low toDay, which means this might be one of the few situations in which a no lynch Day One makes sense. Plus, since there aren't many wolves, they'll have to be a lot less careful about pack behavior, which means one of our standby clues won't come into play at first.


I haven't played a Dueling Wizards game before, so I've probably missed several crucial implications, but I'm excited to see how this game plays out.

Certainly a good thought process, but the other side of the coin is a no lynch vote is in itself a bandwagon to easily hide in. It discourages suspicions and allegations and other information that can be dissected Day two.

[Loslote]

Certainly a good thought process, but the other side of the coin is a no lynch vote is in itself a bandwagon to easily hide in. It discourages suspicions and allegations and other information that can be dissected Day two.

True, I'm just not sure if there will be any information on Day Two regardless. There's MAYBE two baddies, and only one of them actually matters. No way the Evil Wizard sticks their head out for the wolf, so the only way we might get info is if we happen to hit on the Evil Wizard and the wolf tries to come to their rescue - 1/16 shot to draw anyone out, instead of the 1/4 chance we would have if we had a pack of four normal wolves. Suspect and throw accusations all you want - but I'm concerned that there's just not enough at stake for the wolves to actually act like wolves. I would almost call what we have toDay a werebear and an intelligent cobbler rather than a true wolf pack, and I think we need to strategize with that in mind.

I have a question, also - what happens if we try to lynch a Wizard? Do they just die, no chance for a Duel?

[Inziladun]

1. Has the wolf had a change to talk to the Evil Wizard yet? They can pm during the Night phase, but the choice is also made during the Night phase. If the wolf is flying blind, we might look to see shifts in behavior or attitude toMorrow, after the Evils have had a chance to talk to one another. We should be keeping an eye out for shifts in attitude towards other players in general, actually - the Gifteds probably won't have as much reason to change how they behave towards specific individuals.

I wouldn't think the wolf and the Wizard can have been in contact yet. The next Day though the wolf will know the Evil Wizard.

2. Our chances of hitting either a baddie or a Gifted are really low toDay, which means this might be one of the few situations in which a no lynch Day One makes sense. Plus, since there aren't many wolves, they'll have to be a lot less careful about pack behavior, which means one of our standby clues won't come into play at first.

Indeed. It would be a seriously lucky break to hit the Evil Wizard or the wolf now.
We have one good Seer here, the Good Wizard, but they're presumably at least going to create the Ranger before scrying.

I have the feeling the Good Wizard will populate the Gifteds faster than the Evil Wizard will populate the wolves. Unless the Evil Wizard themself is in danger, I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck with just one wolf for a few Nights, to give themselves a chance to get the lay of the land before making their other two choices. Whereas one wolf is just as good as three, if the Evil Wizard can just make another when the first dies, the Gifteds are individually valuable, so I think the Good Wizard is a more motivated seller, so to speak. In which case, our odds of hitting a wolf might not increase after Day One, whereas our odds of hitting a Gifted might.

Hmm. The more wolves, the better the odds one of them dies through lynching, or from the Hunter. I can see the attraction of not creating them all back-to-back. Both Wizards will be hiding from one another early on, I would think, so they're also not going to want to put themselves forward as scrying targets until they'e made their minions.

x/d with Morsul and Lottie

[Morsul the Dark]

Chance of getting a baddie with no lynch 0/16

Don't get me wrong mathematically I get the logic.

Then again I'm not entirely sure I get the whole wizard deal.

[Morsul the Dark]

*old man voice
Back in my day we had wolves and gifted not these new fangled wizards

[Inziladun]

Chance of getting a baddie with no lynch 0/16

Don't get me wrong mathematically I get the logic.

Then again I'm not entirely sure I get the whole wizard deal.

I'm usually averse to a no-lynch on general principles. As it is, we have, presumably, a Good Wizard, a Gifted, an Evil Wizard, and a wolf. A 2/16 chance of hitting one of the baddies or one of the good guys. Better than usual chance of innocent blood on Day One.

x/d with Morsul again

[Inziladun]

A 2/16 chance of hitting one of the baddies or one of the good guys. Better than usual chance of innocent blood on Day One.

I meant, a 2/16 chance of hitting either Wizard or his minion. That's what being up for 17 hours does.

[Loslote]

*old man voice
Back in my day we had wolves and gifted not these new fangled wizards

Actually, the Wizards predate the both of us. ;)

[Morsul the Dark]

I've certainly never played a game with them. But time to pretend to be serious since my posts are mostly banter.

1. My last thought on lynch no lynch. If my math is correct we have a 6.25% of getting bad wizard today. If we forego lynching and lose a friend overnight that leaves 1/15. 6.66666% not going to lie seems to me we could easily have the same exact debate tomorrow which is one reason I'm not a fan of the policy.

2. The dead thread. Even if we make a few mistakes the dead thread could be a little Kharmic power to help us later on.

3. For clarification since the dead thread gives a voter a double vote does that change victory parameters for wolves? Usually it's wolves=innocents but in theory if it got to 1/1 the dead thread could break that tie?

4. I'm going to sleep.

[Boromir88]

2. Our chances of hitting either a baddie or a Gifted are really low toDay, which means this might be one of the few situations in which a no lynch Day One makes sense. Plus, since there aren't many wolves, they'll have to be a lot less careful about pack behavior, which means one of our standby clues won't come into play at first.

I WANT TO SEE SOME PUNISHMENT!!!! :mad:

hroom, sorry I'm going to be prone to outbursts this time. I'm not good underground, feeling a little denned up.

Who wants to come on an 8th attempt to find an exit? And if failing to find it, maybe I can get the consolation of finding the master of these halls...to throttle him for putting me through his games and schemes again.

So, there's a wizard...but is it a ninja-wizard?

[Brinniel]

I have a question, also - what happens if we try to lynch a Wizard? Do they just die, no chance for a Duel?
Not sure, but my guess is that they don't die, and their role as a Wizard is revealed in the narration (though whether they are good or evil remains a mystery).


I have the feeling the Good Wizard will populate the Gifteds faster than the Evil Wizard will populate the wolves. Unless the Evil Wizard themself is in danger, I wouldn't be surprised if they stuck with just one wolf for a few Nights, to give themselves a chance to get the lay of the land before making their other two choices. Whereas one wolf is just as good as three, if the Evil Wizard can just make another when the first dies, the Gifteds are individually valuable, so I think the Good Wizard is a more motivated seller, so to speak. In which case, our odds of hitting a wolf might not increase after Day One, whereas our odds of hitting a Gifted might.Hmm. The more wolves, the better the odds one of them dies through lynching, or from the Hunter. I can see the attraction of not creating them all back-to-back. Both Wizards will be hiding from one another early on, I would think, so they're also not going to want to put themselves forward as scrying targets until they'e made their minions.
I doubt the Evil Wizard will create all four wolves back-to-back, but I also don't think they would wait too long to create multiple wolves. While the likelihood of being discovered this soon isn't great, leaving a lone wolf for too long can be risky on the chance the Evil Wizard's identity is discovered within the first few Days/Nights.

I'm generally against a no lynch on Day 1. It just seems like a cop out to me. The odds may not be great, but we could still get lucky. And anyway, the results of a lynch are far more telling than a non lynch.

The first Day is always the trickiest, so it's nice to see some good substance up for discussion already..

[Nerwen]

Good morning all... but what terrible things are happening in this village... canyon... labyrinth... whatever? Terrible, terrible things! Aiiiieeee!!!

*is immediately lynched by Aganzir*

So, I see people are wondering about the possibility of lynching a Wizard. Well:

There is a Good Wizard and an Evil Wizard. They are the driving force behind much of the game. They are the only two roles that are assigned by me at the start of the game. They cannot be killed by normal means; they must be killed by each other in a Wizard’s Duel (which should be thought of as being pronounced Weeeeeezaaaaard’s Duuuuel in a ridiculous high pitched voice) in which both of them will perish.

As for the question of how many Gifteds/wolves we have... I concur that it's probably one of each, but the rules would seem to allow for other scenarios, so I am not sure how much point there is in trying to do a statistical analysis of our chances.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

1. Has the wolf had a change to talk to the Evil Wizard yet? They can pm during the Night phase, but the choice is also made during the Night phase. If the wolf is flying blind, we might look to see shifts in behavior or attitude toMorrow, after the Evils have had a chance to talk to one another. We should be keeping an eye out for shifts in attitude towards other players in general, actually - the Gifteds probably won't have as much reason to change how they behave towards specific individuals.
Yes, I think the potential shifts in behavior in general are going to be one of the most relevant indicators - something we should pay attention to, especially given the fact that we can't be certain about roles of the dead people. That's actually what worries me the most, correct me if I am wrong, but does it mean that until we get some come-back from the Dead thread (or figure something out through the empowering-voting system like in Kuru's last game), we won't really get any info about who were those who died anyway. Right?

2. Our chances of hitting either a baddie or a Gifted are really low toDay, which means this might be one of the few situations in which a no lynch Day One makes sense. Plus, since there aren't many wolves, they'll have to be a lot less careful about pack behavior, which means one of our standby clues won't come into play at first.
Numerically, it might make sense, if the village can agree on this. On the other hand, Morsul has a point in saying that the odds won't necessarily change very much. But I am all for at least considering that option.

I'm usually averse to a no-lynch on general principles. As it is, we have, presumably, a Good Wizard, a Gifted, an Evil Wizard, and a wolf. A 2/16 chance of hitting one of the baddies or one of the good guys. Better than usual chance of innocent blood on Day One.
Wait, why better, if normally it is, say, 3/16? (Like in a village which has the average three Wolves.)

So, I see people are wondering about the possibility of lynching a Wizard. Well:
But I assume that means that when lynched, the Wizard in question won't die, which would just give away to the other Wizard who they are. So in a way, it is kind of the same thing.

I'm off for a while, but I'll be back later, nice to see some activity here. I mean, for Day 1, impressive...

[Boromir88]

*Boro walks over to the guillotine*

You know there is the lynch in and of itself, which can be useful. But also the very threat of the lynch I find can be useful.

*Boro starts pulling levers and contraptions which set off the decapitating blade...THUD!. He resets and does it a few more times. THUD! THUD!*

Hold people's toes to the fire, as they say. Or I guess, in this case place the head a neck here...

*Boro lies down and places his head and neck in the proper spot. Anyone could come over and send Boro's head flying clean off*

You all picking up what I'm putting down?

*He thinks he hears some gasps of NO! What is the fool doing? And he wonders if there's more than one person saying in their own heads OFF WITH HIS HEAD!*

*Boro steps away from the guillotine*

I just wanted to see how it works. Would it be a good, clean death? It's all academic.

It's curious that 2 people posted and the idea of no lynch today is getting the most talk. Personally, I would have waited until ya know we heard from more people before trying to give a big huge sign "Ah, let's sit on our hands and not lynch today. Look at these dreadful odds!"

[Nerwen]

Yes, I think the potential shifts in behavior in general are going to be one of the most relevant indicators - something we should pay attention to, especially given the fact that we can't be certain about roles of the dead people. That's actually what worries me the most, correct me if I am wrong, but does it mean that until we get some come-back from the Dead thread (or figure something out through the empowering-voting system like in Kuru's last game), we won't really get any info about who were those who died anyway. Right?
I believe so. Isn't that the whole point of the Visitors?

Wait, why better, if normally it is, say, 3/16? (Like in a village which has the average three Wolves.)
"Better" as in "more likely".

But I assume that means that when lynched, the Wizard in question won't die, which would just give away to the other Wizard who they are. So in a way, it is kind of the same thing.
I agree, but Lottie was asking specifically if a lynched Wizard would just die in the normal way, and the rules are clear on that point.

[Thinlómien]

*waves excitedly* It's been like a decade since the last game!

I'm at work, so just two quick points for now:

1) I would refrain from academic discussion about what are feasible strategies for the Evil Wizard as long as speculating those strategies doesn't give us any leads on the Evil Wizard's/ the wolves' identity. We don't want to give him tips, do we? This made me raise eyebrows at Lottie- but you'd assume the wolf would have more private channels for strategic suggestions. Also the EW might proclaim her potential strategies publicly to mislead us, but that's really unnecessarily bold for a first post. Anyway, the point stands that of all things to speculate aloud, best EW strategies isn't the smartest choice.

2) I'm - as you can probably guess - against a no-vote. As someone said, a lynch is always more telling than a no-lynch, and as the lynches are our only ammo, we should use them. I agree the odds are not great, but if we wait for better odds we might spend the whole game waiting while being butchered one by one in our sleep.

edit: xed with Nerwen

[Inziladun]

For clarification since the dead thread gives a voter a double vote does that change victory parameters for wolves? Usually it's wolves=innocents but in theory if it got to 1/1 the dead thread could break that tie?

Those in the Dead Thread can benefit either side that way. Why would it just go for the wolves?

I'm generally against a no lynch on Day 1. It just seems like a cop out to me. The odds may not be great, but we could still get lucky. And anyway, the results of a lynch are far more telling than a non lynch.

Yeah, I agree. I always seem to kick around the idea of not voting Day 1, but I always end up doing it, even when it's a total crapshoot.

Wait, why better, if normally it is, say, 3/16? (Like in a village which has the average three Wolves.)

Until Nerwen brought it up, I'd actually forgotten that the Wizards can't be lynched. So that makes it a 1/16 chance of getting a wolf toDay, and that's if one was made last Night.

x/d with Nerwen and Lommy

[Nerwen]

It's curious that 2 people posted and the idea of no lynch today is getting the most talk. Personally, I would have waited until ya know we heard from more people before trying to give a big huge sign "Ah, let's sit on our hands and not lynch today. Look at these dreadful odds!"
And are the odds necessarily bad? Depends on how you look at it. Will they be "better" or "worse" toMorrow, when we will possibly have another wolf and another gifted? Really not that clear-cut.

True, I'm just not sure if there will be any information on Day Two regardless. There's MAYBE two baddies, and only one of them actually matters. No way the Evil Wizard sticks their head out for the wolf, so the only way we might get info is if we happen to hit on the Evil Wizard and the wolf tries to come to their rescue - 1/16 shot to draw anyone out, instead of the 1/4 chance we would have if we had a pack of four normal wolves. Suspect and throw accusations all you want - but I'm concerned that there's just not enough at stake for the wolves to actually act like wolves. I would almost call what we have toDay a werebear and an intelligent cobbler rather than a true wolf pack, and I think we need to strategize with that in mind.
Are you saying you think the wolf doesn't know the Evil Wizard's identity? Or just that they won't have had time to plot together yet? But then the pack often doesn't do that much plotting on Night One anyway, even in a normal game- they usually don't have enough to go on.

EDIT: x'd since my last post.

[Morsul the Dark]

Those in the Dead Thread can benefit either side that way. Why would it just go for the wolves?



Yeah, I agree. I always seem to kick around the idea of not voting Day 1, but I always end up doing it, even when it's a total crapshoot.



Until Nerwen brought it up, I'd actually forgotten that the Wizards can't be lynched. So that makes it a 1/16 chance of getting a wolf toDay, and that's if one was made last Night.

x/d with Nerwen and Lommy

Perhaps I wasn't clear. In a 1/1 situation in theory the dead could swing a win in either direction. I'm just wondering if a tie is still an automatic win.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Hello all. :)

Well, I'm initially in favour of no-lynch today. I see some arguments against this posted already, but they only seem applicable to normal games imo. A lynch today would be even more random than normal games - at least in those we can presume some level of cooperation between the baddies and look for the tiniest hints. Here it just seems like a shot in the dark, and killing off a gifted would have a greater impact at this stage than killing a wolf (if these roles have indeed been filled yet).

I'm not convinced that vote-and-lynch analysis on Day 2 would be of any help considering it would be done without any idea of nightly activity.

[Morsul the Dark]

To be fair with the mechanic of wolves being created at random times by the evil wizard we have no real knowledge of how many wolves we have at any given time plus people who were once considered iron clad innocent could be evil the next day. While I understand looking for sudden changes in behavior it seems to me we'll never have a clear grasp on who the bad guys really are because we won't even know how many.

Every day will be day one with a lot of information from the previous day being suspect at best. In my opinion in this type of game no lynch for the sake of information gathering isn't the most helpful strategy. And as Boro said we're straight out of the gate saying do nothing...

[Nerwen]

Hello all. :)

Well, I'm initially in favour of no-lynch today. I see some arguments against this posted already, but they only seem applicable to normal games imo. A lynch today would be even more random than normal games - at least in those we can presume some level of cooperation between the baddies and look for the tiniest hints. Here it just seems like a shot in the dark, and killing off a gifted would have a greater impact at this stage than killing a wolf (if these roles have indeed been filled yet).

I'm not convinced that vote-and-lynch analysis on Day 2 would be of any help considering it would be done without any idea of nightly activity.
See my post at #23. If the wolf knows who the Evil Wizard is, I don't think it's *all* that different from a normal Day One- as I said, in my experience not that much plotting happens on Night One anyway. Also, do we know for sure they haven't been able to communicate?
EDIT: x'd with Morsul.

[Inziladun]

Perhaps I wasn't clear. In a 1/1 situation in theory the dead could swing a win in either direction. I'm just wondering if a tie is still an automatic win.

Ah. I would think so, but Mister Mod can elaborate, of course.

Hello all. :)Well, I'm initially in favour of no-lynch today. I see some arguments against this posted already, but they only seem applicable to normal games imo. A lynch today would be even more random than normal games - at least in those we can presume some level of cooperation between the baddies and look for the tiniest hints. Here it just seems like a shot in the dark, and killing off a gifted would have a greater impact at this stage than killing a wolf (if these roles have indeed been filled yet).

That's pretty much what I was getting at. Like I said, only a 1/16 chance of making a dent in the wolves. Not an ideal scenario.But not voting still chafes.
Did we ever clarify if the Wizard and the newly-created wolf have communicated? I would still lean toward the negative.

To be fair with the mechanic of wolves being created at random times by the evil wizard we have no real knowledge of how many wolves we have at any given time plus people who were once considered iron clad innocent could be evil the next day. While I understand looking for sudden changes in behavior it seems to me we'll never have a clear grasp on who the bad guys really are because we won't even know how many.

Knowing that each Night might (or might not) have given us a new wolf to deal with really will make it tough.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I'm not convinced that vote-and-lynch analysis on Day 2 would be of any help considering it would be done without any idea of nightly activity.
That is also a reasonable point.

See my post at #23. If the wolf knows who the Evil Wizard is, I don't think it's *all* that different from a normal Day One- as I said, in my experience not that much plotting happens on Night One anyway. Also, do we know for sure they haven't been able to communicate?
EDIT: x'd with Morsul.

Well I guess the Mod could clarify that for us, if it's relevant? Although also with what you said, unless the Wolves are doing some super-complicated scheme, even in normal village there isn't much pre-plotting on first Night.

That said, I actually believe the first kill is going to be something more relevant to our observations, because that is going to reflect at least in some way on how the baddies think here. Which goes back, again, to the same thing as in every Day 1 discussion: the chiefly cited reason to wait is that on Day 2, you already have some evidence on who's been killed and all that.

EDIT: x-ed with Zil

[Inziladun]

That said, I actually believe the first kill is going to be something more relevant to our observations, because that is going to reflect at least in some way on how the baddies think here. Which goes back, again, to the same thing as in every Day 1 discussion: the chiefly cited reason to wait is that on Day 2, you already have some evidence on who's been killed and all that.

Well, the Nightly kill, at least toNight, may be as much of a crapshoot for the baddies as the lynch would be toDay.

Ordinarily, they'd be mainly looking for the Seer. But in this situation the Good Wizard has that capacity. Is there anything in the Rules about what happens if the kill-choice happens to be the Good Wizard? He can only be taken out by the Evil Wizard, but how would an aborted kill on the Good Wizard look to the wolves? Could they figure his identity that way?

[Kuruharan]

3. For clarification since the dead thread gives a voter a double vote does that change victory parameters for wolves? Usually it's wolves=innocents but in theory if it got to 1/1 the dead thread could break that tie?

-and-

Ah. I would think so, but Mister Mod can elaborate, of course.

Dead Thread Vote Empowerment doesn't impact the Victory Tally.

The Victory Tally is compiled at the beginning of each phase. If the evil side equals the number of remaining goodies then evil wins at that moment. The Dead Thread Vote Empowerment is something that happens within a phase that could impact the outcome of a vote for a lynching candidate.

EDIT: And I suppose I should further clarify that victory is determined in the Living Thread.

[Boromir88]

No one throws a party like a party at Kuru's...I'll give the dwarf credit for that. There's quite a collection of folks I've lost touch with over the last couple years and it's just nice to have us back together...even in these unfortunate circumstances. This is not a nice place to meet.

The good thing about these dueling wizards game is you can even stay involved and participate after death. Sometimes it's rough to decide the first one to go, because you want to give everyone a chance to participate and play...but someone's got to go first. At least now no matter who or when you die, everyone can still influence and participate beyond the grave.

I fully intend to vote today. Call it luck, a Fool's Hope, or what have you, I don't see any reason to think taking a shot in the dark is going to be a devastating risk.

[Inziladun]

I fully intend to vote today. Call it luck, a Fool's Hope, or what have you, I don't see any reason to think taking a shot in the dark is going to be a devastating risk.

That's what cannon fodder is for. ;)

[Eönwë]

Ok, so what do we have?

Morsul the Dark - Posted first, therefore obviously evil.
Inziladun - Waited for Morsul to post first to be less obvious, therefore obviously evil.
Loslote - Discusses Evil Wizard tactics, therefore obviously evil.
Boromir88 - Mostly in-character, therefore obviously evil.
Brinniel - See Lottie.
Nerwen - Clarifies the rules in her first post, therefore obviously evil.
Legate of Amon Lanc - Too helpful and involved in the discussion to be a clueless innocent, therefore obviously evil.
Thinlómien - Tries to use the 'talks about Evil Wizard tactics' argument to cast suspicion on Lottie, therefore obviously evil.
Eomer of the Rohirrim - Quiet, therefore obviously evil.

Eönwë - Well, obviously I'm not evil.

Shastanis Althreduin - Hasn't posted yet, so obviously evil.
satansaloser2005 - See Shasta.
Lalaith - See Shasta.
Mithalwen - See Shasta.
Nogrod - See Shasta.
Pervencia Took - See Shasta.


Ok, this is going to be harder than I thought...

edit: x-ed since Kuru's last post.

[Morsul the Dark]

Ok. So I'm voting.

Now it's time for me to say that weird thing no one likes.

I honestly think the bads have a lot more to lose than us. Not going to lie... gifteds to me, anyway, are less than helpful. You get reveals and counter reveals and a seer in a game where characters can change roles? I'm just not convinced losing them is entirely game breaking. Getting the evil wizard though destroys the baddies chances. Especially if we get lucky and get him day one.

[Eönwë]

Ok, onto serious discussion then.

First of all, as most most people seem to agree, I think that a no-lynch Day 1 is a Day wasted. More importantly, it's a free headstart for the wolves (and the EW this game) on kills. Even in the (extremely) unlikely scenario that the EW didn't turn a wolf last Night, that still gives the Dark Side a free pass. So definitely up for a lynching today.

In terms of actual suspicious behaviour, while my last post was intended as a joke, Lommy's comments on Lottie's "[eyebrow-raising]" behaviour could actually be a classic case of the "this seems suspicious but I'm not actually suspecting you" wolf-tactic to sow distrust early on and have evidence of early suspicion to fall back on if necessary. While I do agree that it's best practice not to discuss the evil side's tactics too much, I also think Lottie was right to point out that it's not necessarily the case that a wolf will be added each Night. Though, ok, talking about how this might differ from the GW and what strategies might underpin these differences might be a bit much.

Anyway, seems like a quiet Day so far, so I'm going to reread the thread.

[Inziladun]

I honestly think the bads have a lot more to lose than us. Not going to lie... gifteds to me, anyway, are less than helpful. You get reveals and counter reveals and a seer in a game where characters can change roles? I'm just not convinced losing them is entirely game breaking. Getting the evil wizard though destroys the baddies chances. Especially if we get lucky and get him day one.

The Wizards cannot be lynched, though I wonder (see above) how that plays out if they're put on the block, either by a lynch, or a wolf-kill on the Good Wizard.

[Eönwë]

The Wizards cannot be lynched, though I wonder (see above) how that plays out if they're put on the block, either by a lynch, or a wolf-kill on the Good Wizard.

Yeah, I imagine it just means that they are outed as a a wizard, but we can't really do anything about it, and we won't know which they are. And the worst part is, even if we did get the Evil Wizard toDay, they'd still have 2 more Nights before they could be taken out by the Good Wizard, by which point they could've worked all sorts of mischief.

[Morsul the Dark]

So... yeah I just reread the whole Wizard doohickey. I'm slightly less confused. But still think having a confirmed identity of the EW would be good. Then there are the visitors... oy I'm so confused.

But I stand by my statements.

[Inziladun]

Yeah, I imagine it just means that they are outed as a a wizard, but we can't really do anything about it, and we won't know which they are. And the worst part is, even if we did get the Evil Wizard toDay, they'd still have 2 more Nights before they could be taken out by the Good Wizard, by which point they could've worked all sorts of mischief.

Sensible, this. No help with deciding on a vote, though.

[Boromir88]

I get positive vibes from Eonwe's posts, Morsul's active and willing contributions, and Brinn's one post.

I'm fully anticipating and hoping to get blocky-posts analysis from Legate.

Anyone who hasn't posted makes me wary if they remember we've started and they're stuck here with the rest of us...

I think Lottie is doing what she likes to do best...go against the grain and counter groupthink.

I never trust Eomer...it could be he looks like he cooks better than he cooks.

I feel like I'm always attacking and voting for Inzil Day 1.

[Loslote]

Randomly killing someone who will probably be an ordo just to say we did something doesn't sit well with me, but if that's what we as a group want to do, I don't have any stronger objections than that I think it will be a waste of a number. I don't think we're in too much danger of killing a Gifted, so it's certainly not the end of the world to lynch someone toDay. That being said, I have no strong feelings as to who is on the chopping block, either. I haven't found anyone to be suspicious. 2/5 of the village have yet to post, but I don't know that I feel better about lynching someone who hasn't said anything either, though.

EDIT: xed with Eonwe, Zil, and Boro

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

First of all, as most most people seem to agree, I think that a no-lynch Day 1 is a Day wasted. More importantly, it's a free headstart for the wolves (and the EW this game) on kills. Even in the (extremely) unlikely scenario that the EW didn't turn a wolf last Night, that still gives the Dark Side a free pass. So definitely up for a lynching today.

I don't see it as a free headstart. Quite the opposite, we almost certainly double the number of killed innocents if we lynch today. When we have basically nothing to go on, this is a risk not worth taking. I wouldn't eliminate someone today just to look busy.

[Mithalwen]

Well, hello. I have read through and got distracted looking at old games.
Anyway all I can say so far is Loslote is pinging my radar like mad. Maybe unfair but various alarm bells triggered. Maybe a bit too aware of potential evil strategy but then querying one of the few criteria even I in my dippy perimenopausal state grasped seemed odd. Or at least the sort of thing I was righteously lynched for in the past.

And the context of that suspicion makes the suggestion of no lynch a bit convenient. Anyway hope a few more bods will surface before voting is necessary. I don't want to leave it too late my insomnia has been replaced by near narcolepsy. It is true what they say about aging. Not fun but interesting.

[Morsul the Dark]

We've got only a couple hours to deadline and a lot of folks not here. I'm worried we're they're not present because they didn't realize we had started? If anyone can reach out on social media perhaps?

I wouldn't vote anyone not here. The biggest issue of the day is to vote or not, that being said while I'm all for voting I'm not sure I can do it in good conscience with so many absent...

[Inziladun]

I don't see it as a free headstart. Quite the opposite, we almost certainly double the number of killed innocents if we lynch today. When we have basically nothing to go on, this is a risk not worth taking. I wouldn't eliminate someone today just to look busy.

Yeah, but that's always the case, isn't it? It's not a matter of 'looking busy', it just has always seemed wrong to not take advantage of the opportunity (slim though it may be) to get a baddie. And will the circumstances toMorrow be much different?

x/d with Morsul

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Well, I'm saying that it's not always the case. There's usually 3 targets out there instead of (probably) 1 - I don't count the EW in this because we could just as well pick the GW and disadvantage him or her that way. Also, those targets could be linked somehow. Here we have no links. And yes, I think that tomorrow will be slightly different, because we'll probably have a kill to work with.

[Eönwë]

Ok, so just in the interest of balance (and to think through the idea properly for myself), I have thought of two reasons against needing to vote today.

First of all, the fact is that the EW gets to turn 4 wolves. That means that unless they get duelled before they can, it is possible for them to replenish the number of wolves. That said, the counterpoint to this is they might be found out before then (and an attempted lynch would aid this).

The other point is in terms of Dead Thread tactics. If we lynch someone now, we have the following situation:
N1: 0 in DT
D1: 0 in DT
N2: 1 in DT
D2: 2 in DT (1/2 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N3: 3 in DT (1/3 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
D3: 4 in DT (3/4 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N4: 5 in DT (3/5 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
... etc.

This means that at each Night, there are 2 unknowns. Of course, if we now agree to a certain rule (e.g. always vote for the unknown that's spent the longest time in the DT), then it could be easier, but there's always the chance of a wasted Night vote early on with 2 unknown wolves overpowering the general vote, and there's also a risk of wolves messing stuff up in moments where people would be tempted to break this rule, e.g. when a Visitor is there.

If we didn't lynch someone today, we'd have:
N1: 0 in DT
D1: 0 in DT
N2: 0 in DT
D2: 1 in DT
N3: 2 in DT (1/2 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
D3: 3 in DT (3/3 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N4: 4 in DT (3/4 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
... etc.

Of course, this is super hypothetical and I can imagine a few situations where it would break down (e.g. Ranger save, Wizards' duel, etc.), but just thought I'd put it out there.

I do also think it would be good to have some protocol in place about what should be done in the Dead Thread so that when the Visitors do visit, they can actually be useful to the Living.


edit: x-posted with Eomer.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I had wanted to do a "list" in the classic way (impressions about individual people), but realised there is not really very much to go with. I mean, Day 1, sure, but originally this one started fairly nicely and I hoped for active people; then it all sort of quieted down again. But now it seems to be picking up again, and nice to see more people appearing still.

Also, right now, I am still thinking the no-vote might be an option to consider. The disadvantage is that we lose one lynch, though the counter-argument to that is that anyway new WWs will appear in future Days, so it is not really anything that would help in that regard. The fact is that lynching a Wolf would take one "bullet" away from the Evil Wizard (but then again we enter the jungle of "IF" we lynch a Wolf etc.) But I think Eomer said it nicely that we should not just "try to look busy". The danger of mislynch is a real one.

I do also think it would be good to have some protocol in place about what should be done in the Dead Thread so that when the Visitors do visit, they can actually be useful to the Living.

And this. This, and hundred times this. I remember very well how it went in the last game where we had a Dead thread, and it was a disaster. Such as when the village switched halfway through what did which votes for whom mean, after people already started casting votes on the Dead thread.

But yes. Something like always saying "if X is innocent, empower Y". I think it worked last time surprisingly well (when the Living didn't mess up the definition).

[Loslote]

I think Eönwë has a good way of looking at it - not so much do we think we have a shot at killing a wolf toDay, but rather how do we want to populate the Dead Thread. We are massively unlikely to kill anyone other than an ordo toDay, so the question becomes, do we want to put the first ordo in the Dead Thread toDay or let the baddies do it overNight? Since we don't know when EW is going to make more wolves, it's hard to numerically play out scenarios, but in a general sense, the Dead Thread is going to be one of our only solid sources of information. According to Eönwë's analysis, the first time the Dead can do something is on Day Two, when they vote to strengthen a vote. If we don't lynch anyone toDay, the first time they'll be able to do something is on Night Three, when they can reveal someone's role. To me, it seems more useful for the Dead to find out roles than it is for them to empower a vote, especially in the case that they have yet to find out any roles (i.e., on Day Two).

EDIT: xed with Legate

[Boromir88]

I do also think it would be good to have some protocol in place about what should be done in the Dead Thread so that when the Visitors do visit, they can actually be useful to the Living.~Eonwe

In previous Dueling Wizards, before there were visitors, we had come up with a way for the Dead to use the "empowering" vote as a means to communicate information to the living.

As an example, we would say "If you uncovered Day 1's lynch was a wolf empower Boro's vote on Day 2. If Day 1 lynch is innocent empower Eonwe's vote."

We lag a day behind on the info, and sometimes the dead aren't so cooperative to take orders from the living, but that was how could get relayed before when there was no visitor role. It runs of the risk of being misintrepretted/too many dead baddies able to pass along bad intel (but then again, a lot of dead baddies trying to muck up the dead thread means the living is doing quite well getting rid of them).

Edit: crossed with Legate and Lottie

[Inziladun]

And this. This, and hundred times this. I remember very well how it went in the last game where we had a Dead thread, and it was a disaster. Such as when the village switched halfway through what did which votes for whom mean, after people already started casting votes on the Dead thread.

But yes. Something like always saying "if X is innocent, empower Y". I think it worked last time surprisingly well (when the Living didn't mess up the definition).

Not being part of a game like this before, I'm trying to savvy up on things that are new.

So, the Dead can always read the Living Thread...so they'll be looking at it for ideas of who to empower. How do they know whom on the Living Thread can be trusted?

x/d with Boro

[Boromir88]

So, the Dead can always read the Living Thread...so they'll be looking at it for ideas of who to empower. How do they know whom on the Living Thread can be trusted?

x/d with Boro

Yes, they just can't post in the Living thread. This time though, the visitors are a new role to Dueling Wizards, so they can return and have a much more concrete communication. But who knows if and when the visitors role gets used. As Legate said, it's been surprisingly successful to use the Dead's empowering vote as a way to communicate what roles the Dead uncover to the living.

[Boromir88]

And I recall other safety nets so the Dead doesn't send faulty information...like

"If you don't trust Boro to empower his vote/you don't know the role of (insert dead person)/don't want to give mixed up info than empower Inzil's vote"...which lets the Living know that "ok the Dead don't have the info to give us we asked for"

[Thinlómien]

In terms of actual suspicious behaviour, while my last post was intended as a joke, Lommy's comments on Lottie's "[eyebrow-raising]" behaviour could actually be a classic case of the "this seems suspicious but I'm not actually suspecting you" wolf-tactic to sow distrust early on and have evidence of early suspicion to fall back on if necessary. While I do agree that it's best practice not to discuss the evil side's tactics too much, I also think Lottie was right to point out that it's not necessarily the case that a wolf will be added each Night. Though, ok, talking about how this might differ from the GW and what strategies might underpin these differences might be a bit much.I was, as usual, thinking while typing. I didn't like Lottie discussing what are reasonable strategies for the EW, so my brain went "suspicious", but as you can see towards the end of that paragraph, I kinda reasoned it would have been a weird/bold move from either a wolf or the EW to openly speculate about the EW's startegies in her very first post. HOWEVER, to do a Lommy flip flop :p now that I think of it, it *might* not be so weird from an EW. Like sure, she'd be drawing attention to herself, but as the EW would be thinking a lot about the EW tactics it might feel natural to her to post about it without thinking much? And for another flip flop: I always suspect Lottie on Day1 so I'm gonna give her the benefit of doubt this time. Probably. But she's really the only one who stands out to me so far, even if it's rather as "someone whose actions caught my attention" as opposed to "someone who's a likely wolf/EW".

And the worst part is, even if we did get the Evil Wizard toDay, they'd still have 2 more Nights before they could be taken out by the Good Wizard, by which point they could've worked all sorts of mischief. But that isn't a reason not to try to bag him today. If we can guarantee the GW can take him out on Day3 if she wishes, then that's amazing. (Yes the EW is a 'he' and the GW is a 'she'. For disambiguation. And feminism. :Merisu: )

I'm all for making up a way for dead thread communication, but it probably isn't the most urgent issue since the DL is approaching?

PSA: Nogrod probably doesn't know the game has started since he hasn't been here and it's 1.30 am Finnish time. I meant to text him earlier but I forgot :( but I did now so he should be around for Day2 I hope! I'll send Sally and Lalaith facebook messages too even though it's a bit late for that too...

Okay: next up: a list to organize my thoughts and a vote. It IS late here.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Not being part of a game like this before, I'm trying to savvy up on things that are new.

So, the Dead can always read the Living Thread...so they'll be looking at it for ideas of who to empower. How do they know whom on the Living Thread can be trusted?

It's simple, we just somehow figure out - it can be quite random - to make a list, such as for example when there are two dead people, we say "if you have determined that 1 is innocent, vote for X, if 1 is guilty, vote for Y, if 2 is innocent, vote for Z..." Preferably, we try to make it so that the people who are being voted for do not have any super-major impact on the final outcome of the vote (as far as it can be assumed in advance... but really, I think that somehow never came as problem in the last game). Yes, there is a risk of misuse, but based on experience, it was very small. I really believe the only time it got messed up was when the Living decided sometime halfway through the Day to change which vote meant what. Plus we had evil Mac (and others, but mainly him) on the dead thread, but he mostly trolled and didn't harm anybody in the end.

Anyway. I am soon planning to go to sleep. Probably won't stay until the very DL. I think I will in any case try to post some summary on people from my perspective, but otherwise just hope that as many people as possible still post meanwhile, especially those who haven't appeared yet.

EDIT: x-ed with some Boros and Lommys

[Eönwë]

And this. This, and hundred times this. I remember very well how it went in the last game where we had a Dead thread, and it was a disaster. Such as when the village switched halfway through what did which votes for whom mean, after people already started casting votes on the Dead thread.

But yes. Something like always saying "if X is innocent, empower Y". I think it worked last time surprisingly well (when the Living didn't mess up the definition).

Ah, I'd totally forgotten to consider the regular communication through empowerment of votes. I meant to add a caveat about how the whole thing was only relevant to visitors, but in that case, this is actually a lot more important, since the Dead Thread is going to be the source of truth for the living.

In that case, I'd like to propose the following:


We don't lynch toDay.
Each night, vote to find out the role of the person who has been around in the Dead Thread longest whose role is unknown. For special cases, see addendum below.
Each Day, take an alphabetical list of the full usernames of the living. On odd Days, order them A->Z, on even Days Z->A.
If the person whose identity was checked was good, empower the vote of someone in the first half of the alphabetical list (one of the known innocents should state who at the beginning of the Day), if they were evil, empower the vote of someone in the second half. For the purposes of this vote, if there is a username exactly in the middle, it counts as if it were in the first half.


Addendum - special cases
Night after a Wizard's Duel: Test the identity of the person whose username appears first in the alphabet.
Night after a Hunter kill: Test the hunter first, then the hunted.
A visitor is present: We will assume the usual. Obviously if the Visitor returns with new rules then we can implement those.


edit: x-posted since Zil's #52

[Inziladun]

And I recall other safety nets so the Dead doesn't send faulty information...like

"If you don't trust Boro to empower his vote/you don't know the role of (insert dead person)/don't want to give mixed up info than empower Inzil's vote"...which lets the Living know that "ok the Dead don't have the info to give us we asked for"

It's simple, we just somehow figure out - it can be quite random - to make a list, such as for example when there are two dead people, we say "if you have determined that 1 is innocent, vote for X, if 1 is guilty, vote for Y, if 2 is innocent, vote for Z..." Preferably, we try to make it so that the people who are being voted for do not have any super-major impact on the final outcome of the vote (as far as it can be assumed in advance... but really, I think that somehow never came as problem in the last game). Yes, there is a risk of misuse, but based on experience, it was very small. I really believe the only time it got messed up was when the Living decided sometime halfway through the Day to change which vote meant what. Plus we had evil Mac (and others, but mainly him) on the dead thread, but he mostly trolled and didn't harm anybody in the end.

Ah, ok. It'll take at least three Dead to be useful that way, though. Since, as Kuru noted, just two dead could vote to reveal one another.

x/d with Steve

[Loslote]

Eönwë's plan is a perfectly fine one, and barring major objections, it might be a good idea to just adopt it as the default moving forward to avoid confusion. If everyone's arguing, it could be hard for the Dead to be clear, so I think it would be better to pick a plan that will work and stick with it than to debate about what the best possible plan would be. However:

Night after a Hunter kill: Test the hunter first, then the hunted.

I didn't think the Hunter could be evil, shouldn't it be hunted first, then hunter?

[Inziladun]

Ah, I'd totally forgotten to consider the regular communication through empowerment of votes. I meant to add a caveat about how the whole thing was only relevant to visitors, but in that case, this is actually a lot more important, since the Dead Thread is going to be the source of truth for the living.

In that case, I'd like to propose the following:


We don't lynch toDay.
Each night, vote to find out the role of the person who has been around in the Dead Thread longest whose role is unknown. For special cases, see addendum below.
Each Day, take an alphabetical list of the full usernames of the living. On odd Days, order them A->Z, on even Days Z->A.
If the person whose identity was checked was good, empower the vote of someone in the first half of the alphabetical list (one of the known innocents should state who at the beginning of the Day), if they were evil, empower the vote of someone in the second half. For the purposes of this vote, if there is a username exactly in the middle, it counts as if it were in the first half.


Addendum - special cases
Night after a Wizard's Duel: Test the identity of the person whose username appears first in the alphabet.
Night after a Hunter kill: Test the hunter first, then the hunted.
A visitor is present: We will assume the usual. Obviously if the Visitor returns with new rules then we can implement those.

Obviously, you're trying to cause my brain to explode, when I don't even have the benefit of coffee. :rolleyes:

x/d with Lottie

[Thinlómien]

Nerwen - seems like normal self
Inziladun - seems like normal self
Loslote - kinda shady but not necessarily (probably?) evil
Boromir88 - probably the most eyebrow villager so far, the overtly cheerful banter seems a bit off (I don't want to say you're not allowed to have fun :p but something about his behaviour seems like an act)
Shastanis Althreduin - I'll facebook message him too oops
satansaloser2005 - not here not judging
Eomer of the Rohirrim - predictably rubs me the wrong way, ignoring that
Morsul the Dark - seems innocent?
Lalaith - not here not judging
Legate of Amon Lanc - seems like normal self
Mithalwen - seems like normal self
Eönwë - if I was dead I'd empower him
Nogrod - not here not judging
Pervencia Took - not here not judging
Brinniel - seems like normal self

edit: xed with the last 4 posts

[Lalaith]

We've got only a couple hours to deadline and a lot of folks not here. I'm worried we're they're not present because they didn't realize we had started? I
I'm here now. Blasted Kuru, he throws a fantastic party, I'll give you that, but instead of doing his hostly duty with warm showers, hot coffee and cold compresses for our poor heads the next day, he expects us to nurse our hangovers in the bowels of some ghastly charnel house. Bah.
I've been reading over everyone's comments and here are my thoughts on those comments.
ut how would an aborted kill on the Good Wizard look to the wolves? Could they figure his identity that way? (Inzil)
It would be for the EW to figure this out, wolves are merely his pawns...but yes, that could play into his hands.
but rather how do we want to populate the Dead Thread (Lottie) yes I was wondering that too.
Now it's time for me to say that weird thing no one likes. (Morsul) Actually I was half nodding about what you're saying about gifteds there but maybe that's just because I haven't got my head round the rules of this particular game yet.
I concur that it's probably one of each, but the rules would seem to allow for other scenarios(Nerwen )
This I really am scratching my head about but again, maybe it's because I haven't got my head around this game yet.
If anyone can reach out on social media perhaps?
Who is still left to post? Nogs, Sally, Shasta and Percenvia I think? I can stick something on facebook.

[Loslote]

Ah, ok. It'll take at least three Dead to be useful that way, though. Since, as Kuru noted, just two dead could vote to reveal one another.

I assume a Dead person could vote for themselves, and I guess we'll have to trust them to be reasonable and both vote for the first person lynched (since if we don't lynch toDay and the first person is a wolf kill, we can assume they were not themselves a wolf).

[Eönwë]

Eönwë's plan is a perfectly fine one, and barring major objections, it might be a good idea to just adopt it as the default moving forward to avoid confusion. If everyone's arguing, it could be hard for the Dead to be clear, so I think it would be better to pick a plan that will work and stick with it than to debate about what the best possible plan would be. However:



I didn't think the Hunter could be evil, shouldn't it be hunted first, then hunter?

Oh wait, good point. If the narration is clear about who is who, then the dead should not look at the hunter at all, as they are a known innocent.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Hi, everyone. Lommy just poked me on FB - thanks, dear - to let me know this had started. Apologies for my absence thus far. Will read what's happened. Back shortly!

[Eönwë]

I assume a Dead person could vote for themselves, and I guess we'll have to trust them to be reasonable and both vote for the first person lynched (since if we don't lynch toDay and the first person is a wolf kill, we can assume they were not themselves a wolf).

Yeah, if the first unknown doesn't vote for themself, I think they can safely be assumed to be evil.

[Lalaith]

Eönwë's plan is a perfectly fine one
Is it a fine plan? Maybe. I read over it and felt like I've been asked to find a five pound note in the corner of a round room....just read Inzil's comment though and feel a bit better, I was starting to feel like the group dunce.

[Thinlómien]

In that case, I'd like to propose the following:


We don't lynch toDay.
Each night, vote to find out the role of the person who has been around in the Dead Thread longest whose role is unknown. For special cases, see addendum below.
Each Day, take an alphabetical list of the full usernames of the living. On odd Days, order them A->Z, on even Days Z->A.
If the person whose identity was checked was good, empower the vote of someone in the first half of the alphabetical list (one of the known innocents should state who at the beginning of the Day), if they were evil, empower the vote of someone in the second half. For the purposes of this vote, if there is a username exactly in the middle, it counts as if it were in the first half.


Addendum - special cases
Night after a Wizard's Duel: Test the identity of the person whose username appears first in the alphabet.
Night after a Hunter kill: Test the hunter first, then the hunted.
A visitor is present: We will assume the usual. Obviously if the Visitor returns with new rules then we can implement those.I think we have the new phantom here! :eek: ;)

Seriously though: yes. Good. I'm too tired to think whether the special cases rules make sense, so I'll get back to that tomorrow.

The only thing I disagree with is that I think we should already start lynching toDay. I'm gonna vote within ten minutes unless someone gives me a very good reason not to. "Caution" or "odds" is not one. :p

x:ed with everyone I predict

[Loslote]

Is it a fine plan? Maybe. I read over it and felt like I've been asked to find a five pound note in the corner of a round room....just read Inzil's comment though and feel a bit better, I was starting to feel like the group dunce.

It's a little lawyer-y, to be sure. :p But I think it gives both the village and the dead enough flexibility while allowing for clear communication.

[Eönwë]

The only thing I disagree with is that I think we should already start lynching toDay. I'm gonna vote within ten minutes unless someone gives me a very good reason not to. "Caution" or "odds" is not one. :p

Well, that's what this was about:

If we lynch someone now, we have the following situation:
N1: 0 in DT
D1: 0 in DT
N2: 1 in DT
D2: 2 in DT (1/2 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N3: 3 in DT (1/3 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
D3: 4 in DT (3/4 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N4: 5 in DT (3/5 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
... etc.

This means that at each Night, there are 2 unknowns. Of course, if we now agree to a certain rule (e.g. always vote for the unknown that's spent the longest time in the DT), then it could be easier, but there's always the chance of a wasted Night vote early on with 2 unknown wolves overpowering the general vote, and there's also a risk of wolves messing stuff up in moments where people would be tempted to break this rule, e.g. when a Visitor is there.

If we didn't lynch someone today, we'd have:
N1: 0 in DT
D1: 0 in DT
N2: 0 in DT
D2: 1 in DT
N3: 2 in DT (1/2 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
D3: 3 in DT (3/3 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N4: 4 in DT (3/4 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
... etc.

Of course, this is super hypothetical and I can imagine a few situations where it would break down (e.g. Ranger save, Wizards' duel, etc.), but just thought I'd put it out there.

[Loslote]

The only thing I disagree with is that I think we should already start lynching toDay. I'm gonna vote within ten minutes unless someone gives me a very good reason not to. "Caution" or "odds" is not one. :p

We don't need a third person in the dead thread. Having the person first lynched in the dead thread does not enable us to gain any additional information. However, if you feel like you have a strong enough suspicion to vote on, definitely go for it. I don't have any such strong suspicions, and therefore I will not be voting to lynch anyone, since I don't think doing so helps us unless we are confident that the person we lynch is a probable wolf.

EDIT: xed with Eonwe

[Eönwë]

It's a little lawyer-y, to be sure. :p But I think it gives both the village and the dead enough flexibility while allowing for clear communication.

Well I just wanted to avoid all sorts of weird ways of abusing the system. :p

[Mithalwen]

Lommie, I am sure you mean well and no doubt some were generally innocent of the start - maybe if they were expecting a role pm to trigger an email notification rather than checking the board not realising that only special roles would be notified. However since Kuru stated he was waiting on the selected wizards to confirm their acceptance, saying you didn't know it had started then indicates that that person isn't a wizard. So perhaps need to be careful with this meta info. Pinch of salt or assume knew but detained...

[Eönwë]

We don't need a third person in the dead thread. Having the person first lynched in the dead thread does not enable us to gain any additional information. However, if you feel like you have a strong enough suspicion to vote on, definitely go for it. I don't have any such strong suspicions, and therefore I will not be voting to lynch anyone, since I don't think doing so helps us unless we are confident that the person we lynch is a probable wolf.

Agreed. Also, while it would be sub-optimal to have the 1:2 known:unknown ratio on N3, the only way it can really be messed up is if we've lynched 2 wolves, in which case we're probably doing well enough that we can afford to mess up a few signals early on. And hopefully the Visitors will clarify if that's been the case.

[Boromir88]

Well, that's what this was about:

At this rate though...with no votes and under an hour to go...we might end up with a lynch anyway if we get flurry deadline voting

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I was, as usual, thinking while typing. I didn't like Lottie discussing what are reasonable strategies for the EW, so my brain went "suspicious", but as you can see towards the end of that paragraph, I kinda reasoned it would have been a weird/bold move from either a wolf or the EW to openly speculate about the EW's startegies in her very first post. HOWEVER, to do a Lommy flip flop :p now that I think of it, it *might* not be so weird from an EW. Like sure, she'd be drawing attention to herself, but as the EW would be thinking a lot about the EW tactics it might feel natural to her to post about it without thinking much? And for another flip flop: I always suspect Lottie on Day1 so I'm gonna give her the benefit of doubt this time. Probably. But she's really the only one who stands out to me so far, even if it's rather as "someone whose actions caught my attention" as opposed to "someone who's a likely wolf/EW".

Okay, this was about the most confusing thing I have read during the whole Day. To quote a classic, "what dost thou wish to say, Chieftain?"

Anyway.

Nerwen - seems like her classic self, posts in an informative way. No reason to suspect her of anything intoward here.
Inzil - Basically also fairly classic Zil. I don't think there's anything out of the norm here.
Loslote - seems like having a bit more drive than I expected. Is contributing, however, and her initial idea about the no-vote had some good points behind it.
Boro - to be honest, he is a bit all over the place, as in, the in-character posting really surprised me from him. I am not sure what to think about it. But otherwise, his normal contributions to the discussion were there as well and those were normal.
Shasta - sadly absent EDIT: wait no, good! Welcome.
Eomer - had some good points there. I really think his arguments about the lynching are valid. But even objectively, reminds me of his usual self.
Morsul - I could re-quote his signature... although not really; I actually think he sounds very responsible and not unreliable at all. Otherwise he resonates with his classic self. I like how he's engaged in the debate.
Lommy - feels normal? Had a bit noncommital attitude at first, but maybe that was just because of the briefness of her post and the circumstances she posted from (i.e., quickly), then, she came with that super-underipherable thing above. But that's about it for now.
Lalaith - EDIT: ha! Also just appeared. Good.
Mith - good that she appeared. I would like to see more from her to make an opinion, though.
Eönwë - when I originally wanted to start making notes about people, I wanted to write down that he was "very systematic". That was even before all the charts he posted now. Anyway, he's again one of those who seem to take this game very responsibly (same as Morsul, for example).
Nogrod - even more sadly absent, though whispers from beyond this canyon say that he's been somewhat busy lately.
Pervencia Took - likewise absent, I just hope she didn't get scared and run away since this was meant to be her first game.
Brinniel - appeared and contributed to the debate, but nothing very detailed there either. Would like to see more as well.

That's about it for initial impressions, however. Nothing much altogether.

Off to check what happened meanwhile...

EDIT: X-ed with a bunch of people. But nice to see posts.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Alright. Things I thought of while reading that might be relevant:

- I DO think that the EW is likely not one of the first people who offered up insight on the game, for this reason; the EW is the only evil right now that it's incredibly bad for the wolf team to lose. And it's useless to say that they aren't "lost" if they're lynched - they're outed, and that's just as bad.

- I DO think the EW is likely to wait a bit to see which way the village wind is blowing before they offer up opinions, for the reason stated above.

- I DO NOT have the current IRL capacity to look back and see who matches what I posited in the first two points. I will get to it as I can, should I be alive to do so.

- I DO think that Boro is a goober and that Nerwen is gorgeous.

That is all for now.

[Brinniel]

Is it a fine plan? Maybe. I read over it and felt like I've been asked to find a five pound note in the corner of a round room....just read Inzil's comment though and feel a bit better, I was starting to feel like the group dunce.
No, I'm still trying to wrap my head around it too.

I honestly haven't really factored in the Dead Thread, though it now seems to be a large part of the discussion. I have no recollection of ever playing a WW game with a Dead Thread before, so I'm sure how it all works. As complicated as it seems, I think communication of some sort is a good idea.

[Thinlómien]

Agh I wanted to go to sleep!!! But like if someone's gonna vote I want to vote too! And I don't think we should skip the lynch. Also I don't think it's harmful to lynch anyone toDay when it comes to dead thread communication, it's just not as beneficial as it could be.

Lommie, I am sure you mean well and no doubt some were generally innocent of the start - maybe if they were expecting a role pm to trigger an email notification rather than checking the board not realising that only special roles would be notified. However since Kuru stated he was waiting on the selected wizards to confirm their acceptance, saying you didn't know it had started then indicates that that person isn't a wizard. So perhaps need to be careful with this meta info. Pinch of salt or assume knew but detained... I don't know of anyone not knowing about the game starting. I just assumed, and thought better to message them just in case. But I agree we shouldn't draw any conclusions based on that, or take "I didn't know the game started" at face value.

edit: xed with Brinn

[Eönwë]

Agreed. Also, while it would be sub-optimal to have the 1:2 known:unknown ratio on N3, the only way it can really be messed up is if we've lynched 2 wolves, in which case we're probably doing well enough that we can afford to mess up a few signals early on. And hopefully the Visitors will clarify if that's been the case.

Just to clarify, what I mean here is that by N3, in order for there to be a mutiny, both lynches must have been wolves. After that, unless we somehow continue to lynch only wolves, the side of good should come out on top.

On which note, I think there's another addendum: If there has been such a 'mutiny', ignore it in the next empowerment (or things will get even more confusing).

[Thinlómien]

++Boro

I still think it makes more sense to take a shot at lynching a baddie than not to take it.

Boro seems the most fishy (see: list) so he gets my vote.

I also think innocent Boro would be a reliable dead thread presence and a guilty Boro an entertaining one.

Good night!


ps. Legate if you need a clarification I'll write you one toMorrow unless I'm dead.


edit: xed with Eönwë

[Loslote]

Also I don't think it's harmful to lynch anyone toDay when it comes to dead thread communication, it's just not as beneficial as it could be.

I agree with this. That's why I'm not throwing any sort of suspicion on the people who still want a lynch - I don't think it's a baddie tactic or anything, just a difference in opinion. Do we want to take an informal poll, maybe? In favor of lynching vote lynch, in favor of no lynch vote no lynch, like so: ++no lynch, just to get a feel of where the village is at?

EDIT: xed with Lommy

[Boromir88]

- I DO think that Boro is a goober and that Nerwen is gorgeous.


Awe, thanks :D. That means a lot coming from you.

++Boro

I still think it makes more sense to take a shot at lynching a baddie than not to take it.

Boro seems the most fishy (see: list) so he gets my vote.

I also think innocent Boro would be a reliable dead thread presence and a guilty Boro an entertaining one.~Lommy

You know what...I'm not even flustered by that. Usually, I'm fighting tooth and nail for revenge, but that's well reasoned. You've halfway convinced me that I should vote for myself.

Edit, crossed with Lottie. Fixing quote tags

[Eönwë]

It's really worrying me how much I'm finding myself agreeing with Lottie. If you're the Evil Wizard... :eek:

[Loslote]

It's really worrying me how much I'm finding myself agreeing with Lottie. If you're the Evil Wizard... :eek:

Promise I'm not :p

[Mithalwen]

I don't know of anyone not knowing about the gamev5 starting. I just assumed, and thought better to message them just in case. But I agree we shouldn't draw any conclusions based on that, or take "I didn't know the game started" at face value.

edit: xed with Brinn

That was all I meant. I took your words as speculation. It is only that in this game it happens to have significance so important just to be wary.

[Lalaith]

I have to vote too - this deadline time and my bedtime are not a good combo.
I don't have strong suspicions yet but a non-lynch/non-vote feels like a cop-out.
I'm going to with
++Nerwen
Because she's been a bit enigmatic toDay, because if she's bad she's scary and if she's good she'll be an asset to the dead thread.

[Loslote]

We have twenty minutes until DL, so it's time to start making decisions. We can still not lynch anyone (ties = no lynch), but we'd have to be very clear about who is voting and how. We can also stick with Lommy's Boro vote. I don't necessarily want to see Boro dead, but I don't have a better candidate, so if we want to play it safe and be sure we don't lynch someone else trying to tie it, I could see adding votes there. What do people want to do?

EDIT: Highlight it, Lalaith!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Well I guess there it goes for the no-lynch option, although I guess the potential option to nullify it is still there if we could make sure to agree on a counter-vote or something.

That said, I also want to go to sleep. It is like 2:40 here. And the DL is fast approaching anyway.

The ++no lynch would still be something I could back up, even though if I had to choose and vote a person, Boro would actually be among those to consider. I just wish this hadn't happened like this with the sort of sudden rush because I honestly would have prefered to go to sleep and leave it at that.

EDIT: x-ed with Mith and onwards

[Boromir88]

Lalaith highlight your vote if you want it to count.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I have to vote too - this deadline time and my bedtime are not a good combo.
I don't have strong suspicions yet but a non-lynch/non-vote feels like a cop-out.
I'm going to with
++Nerwen
Because she's been a bit enigmatic toDay, because if she's bad she's scary and if she's good she'll be an asset to the dead thread.

Btw is that an actual vote? You should highlight it ( writing [highlight ][ /highlight] without the spaces there)

[Morsul the Dark]

++Lottie

Right out the gate she was giving strategies for wolves and wizards. I'm also interested in her mentioning wolf and wizard not being in contact. So the wolf has to find the wizard? If that's the case another reason to go for a wolf right? Keep the wizard isolated.

Edit X'ed since Boro vote

[Eönwë]

Kuru, are you counting Lal's vote?

Edit: Well, looks like it's a tie anyway.

[Loslote]

Kuru, are you counting Lal's vote?

Edit: Well, looks like it's a tie anyway.

So long as no one else votes :eek:

[Boromir88]

Gotta love how these early Day deadlines always turn out.

This is exciting. :D

[Lalaith]

It's ok I've sorted it sorry. Half asleep and voting via phone. Good luck everyone and goodnight.

[Eönwë]

Just to keep things clear for future Days, see the following post.

[Eönwë]

Each Night, vote to find out the role of the person who has been around in the Dead Thread longest whose role is unknown. For special cases, see addendum below.
Each Day, take an alphabetical list of the full usernames of the living. On odd Days, order them A->Z; on even Days Z->A.
If the person whose identity was checked was good, empower the vote of someone in the first half of the alphabetical list (one of the known innocents should state who at the beginning of the Day), if they were evil, empower the vote of someone in the second half. For the purposes of this vote, if there is a username exactly in the middle, it counts as if it were in the first half.


Addendum - special cases
Night after a Wizard's Duel: Test the identity of the person whose full username appears first in the alphabet.
Night after a Hunter kill: Test the hunted. The hunter is a known innocent.
A visitor is present: We will assume the usual. Obviously if the Visitor returns with new rules then we can implement those.

Note: If there has been a 'mutiny', i.e., voting has been overrun by the wolves at any point, continue to vote as if the correct information had been transferred at the appropriate time. This will mean that at least all future information will be correct. The responsibility of the Visitors is to inform the Living Thread of any such 'mutinies' when they return to the Living Thread.

[Kuruharan]

Last game I was lenient, but since we've had a number of people asking for a highlight in the past few minutes, I'm going to disallow Lalaith's vote this time around.

Carry on.

Never mind...she was highlighting as I was typing.

Her vote now counts.

[Inziladun]

Back later than I expected, and having to try and catch up quickly. I guess we're voting? I see Lal put in a vote for Nerwen. As I was driving back, it had occurred to me that I might do the same, as Nerwen has seemed maybe a little more guarded than usual, and if innocent, would be a great asset in the Dead Thread.

But I'm open to another if someone else jumps out from the flurry I missed.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Will the bloodlust take me? Will I break the tie? :p

[Mithalwen]

]++Loslote



Money where mouth is

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Gotta love how these early Day deadlines always turn out.

This is exciting. :D
Only why does it always have to be at some unearthly hour :rolleyes:

Also, my brain isn't in the mode to fully appreciate Eönwë's precise-talk worthy of Wittgenstein, but I am sure it will come handy. Anyway, if there's any problem with that, it can always be amended on the future Days. (Just not in the middle of anything.)

EDIT: x-ed with three

[Shastanis Althreduin]

I do not want to lynch Boro or Nerwen OR Lottie.

[Morsul the Dark]

Each Night, vote to find out the role of the person who has been around in the Dead Thread longest whose role is unknown. For special cases, see addendum below.
Each Day, take an alphabetical list of the full usernames of the living. On odd Days, order them A->Z; on even Days Z->A.
If the person whose identity was checked was good, empower the vote of someone in the first half of the alphabetical list (one of the known innocents should state who at the beginning of the Day), if they were evil, empower the vote of someone in the second half. For the purposes of this vote, if there is a username exactly in the middle, it counts as if it were in the first half.


Addendum - special cases
Night after a Wizard's Duel: Test the identity of the person whose full username appears first in the alphabet.
Night after a Hunter kill: Test the hunted. The hunter is a known innocent.
A visitor is present: We will assume the usual. Obviously if the Visitor returns with new rules then we can implement those.

Note: If there has been a 'mutiny', i.e., voting has been overrun by the wolves at any point, continue to vote as if the correct information had been transferred at the appropriate time. This will mean that at least all future information will be correct. The responsibility of the Visitors is to inform the Living Thread of any such 'mutinies' when they return to the Living Thread.

sure thing (https://youtu.be/Ccoj5lhLmSQ)

Xed a bunch

[Loslote]

I do not want to lynch Boro or Nerwen OR Lottie.

Yeah, I would rather not die thanks

[Inziladun]

I'll take the plunge.

++Nerwen

Don't have the time to consider more.

[Loslote]

Vote tally:
Lottie - 2
Nerwen -2
Boro - 1

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

D'uh?

++Boro

Now that should either be a tie, or... well, whatever people will start to cause chaos?

EDIT: x-ed with a few. Okay, well?

[Shastanis Althreduin]

++Lottie

I do not think she is the evil wizard. This vote sucks.

[Loslote]

++Boro

To hopefully break the tie :eek:

EDIT: And by break, I mean cause

[Brinniel]

I don't want to spread the votes out too much so..

++Loslote

She has worked very hard to be helpful, which could go sour for us if she's evil. I can't help but think how clever it would be for a baddie to be the first one to come up with the idea of a no-lynch toDay in an attempt to avoid suspicion. I know I'm grasping at straws, but for Day 1, that's all I've got.

If I'm wrong however, I do think her helpfulness will be good for us in the Dead Thread.

EDIT: X-ed with multiple posts

[Loslote]

Can we get one more ++Boro for a no lynch? :eek:

EDIT: Thanks, Boro!

[Boromir88]

Lommy's convinced me now 51%

++Boro

Sorry...had to go to the halls of my forebears and in their inexplicably odd company I hopefully will not disappoint.

I've yet to have the fortune of being carefree ghostly observer...I never seem to die in these types. I'm not going to deny my heart has greatly desired this since the 1st appearance of a dead thread.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, now this is off the rails... entropy in practice, seriously!

EDIT: will this never end

[Kuruharan]

The deadline has come.

Please stop posting.

Narration(s) to follow.

Maybe a little delayed because my wife wants to eat dinner for some reason. :rolleyes:

She doesn't get the value of a good werewolfing...

[Kuruharan]

(Somebody should do a tally and comparison of crazy ends to DAY 1...I'd have to think this is one of the more frantic...my compliments.)

~~~~~Our Tale~~~~~

"I refuse to participate in this," cried one. "Let's behead Kuru!"

"Agreed," shouted the rest.

This proved fruitless. Kuru didn't seem to be around...and they still couldn't find a way out.

"I still refuse to participate in this ridiculous, pointless lynch mob!" said one. "We still have no proof that anything nefarious is afoot...except for Kuru kidnapping us and stranding us here!"

"Yeah!"

"I agree!"

"What will we do now?" asked one.

"Well, there seems to be nothing else to do except move in to our little chambers for the moment," replied another.

"Whatever we do, let's stay away from that awful guillotine!" said yet another.

"Yes, I won't participate in a pointless lynch mob," declared a speaker.





"I will," one said suddenly.

"Me too, no problem," said another.

"So will I!"

"And me!"

"Don't leave me out," said one of the previous speakers who said they didn't want anything to do with the guillotine.

"Me either!"

"Or me!"

"That's it!" cried one. "I've had enough of this! It seems the only way out of this situation is for me to use the guillotine on myself! Don't try to stop me! I shall invoke the traditional sacred cry of one embarked on this hallowed action!"

"Nilpaurion Felagund!"

The party was hushed in reverent awe.

"But...that leaves us with a tie," noted a sheepish voice.

"Oh...I guess I can't do that, then."

Everyone retired to bed.

~~~~~~~~~~

It is now NIGHT 2. Those with NIGHTly business may now conduct it.

The Ordos sleep now.


Living
Nerwen
Inziladun
Loslote
Boromir88
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Morsul the Dark
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Legate of Amon Lanc
Mithalwen
Eönwë
Nogrod
Pervinca Took
Brinniel

[Kuruharan]

~~~~~Our Tale~~~~~

The NIGHT was quiet.

Mostly.

Except that as dawn began creeping over the horizon there was a strange buzz.

It went on and on growing louder and LOUDER and LOUDER!!!!!!

The guests huddled in their rooms, terrified.

bzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZ BANG *fizzle* POP

Absolute silence.

As the sun rose over the horizon everyone slipped out of their rooms into the canyon.

They stood staring at each other around the guillotine.

All except for one.

Blood poured out from under the door of the chamber of Morsul the Dark.

Turns out Kuru was right.

What to do now?

I think an excellent place to start is to focus on how Kuru was right. :p

~~~~~~

DAY Two has begun. Morsul the Dark was killed in the NIGHT.

You may all post.

Living
Nerwen
Inziladun
Loslote
Boromir88
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Legate of Amon Lanc
Mithalwen
Eönwë
Nogrod
Pervinca Took
Brinniel

The Dead
Morsul the Dark

[Boromir88]

I must be cursed.

Can we get one more ++Boro for a no lynch?

EDIT: Thanks, Boro!~Lottie

Erm...you're welcome. I guess? Just so we're clear, I didn't do it for you.

[Inziladun]

Craziness. So...Morsul was the Night-kill. Conventional wolf-wisdom says he could have been seen as a Gifted, or they had no real idea and just wanted to do something to make us obsess. I don't recall anything from him that might have marked him as a target.


Just so we're clear, I didn't do it for you.

Then why?

[Mithalwen]

He was one of the most vocal and was seriously gunning for Loslote. Can't fauLt him for that. Also anti no lynch. Ditto.

Oh look, stone me (don't actually stone me! I am being rhetorical). Kuru was right. Clever Kuru.
2 am... very sleepy. Unless someone has said something a2akening while I typed this...laters

[Inziladun]

He was one of the most vocal and was seriously gunning for Loslote. Can't fauLt him for that. Also anti no lynch. Ditto.

Are you putting those as reasons for his being killed? Not buying it.

[Inziladun]

I must be cursed.

Put on a coonskin hat, take a lit sparkler in each hand, and sing this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wU1kTuVSUOw) backwards while walking the shore of Lake Erie. That'll take care of it.

[Nerwen]

Okay... I will look at Morsul's posts to see if I can glean anything.

Meanwhile- Boro, what was all that about? It looks like you believed you were breaking the tie and thus nilping yourself. Is that right?

Another thing- a number of voters yesterDay (including, I admit, both people who voted me) strike me as using the existence of the Dead Thread as an excuse for not really "owning" their votes- "no, I don't really suspect this person, but who cares? Dead Thread!" And yes, I know it was Day One, when reasons for voting tend to be flimsy, but still...

[satansaloser2005]

So what I'm gathering here is that no one was lynched and we don't know why, and Morsul was killed and we don't know why. Lovely. :rolleyes:

The night kill tells us nothing right now, I believe, which is to say that I think it was a pretty standard first kill rather than a stab at a perceived gifted, and thus I'm not interested. I'm far more keen on looking into the Day One shenanigans and how on earth that happened. I think folks could do with a rehash of their vote explanations.

Also, my prince, I demand an explanation. You can't leave me so soon! :Merisu:

[satansaloser2005]

Just an FYI that I am headed to bed shortly. I will attempt to check the thread prior to work and will be in and out thereafter until my evening.

Let's not have chaos again, shall we? :eek:

[Brinniel]

I honestly think the bads have a lot more to lose than us. Not going to lie... gifteds to me, anyway, are less than helpful. You get reveals and counter reveals and a seer in a game where characters can change roles? I'm just not convinced losing them is entirely game breaking. Getting the evil wizard though destroys the baddies chances. Especially if we get lucky and get him day one.
I do agree with him to an extent on this. While Gifteds definitely have their usefulness, we don't necessarily need to rely on them to win the game. Anyway, I wonder if the baddies picked up on this quote and suspected a gifted Morsul was attempting to play down his own role. Then again, finding a gifted is such a shot in the dark so early in the game, I'm not sure that the baddies would factor giftedness at all when selecting last Night's pick.

Boro's self vote at the end of yesterDay would be an awfully big risk if he were a baddie. I'm inclined to think he was innocent when he made that vote. But then that was yesterDay. There's a very real possibility that a new wolf is among us. Which means we can't use any of the previous Day's behavior as a grounds for innocence. That's always the tricky part about these Dueling Wizard games.

[Brinniel]

So what I'm gathering here is that no one was lynched and we don't know why
No one was lynched because there was a tie.

I do agree that what went down during those last minutes deserves another look.

But for now, I will be retiring for the night too as it is late and I am tired.

[Mithalwen]

Are you putting those as reasons for his being killed? Not buying it.

Not really. More pointing out that he doesn't fit the profile of a typical first kill of someone who has showed up but really not participated. Morsul posted a lot and offered strong opinions so frankly it seems a bit odd and aggressive to make out he isn't worth looking at the moment the day starts dismissing his death as something for us to obsess over. His death is all we have as concrete information and we ignore it? Really...?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I must be cursed.

Okay, first thing: let's make this clear. I absolutely didn't get what was that you were doing in the last minute there, because your post sounded first like you were saying in one sentence "goodbye, I am dying" and in the next "I have always wanted to die, but I am not dying yet". So what was it? What was your vote supposed to accomplish, a tie, or a break?

Otherwise, as for Morsul's death: I think it would obviously be a helpful thing for the Wolves to try to get a Gifted like in every normal game, especially since the Good Wizard would then lose them. The question is, with all the roles being unknown and all, how much of an important thing it would be for them. (What makes this worse to analyse now is also that since we didn't get to hear what his role was, there is no way telling whether he actually was a Gifted or not.)

That said, Morsul mentioned several times that the special roles confused him. By all logic, that would be a sign pointing to him not being a Gifted, unless the baddies would interpret it as a bluff from him. That's the same like what Brinniel said about him downplaying the role of Gifteds.

I tend to agree with Mith that he was certainly not a non-participating player, question is what does it mean in practice. There are many "participating players" (although again, I think Morsul was more active than he was usually, and so maybe that was again a reason for him to stand out as a target).

Of course, "all of the above" is also a reasonable explanation. I mean the more reasons the Wolves have to kill somebody, the more likely they would be to target him, obviously.

[Nerwen]

Okay, I intended to have this done much sooner, but things got in the way.

Morsul, His First and Last Day.

#6.(Replying to Lottie at #5.)
Certainly a good thought process, but the other side of the coin is a no lynch vote is in itself a bandwagon to easily hide in. It discourages suspicions and allegations and other information that can be dissected Day two.

#9.
Chance of getting a baddie with no lynch 0/16

Don't get me wrong mathematically I get the logic.

Then again I'm not entirely sure I get the whole wizard deal.

#10.
*old man voice
Back in my day we had wolves and gifted not these new fangled wizards

#14.
I've certainly never played a game with them. But time to pretend to be serious since my posts are mostly banter.

1. My last thought on lynch no lynch. If my math is correct we have a 6.25% of getting bad wizard today. If we forego lynching and lose a friend overnight that leaves 1/15. 6.66666% not going to lie seems to me we could easily have the same exact debate tomorrow which is one reason I'm not a fan of the policy.

2. The dead thread. Even if we make a few mistakes the dead thread could be a little Kharmic power to help us later on.

3. For clarification since the dead thread gives a voter a double vote does that change victory parameters for wolves? Usually it's wolves=innocents but in theory if it got to 1/1 the dead thread could break that tie?

4. I'm going to sleep.

#24. (Replying to Zil at #22.)
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In a 1/1 situation in theory the dead could swing a win in either direction. I'm just wondering if a tie is still an automatic win.

#26.
To be fair with the mechanic of wolves being created at random times by the evil wizard we have no real knowledge of how many wolves we have at any given time plus people who were once considered iron clad innocent could be evil the next day. While I understand looking for sudden changes in behavior it seems to me we'll never have a clear grasp on who the bad guys really are because we won't even know how many.

Every day will be day one with a lot of information from the previous day being suspect at best. In my opinion in this type of game no lynch for the sake of information gathering isn't the most helpful strategy. And as Boro said we're straight out of the gate saying do nothing...

#35.
Ok. So I'm voting.

Now it's time for me to say that weird thing no one likes.

I honestly think the bads have a lot more to lose than us. Not going to lie... gifteds to me, anyway, are less than helpful. You get reveals and counter reveals and a seer in a game where characters can change roles? I'm just not convinced losing them is entirely game breaking. Getting the evil wizard though destroys the baddies chances. Especially if we get lucky and get him day one.

#39.
So... yeah I just reread the whole Wizard doohickey. I'm slightly less confused. But still think having a confirmed identity of the EW would be good. Then there are the visitors... oy I'm so confused.

But I stand by my statements.

#45.
We've got only a couple hours to deadline and a lot of folks not here. I'm worried we're they're not present because they didn't realize we had started? If anyone can reach out on social media perhaps?

I wouldn't vote anyone not here. The biggest issue of the day is to vote or not, that being said while I'm all for voting I'm not sure I can do it in good conscience with so many absent...

#92. Votes Lottie (Boro 1, Nerwen, Lottie 1)
++Lottie

Right out the gate she was giving strategies for wolves and wizards. I'm also interested in her mentioning wolf and wizard not being in contact. So the wolf has to find the wizard? If that's the case another reason to go for a wolf right? Keep the wizard isolated.

Edit X'ed since Boro vote

#105. (Replying to Eonwe’s suggestions for communicating with the Dead at #98)
sure thing (https://youtu.be/Ccoj5lhLmSQ)

Xed a bunch

Thoughts: He had a lot to say generally, and doesn’t seem to have been suspected by anyone– but then that last was true of many players yesterDay, to the point that I think it can be discounted as a factor.

Talked a lot about–

a. The vote-or-not question.
b. The mechanics of the Dead thread.
c. The Wizards, in particular the desirability of catching the Evil Wizard.

I’d say that c. may have been what did for him– preoccupation with a particular rôle is very often a gifted tell (from the wolfish point of view). Claimed to be confused by the rules, but that could have been seen as an “obvious” blind (to answer Legate).

The other notable thing he did was, of course, vote Lottie. Apparently he thought her a possible wolf? But that oughtn’t to have been enough in itself to get him killed, even if she is one. Was not suspicious of anyone else.

One more thing we can say now– I think– is that a wolf was definitely created Night One– according to the rules, the Evil Wizard couldn’t have started off with a solo kill. Not that there was much reason to doubt it, but every bit of information helps.

[Lalaith]

I was using the Night break to read back over the posts of Day One and I was thinking Morsul's contributions were helpful and sensible, and thus he was probably innocent.
Perhaps the baddies thought this too - in that lots of us might decide to trust him toDay.

I'm sorry I was such a berk with my highlighting etc last Day - the deadline is so late and I get confused when I'm tired, and I'm not nearly so clever at posting stuff via my phone as some of you young folk. I must say that last minute flurry of insanity was hilarious to read when I woke up. I will almost always be in bed at actual deadline and will thus nearly always be voting early and missing the fun. :(

So we can assume probably two baddies yesterday and perhaps up to three baddies amongst us today?

[Nerwen]

Since it is strictly against the rules for us to cite post counts from the Dead Thread, I will definitely not mention the fact that it has seventeen posts as of now in support of any theory that poor Morsul is just babbling away to himself in there à la Gollum.:smoking:

EDIT: x’d with Lalaith.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

One more thing we can say now– I think– is that a wolf was definitely created Night One– according to the rules, the Evil Wizard couldn’t have started off with a solo kill. Not that there was much reason to doubt it, but every bit of information helps.

I'm getting a bit muddled with these rules so can we double-check this? Is it possible that no wolf was created on Night 1; first wolf created on Night 2; and also first kill made that same night?

[Nerwen]

I was using the Night break to read back over the posts of Day One and I was thinking Morsul's contributions were helpful and sensible, and thus he was probably innocent.
Perhaps the baddies thought this too - in that lots of us might decide to trust him toDay.

I'm sorry I was such a berk with my highlighting etc last Day - the deadline is so late and I get confused when I'm tired, and I'm not nearly so clever at posting stuff via my phone as some of you young folk. I must say that last minute flurry of insanity was hilarious to read when I woke up. I will almost always be in bed at actual deadline and will thus nearly always be voting early and missing the fun. :(

So we can assume probably two baddies yesterday and perhaps up to three baddies amongst us today?
According to my reading of the rules, yes. Unless the Evil Wizard is able to turn someone and start killing the same Night, which I suppose is possible.
EDIT:x’d with Eomer.

[Nerwen]

I'm getting a bit muddled with these rules so can we double-check this? Is it possible that no wolf was created on Night 1; first wolf created on Night 2; and also first kill made that same night?
Yes, that didn’t occur to me until after I’d posted. So scratch what I said, basically.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I agree with much of the Morsul analysis so far, and it seems to me likely that he was killed because he posted quite a lot, and because there was quite a bit of meat to those posts. It would be sure to get us all talking, especially about Loslote (whom he suspected).

I don't get the Boro situation: dunno why he became a suspect, and dunno why he's embracing it. Could be a noble sacrifice? Drawing attention away?

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Yes, that didn’t occur to me until after I’d posted. So scratch what I said, basically.

I'm really not sure, there seems to be some leeway in the rules. In any case, there's an excellent chance that there are 2 wolves going about now so I don't think we'd get blamed for thinking that.

[Lalaith]

I don't get the Boro situation: dunno why he became a suspect, and dunno why he's embracing it. Could be a noble sacrifice? Drawing attention away?

Yes I'm puzzled too. Maybe a kamikaze wolf who wants to go into the Dead Thread to cause trouble? Or maybe just a playful Ordo and the reason he gave is genuine?

[Mithalwen]

I can't quote for some reason but to answer Legate's philosophical question about what participating really means. Think of this as a multi car road trip. Some people have a compulsion to be one of the drivers, if deprived they will insist on querying the route and changing all the settings on the dashboard. Other people are prepared to take their turn as requested but don't have to be at the forefront but may be useful in other ways - spotting roadsigns, handing over drinks and sweets and holding the map. Some just sit and gawp out of the window saying Ooh look pretty flowers. A few clearly missed the pick up...

Morsul wasn't just along for the ride. He didn't make airyfairy statements saying x seems a bit odd without developing it. He backed up his suspicions and opinions. So while it would be a n unsophisticated villain who killed somone who suspected them (unless it was a very sophisticated double bluff) it is still worth considering the victim's behaviour. If I umderstand correctly he has to be innocent? Because if he were a wizard he couldn't be dead and if he were a wolf he wouldn't kill himself. Or have I got that wrong.

[Lalaith]

Is it possible that no wolf was created on Night 1; first wolf created on Night 2; and also first kill made that same night?
Hmmm...I'm thinking its unlikely as to delay too much on wolf creation would be a very risky policy for EW for a number of reasons.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

But it's the EW who decides the kill, right? So maybe Morsul was a wolf, got sacrificed, and now will be running the Dead Thread because everyone thinks he's innocent? How devious. :D

I really need to spend a few minutes thinking about the Dead Thread because I'm unsure how much impact it will actually have - maybe I've been overthinking its importance.

[Nerwen]

But it's the EW who decides the kill, right? So maybe Morsul was a wolf, got sacrificed, and now will be running the Dead Thread because everyone thinks he's innocent? How devious. :D

I really need to spend a few minutes thinking about the Dead Thread because I'm unsure how much impact it will actually have - maybe I've been overthinking its importance.
I doubt very much that the wolves would consider it important enough to be worth that.

[Inziladun]

Since it is strictly against the rules for us to cite post counts from the Dead Thread, I will definitely not mention the fact that it has seventeen posts as of now in support of any theory that poor Morsul is just babbling away to himself in there à la Gollum.

I had to stop myself just after the Day began, because I'm so used to seeing the bolding on the thread title indicating a new post, and that tells me to read it. But the Dead Thread is verboten to me at the moment.

But it's the EW who decides the kill, right? So maybe Morsul was a wolf, got sacrificed, and now will be running the Dead Thread because everyone thinks he's innocent? How devious. :D

I thought the Wizard passed along the kills, but the wolves could make their own decision. Though whether the Wizard can (or would) override them I don't know.

[Inziladun]

Another thing- a number of voters yesterDay (including, I admit, both people who voted me) strike me as using the existence of the Dead Thread as an excuse for not really "owning" their votes- "no, I don't really suspect this person, but who cares? Dead Thread!" And yes, I know it was Day One, when reasons for voting tend to be flimsy, but still...

A vote is a vote, and 'ownership' is beyond dispute. Knowing the Dead Thread awaits is also a bit of a balm for a guilty conscience.

[Nerwen]

I can't quote for some reason but to answer Legate's philosophical question about what participating really means. Think of this as a multi car road trip. Some people have a compulsion to be one of the drivers, if deprived they will insist on querying the route and changing all the settings on the dashboard. Other people are prepared to take their turn as requested but don't have to be at the forefront but may be useful in other ways - spotting roadsigns, handing over drinks and sweets and holding the map. Some just sit and gawp out of the window saying Ooh look pretty flowers. A few clearly missed the pick up...

Morsul wasn't just along for the ride. He didn't make airyfairy statements saying x seems a bit odd without developing it. He backed up his suspicions and opinions. So while it would be a n unsophisticated villain who killed somone who suspected them (unless it was a very sophisticated double bluff) it is still worth considering the victim's behaviour. If I umderstand correctly he has to be innocent? Because if he were a wizard he couldn't be dead and if he were a wolf he wouldn't kill himself. Or have I got that wrong.
It is technically possibly for him to be a wolf (I think) but I don't think the possibility is worth bothering about unless something *really* strange comes up in the future.

Anyway, I've talked about his behaviour and how I believe he may have been killed as a possible gifted/wizard. Obviously if his death points to anyone at all, it points to Lottie, but I can't imagine he was killed just for voting her, unless the evil side thought he had dreamed her- i.e. was the GW using his "Seer" ability. (I need to check the rules regarding how that works... but I have an awful headache right now, and I'm blaming it entirely on this game.:mad:)

EDIT: x'd with 2 Zils.

[Mithalwen]

But it's the EW who decides the kill, right? So maybe Morsul was a wolf, got sacrificed, and now will be running the Dead Thread because everyone thinks he's innocent? How devious. :D

I really need to spend a few minutes thinking about the Dead Thread because I'm unsure how much impact it will actually have - maybe I've been overthinking its importance.

Depends on perhaps how significant the vote empowerment thing is? Which will be on a case by case basis as far as I can see. And voting is not always easy to predict and can suprise... so quite a big gamble, to sacrifice a wolf though it seems not theoretically impossible.

[Inziladun]

Obviously if his death points to anyone at all, it points to Lottie, but I can't imagine he was killed just for voting her, unless the evil side thought he had dreamed her- i.e. was the GW using his "Seer" ability.

Was it ever clarified what happens if the wolves target the Good Wizard? They can't kill him that way, but could they get his identity?

[Nerwen]

Was it ever clarified what happens if the wolves target the Good Wizard? They can't kill him that way, but could they get his identity?
Let me check the rules...

[Nerwen]

Here we go:

If the Evil Wizard scrys or attempts to convert the Good Wizard, the Evil Wizard is informed of the identity of the Good Wizard. This opens the door for the Evil Wizard to challeng

Edit: sorry, you meant specifically "target for a kill"? No, it doesn't say.

[Brinniel]

Was it ever clarified what happens if the wolves target the Good Wizard? They can't kill him that way, but could they get his identity?
You know, I was assuming yes, but unless I missed something, I actually can't find anything that says it in the rules. So if the kill fails, the EW might not know whether the target was ranger protected or the GW.

But it's the EW who decides the kill, right? So maybe Morsul was a wolf, got sacrificed, and now will be running the Dead Thread because everyone thinks he's innocent? How devious.
That seems like an awfully big gamble, especially considering that with yesterDay's no-lynch, Morsul was the very first kill of the game.

FYI, I'm off to work, so aside from maybe another brief post, I won't really be able to participate again until the last hour or two.

[Nogrod]

I feel the rust jamming my brains after such a long time - it's like the neurons try to get moving but the whole machinery just cracks and screeches.

Good to be back - even if I''m not considering to floodpost the thread this time around.

First things first though.

So are the rules that are laid in the first post of the "Re-Party"-thread (updated last on 7th. of July) up to date and authoritative ones - including all possible changes and addenda that have been developed during the planning period? It looked like this game thread's rules were a bit shorter version - but I didn't have the patience to go double-checking every aspect as to which things are included in which version.

Secondly I'm quite strongly opposing Eönwe's plan of trying to tie the hands of those in the Dead-thread beforehand to some easily misguided scheming where the dead-vote is used with insecure methods trying to communicate possibly things that are not of any consequence even if the living might think so. Having spend basically the whole last game in the Dead-thread I did swore quite often to the stubborn and arrogant hubris within the Living-thread where they thought they were doing something witty and productive when they actually had no idea what was really going on. And I was not the only one thinking like that.

Let's remember that the Dead are a lot wiser than we the living are - and the gap between their understanding and ours widens everyday.

Also, having complicated - or in the worst situation - conflicting "rules of interpretation" for the Dead-vote is only going to muddy the waters and give the baddies a justification for their voting based on some interpretations of what the Dead might have wanted to say.

Talking of the Dead-vote. I understood the rules that the Dead have one vote - like one living person would have - but then someone (Morsul?) talked on D1 of the Dead "doubling" the vote for someone and nobody - not even Kuru - corrected him. So how is it? One vote sounds reasonable, doubling the vote sounds pretty strong indeed...

[Inziladun]

Good to be back - even if I''m not considering to floodpost the thread this time around.

It's good to have you back, sir! :)

Secondly I'm quite strongly opposing Eönwe's plan of trying to tie the hands of those in the Dead-thread beforehand to some easily misguided scheming where the dead-vote is used with insecure methods trying to communicate possibly things that are not of any consequence even if the living might think so.

It just seems a little complicated, and a bit too rigid for my taste. But if the majority want to do that, I won't be a rogue.

Talking of the Dead-vote. I understood the rules that the Dead have one vote - like one living person would have - but then someone (Morsul?) talked on D1 of the Dead "doubling" the vote for someone and nobody - not even Kuru - corrected him. So how is it? One vote sounds reasonable, doubling the vote sounds pretty strong indeed...

I thought the Dead just did two majority-votes: one to give one of the Living one extra vote, and to determine of of their number for role-reveal. Hopefully I'm not missing something.

[Nerwen]

I feel the rust jamming my brains after such a long time - it's like the neurons try to get moving but the whole machinery just cracks and screeches.

Good to be back - even if I''m not considering to floodpost the thread this time around.

First things first though.

So are the rules that are laid in the first post of the "Re-Party"-thread (updated last on 7th. of July) up to date and authoritative ones - including all possible changes and addenda that have been developed during the planning period? It looked like this game thread's rules were a bit shorter version - but I didn't have the patience to go double-checking every aspect as to which things are included in which version.

Secondly I'm quite strongly opposing Eönwe's plan of trying to tie the hands of those in the Dead-thread beforehand to some easily misguided scheming where the dead-vote is used with insecure methods trying to communicate possibly things that are not of any consequence even if the living might think so. Having spend basically the whole last game in the Dead-thread I did swore quite often to the stubborn and arrogant hubris within the Living-thread where they thought they were doing something witty and productive when they actually had no idea what was really going on. And I was not the only one thinking like that.

Let's remember that the Dead are a lot wiser than we the living are - and the gap between their understanding and ours widens everyday.

Also, having complicated - or in the worst situation - conflicting "rules of interpretation" for the Dead-vote is only going to muddy the waters and give the baddies a justification for their voting based on some interpretations of what the Dead might have wanted to say.

Talking of the Dead-vote. I understood the rules that the Dead have one vote - like one living person would have - but then someone (Morsul?) talked on D1 of the Dead "doubling" the vote for someone and nobody - not even Kuru - corrected him. So how is it? One vote sounds reasonable, doubling the vote sounds pretty strong indeed...
I can't find this, but are you sure it wasn't a question of doubling the vote *of* someone rather than the vote *for* someone?

That said, I am not nearly as confident in this plan to communicate with the Dead as some people seem to be. I think it did more or less work last game with a Dead thread, but this time there are so many other variables... I mean it's clear most of us still haven't got our heads around the rules properly yet.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I was using the Night break to read back over the posts of Day One and I was thinking Morsul's contributions were helpful and sensible, and thus he was probably innocent.
Perhaps the baddies thought this too - in that lots of us might decide to trust him toDay.
That would be quite a likely one, too. Or just one of the reasons.

So we can assume probably two baddies yesterday and perhaps up to three baddies amongst us today?
Which we should pay attention to, btw - because while yesterDay it was either one or two baddies (presumably two), which gets easily lost in a village like this, if it's three now and four (!) toMorrow (or potentially, at least), this can get off the rails very fast.

But it's the EW who decides the kill, right? So maybe Morsul was a wolf, got sacrificed, and now will be running the Dead Thread because everyone thinks he's innocent? How devious. :D

I really need to spend a few minutes thinking about the Dead Thread because I'm unsure how much impact it will actually have - maybe I've been overthinking its importance.
I think intentionally sacrificing a Wolf to populate the Dead Thread sounds like a scheme the phantom could come up with, but objectively, it does not make much sense.

Okay, now that I started thinking about it, I *could* imagine a scheme where the EW would just intentionally sacrifice all Wolves and try to completely misinform the village by making them think there are Wolves among them so they would just lynch each other, but really, it does not sound like a very logical strategy.

Obviously if his death points to anyone at all, it points to Lottie, but I can't imagine he was killed just for voting her, unless the evil side thought he had dreamed her- i.e. was the GW using his "Seer" ability.
Yes, I find it somehow difficult to believe that the Wolves would go for such a straightforward connetion. Even though if Lottie is evil, maybe the fact that Morsul was insistent on lynching even though many people were against it might have made the WWs think he knew something? But personally, I think that if you put it that way, it would make more sense if it was an attempt to frame an innocent Lottie.

Depends on perhaps how significant the vote empowerment thing is? Which will be on a case by case basis as far as I can see. And voting is not always easy to predict and can suprise... so quite a big gamble, to sacrifice a wolf though it seems not theoretically impossible.
At least based on experience from previous game, there would need to be significantly large presence of the Wolves on the Dead thread to accomplish anything.

EDIT: ah, Nogrod is back. Great! Let's have something to read...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

So are the rules that are laid in the first post of the "Re-Party"-thread (updated last on 7th. of July) up to date and authoritative ones - including all possible changes and addenda that have been developed during the planning period? It looked like this game thread's rules were a bit shorter version - but I didn't have the patience to go double-checking every aspect as to which things are included in which version.
There are also rules at the beginning of this thread, which I believe are the same, an in any case those should be up-to-date, since they were posted here with the game itself.


Secondly I'm quite strongly opposing Eönwe's plan of trying to tie the hands of those in the Dead-thread beforehand to some easily misguided scheming where the dead-vote is used with insecure methods trying to communicate possibly things that are not of any consequence even if the living might think so. Having spend basically the whole last game in the Dead-thread I did swore quite often to the stubborn and arrogant hubris within the Living-thread where they thought they were doing something witty and productive when they actually had no idea what was really going on. And I was not the only one thinking like that.
I remember the horrors of the previous Dead thread well, but I think that was what setting up some rules beforehand might be helpful for. Of course, you are right about this being different situation in the amount of uncertainity, different roles etc. Also, and that is perhaps more relevant point, we possibly should not "set" the rules in stone in case there comes some situation in the Dead thread we didn't think of, and then the Dead would have no way of communicating it back.

Talking of the Dead-vote. I understood the rules that the Dead have one vote - like one living person would have - but then someone (Morsul?) talked on D1 of the Dead "doubling" the vote for someone and nobody - not even Kuru - corrected him. So how is it? One vote sounds reasonable, doubling the vote sounds pretty strong indeed...

I think it was just some sort of example? In any case, I think the rules are just giving a "+1" vote.

[Kuruharan]

Was it ever clarified what happens if the wolves target the Good Wizard? They can't kill him that way, but could they get his identity?

With a few exceptions, which I will list, any action against either Wizard will expose that Wizard to their enemy. So, yes, if the wolves attempt to target the Good Wizard for a kill/scry/anything the Good Wizard's identity is exposed to the Evil Wizard.

Likewise, any action against the person of the Evil Wizard, scry/gifting, will expose the identity of the Evil Wizard to the Good Wizard.

Exceptions:

If the party attempts to lynch either Wizard, they will fail and it will be obvious that they fail. I won't reveal the alignment of the Wizard in the narration, but their opposite number will know who they are, so for all intents and purposes that acts as a reveal.

Rule Clarification: The Ranger can deflect probes/attacks on the person of the Good Wizard. So let's say the Evil Wizard and Wolves try to kill the Good Wizard but the Ranger is protecting the Good Wizard. The Evil Wizard will receive the same message they would in any other circumstances of a Ranger save, which will be, and I quote:

"*Doink* Missed."

I had always had this in mind as part of the Ranger abilities, but I realized that I never actually spelled that out for everyone. Sorry about that. :(

My thinking was that, yes the Ranger could just endlessly protect the Good Wizard but then they are just leaving the entire rest of the playing field open for the Evil Wizard and Wolves to have a field day. It seemed like a good tactical problem to place before the Ranger...and in a way in front of the Bad Team as well.

So are the rules that are laid in the first post of the "Re-Party"-thread (updated last on 7th. of July) up to date and authoritative ones - including all possible changes and addenda that have been developed during the planning period? It looked like this game thread's rules were a bit shorter version - but I didn't have the patience to go double-checking every aspect as to which things are included in which version.

The rules at the start of this thread are the most authoritative ones. I will update the rules in the first post as needed, including the clarification I just outlined above.

They seem a bit shorter because I streamlined the text a bit and shed some of the explanations and things that seemed redundant by the time we started the game.

Talking of the Dead-vote. I understood the rules that the Dead have one vote - like one living person would have - but then someone (Morsul?) talked on D1 of the Dead "doubling" the vote for someone and nobody - not even Kuru - corrected him. So how is it? One vote sounds reasonable, doubling the vote sounds pretty strong indeed...

While accurate in a way, "doubling" is probably a poor way to phrase it.

One individual has their vote raised from one to two. That's all that happens. The entire vote total for an individual is not raised. So let's say that Bob the Tomato has five votes and the Dead Thread votes to empower Larry the Cucumber who is one of the people voting against Bob. Bob's total only goes up to six, not ten.

[Inziladun]

Obviously if his death points to anyone at all, it points to Lottie, but I can't imagine he was killed just for voting her, unless the evil side thought he had dreamed her- i.e. was the GW using his "Seer" ability. (I need to check the rules regarding how that works... but I have an awful headache right now, and I'm blaming it entirely on this game.:mad:)

I can't believe he was targeted as a potential Good Wizard. From the evil point of view, would the Good Wizard really go so far on a limb Day 1 to cast a vote on a wolf he'd scryed? And how likely would it have been that the GW would forego a Gifted creation on Night 1, lacking any data on anyone, just to randomly pick someone for a role-reveal?

x/d with the Mod- so the EW and wolves might have had some benefit to going after a possible GW Morsul- except they didn't have this clarification at that time.

[Nogrod]

I can't find this, but are you sure it wasn't a question of doubling the vote *of* someone rather than the vote *for* someone?It could be - at least it would make sense.

I mean it's clear most of us still haven't got our heads around the rules properly yet.Indeed.


Just a few thoughts.

I believe we can assume there was a wolf among us on D1. The EW might have fancy strategies including not making herself a wolf the pre-game Night but yet there was a Night-kill last Night. Now that could happen if the rules allowed signing a wolf and make her to kill the very same Night, but I somehow doubt that - Kuru?

Besides just my personal doubt (feeling) there is the actual stated rule that the EW can only make a solo Night-kill after she has created at least one wolf - which kind of suggests the interpretation that the EW needs a wolf to start killing people off.

And anyway, besides the ability to kill in the first place, the EW needs numbers. It might be, she's not going to rush with bringing forwards her full pack immediately (to do that as fast as possible), but she'd need at least one, rather immediately.

Therefore I'd assume we had one already on D1.

But with no pack to defend or to plot with there probably are no clear wolftracks we could infer something from. Unless that late sequence of events which led to the no-kill decision involved the improbable - but possible - scenario where one wolf needed to cover for the EW herself - or vice versa.

That's not much, but probably the best be we have thus far.

I'll be back a little later with hopefully some better ideas.

[Kuruharan]

Now that could happen if the rules allowed signing a wolf and make her to kill the very same Night, but I somehow doubt that - Kuru?

This would not be possible. The Evil Wizard couldn't create and then kill that wolf in the same NIGHT. If the Evil Wizard tried something like this the victim would go to the Dead Thread as an Ordo.

That wouldn't preclude killing that wolf on a subsequent NIGHT, but it wouldn't work to do it on the same NIGHT.

Besides just my personal doubt (feeling) there is the actual stated rule that the EW can only make a solo Night-kill after she has created at least one wolf - which kind of suggests the interpretation that the EW needs a wolf to start killing people off.

Yes.

The Evil Wizard may make kills solo once they have created a wolf (in a scenario where the Evil Wizard has lost all their wolves). This rule applies even if the Evil Wizard has wolf picks in reserve that have not been used yet but is for some reason on his/her own.

EDIT: So I guess, theoretically, and I didn't fully appreciate it until this moment, the Evil Wizard could turn this into the most diabolical solo were-bear role ever!

Not that I'm suggesting anything to anyone. :p

[Mithalwen]

I don't think that we necessarily need to have a default request system in place early as long as we give the dead sensible options which are adhered to and not changed midstream. Spending too much time now exploring various permutations really would be an unnecessary displacement activity at this point.
Don't want to end up like this again.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YawagQ6lLrA

[Nogrod]

Now that could happen if the rules allowed signing a wolf and make her to kill the very same Night, but I somehow doubt that - Kuru?This would not be possible. The Evil Wizard couldn't create and then kill that wolf in the same NIGHT. If the Evil Wizard tried something like this the victim would go to the Dead Thread as an Ordo.

That wouldn't preclude killing that wolf on a subsequent NIGHT, but it wouldn't work to do it on the same NIGHT.

I wasn't actually talking about the EW killing her wolf the very same Night the wolf was created. Sorry if I phrased it badly.

My concern was, whether the "evil side" could have killed Morsul last Night if there was no wolf turned already on the pre-game Night (whether there was not a wolf among us on D1)?

Aka. if the EW didn't turn anyone into a wolf before D1 started, could she have turned someone into a wolf last Night and then have Morsul killed the very same Night she turned her first wolf into being?

Looking at it from the other POV. If there would be no wolf now, then no-one would have died last Night because there a) is no wolf to do the killing, and b) the EW has not turned anyone a wolf aka. (by rules) can't kill anyone solo either?

So it concerns the speculation about whehter there was a wolf among us yesterDay, not whether the EW killed her puppy just to send her into the Dead-thread (which would be quite insane - or phantomish)... :rolleyes:

[Loslote]

As far as the Dead Thread communication goes, I think it is better to have a consistent plan than it is to try to wing it. Sure, something may go wrong, but that can be addressed by putting in a failsafe - say, empower the first or last people alphabetically if something has gone terribly wrong, and we can work out a new plan to draw out what, exactly, has gone wrong the next Day. If we don't have a plan at all, getting any information from the Dead Thread becomes much more difficult, and the possibility of confusion increases drastically. I am honestly side-eying Nog for, as far as I can tell, dismissing the idea of *having a plan at all*. Sure, it can get messy, but if we don't have a solid plan, communication would be almost impossible. I'm less wary of Mith, who doesn't like the plan but is suggesting alternatives rather than effectively saying "communicating with the Dead Thread is hard, we shouldn't even try". All but one of us is in the living thread *right now*, now is the time to hash this out, when everyone can make sure they're comfortable with the plan in the case that they are the ones who end up in the Dead Thread.

As far as Morsul goes, I wonder if the EW killed him in part as a way to shield the rest of the last minute voters from scrutiny. Morsul was one of the earlier and more bold voters, and by focusing attention on his vote, maybe the EW was hoping to draw our attention away from a vote like Zil's for Nerwen, or the votes for me, or even the votes for Boro meant to tie it up. At any rate, I think we, as a village, haven't spent much time looking at those, and I do want to take a closer look.

[Mithalwen]

The important thing as I recall was to limit the questions so that the dead had a multiple choice of votes to allow for their special knowledge. We don't want to mess up lynching a wolf to know x in the dead thread was an ordo.
And a get out clause if the living don't know what they are asking for. Working out all possible permutations seems a bit unnecessary at this point. I would have to look back but I think it did work most of the time apart from the day 3 or four people posted their preferred options very late.

[Inziladun]

If we don't have a plan at all, getting any information from the Dead Thread becomes much more difficult, and the possibility of confusion increases drastically.

Maybe I'm just thick, but is the Dead activity really going to give the Living much useful info, other than the knowledge that the Dead gave someone an extra vote (for, to the Living, unknown motives)?

As far as Morsul goes, I wonder if the EW killed him in part as a way to shield the rest of the last minute voters from scrutiny. Morsul was one of the earlier and more bold voters, and by focusing attention on his vote, maybe the EW was hoping to draw our attention away from a vote like Zil's for Nerwen, or the votes for me, or even the votes for Boro meant to tie it up.

I think that's a stretch, but worthy of thought, I guess.

x/d with Mith

[Loslote]

Maybe I'm just thick, but is the Dead activity really going to give the Living much useful info, other than the knowledge that the Dead gave someone an extra vote (for, to the Living, unknown motives)?

If we have a clear plan, the empowerment won't be based on unknown motives. There will be three clear options - empower someone from one group of people if person x was innocent, from a second group if evil, and from a third, failsafe group if something is wrong. That way, the Dead have options for who they want to empower in order to convey the information, and we can avoid the situation where the Dead don't want to vote for the person we selected as the "person x was innocent" message.

This assumes the Dead reveal the roles in order of arrival, but I think that's reasonable, and if they have to depart from the plan, they can use the failsafe and wait for a Visitor to deliver the more complicated message.

[Boromir88]

I was intending to break a tie. But I'll take the rest to the grave with me.

I'm here for the rest of the day. Reading, catching up and I guess I'll go from there and see if today brings any changes.

Good to see everyone here and some healthy participation.

[Boromir88]

In theory, maybe the EW didn't create a wolf N1. So, D1 there was no wolf and the EW was just trying to get a lynch/small chance to expose the GW/gifted. What would be the advantage to create a wolf N1, other than create a small chance of possibly losing the wolf in a lucky D1 lynch? If by creating a wolf N2, the EW then gets to make a kill on N2, I'd definitely wait until N2 until creating a wolf. If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.

[Inziladun]

If we have a clear plan, the empowerment won't be based on unknown motives. There will be three clear options - empower someone from one group of people if person x was innocent, from a second group if evil, and from a third, failsafe group if something is wrong. That way, the Dead have options for who they want to empower in order to convey the information, and we can avoid the situation where the Dead don't want to vote for the person we selected as the "person x was innocent" message.

But if the lists of whom to empower, as set out by Steve are alphabetical, doesn't that have a innate randomness?

Leeroy (http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/leeroy-jenkins), I'm starting to sympathize. :D

This assumes the Dead reveal the roles in order of arrival, but I think that's reasonable, and if they have to depart from the plan, they can use the failsafe and wait for a Visitor to deliver the more complicated message.

Then again, the wait for either Visitor could be a protracted one.

In theory, maybe the EW didn't create a wolf N1. So, D1 there was no wolf and the EW was just trying to get a lynch/small chance to expose the GW/gifted. What would be the advantage to create a wolf N1, other than create a small chance of possibly losing the wolf in a lucky D1 lynch? If by creating a wolf N2, the EW then gets to make a kill on N2, I'd definitely wait until N2 until creating a wolf. If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.

You could be right. Odds are we do have a wolf now, though.

[Loslote]

But if the lists of whom to empower, as set out by Steve are alphabetical, doesn't that have a innate randomness?

We want there to be at least a couple of possible people to empower for each option, so that the Dead aren't forced to affect the vote in a way they didn't want. The alphabetical ordering is just one way of dividing the living into groups, we could go with another. Most methods of dividing into groups are going to be about as good as the others, though.

[Loslote]

In theory, maybe the EW didn't create a wolf N1. So, D1 there was no wolf and the EW was just trying to get a lynch/small chance to expose the GW/gifted. What would be the advantage to create a wolf N1, other than create a small chance of possibly losing the wolf in a lucky D1 lynch? If by creating a wolf N2, the EW then gets to make a kill on N2, I'd definitely wait until N2 until creating a wolf. If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.

I think that the EW wouldn't get a kill if they waited for N2, based on what Kuru said earlier:

This would not be possible. The Evil Wizard couldn't create and then kill that wolf in the same NIGHT. If the Evil Wizard tried something like this the victim would go to the Dead Thread as an Ordo.

Based on that, it seems like the wolf isn't actually a wolf until dawn breaks. I think. Could we get a rule clarification, Kuru?

[Boromir88]

You could be right. Odds are we do have a wolf now, though.

Point being. it might be worth taking a look at those voting and who were pursuing a lynch yesterday as EW suspects. Granted, one of the more vocal "lynch someone" voices was Morsul.

[Inziladun]

We want there to be at least a couple of possible people to empower for each option, so that the Dead aren't forced to affect the vote in a way they didn't want. The alphabetical ordering is just one way of dividing the living into groups, we could go with another. Most methods of dividing into groups are going to be about as good as the others, though.

Well, they don't have to empower anyone, do they?

[Loslote]

Well, they don't have to empower anyone, do they?

No, but we don't want to put them in a position where they have to chose between communicating information and not messing up the lynch. Having options gives them the ability to both communicate and potentially have some impact on the lynch vote.

[Nerwen]

I can't believe he was targeted as a potential Good Wizard. From the evil point of view, would the Good Wizard really go so far on a limb Day 1 to cast a vote on a wolf he'd scryed? And how likely would it have been that the GW would forego a Gifted creation on Night 1, lacking any data on anyone, just to randomly pick someone for a role-reveal?
Context- more likely than the other scenario that a Wolflote killed him out of spite/panic. That was my only point. (Honestly I don't find her particularly suspicious anyway.)

x/d with the Mod- so the EW and wolves might have had some benefit to going after a possible GW Morsul- except they didn't have this clarification at that time.
Ahem. How do you know???

[Inziladun]

Ahem. How do you know???

Ahem. Because Kuru just said it toDay?

[Inziladun]

And yes, I know the baddies could have asked Kuru themselves, but I don't think it likely.

[Nerwen]

And yes, I know the baddies could have asked Kuru themselves, but I don't think it likely.
Actually, I'd have thought it very likely... and you were so certain a moment ago...

[Inziladun]

I only have another couple of hours before I'm going to have to vote and sign off for the Day. Not good, when so many haven't been around.

[Inziladun]

Actually, I'd have thought it very likely... and you were so certain a moment ago...

Ah. There's Eeevill afoot. ;)

[Eönwë]

Ok, commenting as I read through.

Yes I'm puzzled too. Maybe a kamikaze wolf who wants to go into the Dead Thread to cause trouble? Or maybe just a playful Ordo and the reason he gave is genuine?
This is actually a pretty interesting idea. Since the EW has one 'disposable' wolf, it could be useful for evil side to have someone in the other thread, especially early on (the risk of which is actually what converted me into an anti-lyncher and prompted me to come up with the Dead Thread plan).

I thought the Wizard passed along the kills, but the wolves could make their own decision. Though whether the Wizard can (or would) override them I don't know.
I mean, it might not be a nice thing to do, but since the EW is the one that makes the pick (i.e., sends it to Kuru), I interpreted the rules as pretty clearly implying that the EW is the one that ultimately makes the pick, with the wolves acting more as advisers/helpers (which also makes sense thematically).

edit:x-ed since Lottie's #171

[Nerwen]

Ah. There's Eeevill afoot. ;)
Let me be clear, Zil- yes, I'm indeed saying that looks a possible slip to me. In a more conventional game I'd be a lot surer, but I know I've been guilty of making assumptions myself this time around. Still...

Edit: x'd with Eonwe.

[Inziladun]

Let me be clear, Zil- yes, I'm indeed saying that looks a possible slip to me. In a more conventional game I'd be a lot surer, but I know I've been guilty of making assumptions myself this time around. Still...

Fair enough, since I'm leaning toward voting you again, barring some sudden revelation.

[Nerwen]

Fair enough, since I'm leaning toward voting you again, barring some sudden revelation.
Why, though?

[Nerwen]

I do wish more of the village would show up.

[Loslote]

Fair enough, since I'm leaning toward voting you again, barring some sudden revelation.

Why, though?

I would also like to hear your reasons for voting Nerwen, both toDay and yesterDay, if you have the time. I thought your vote yesterDay came from not a lot of build up, and I don't know that I see where your suspicion comes from, even though it has been very consistent. I don't know that I buy that your slip is necessarily proof of evil, but your comments about the Dead Thread earlier did seem to be aimed more at distraction and prolonging the conversation than actual clarification. I could see a [wolf trying to keep the discussion on Dead Thread mechanics in order to prevent us from looking for wolves.

[Nogrod]

If by creating a wolf N2, the EW then gets to make a kill on N2, I'd definitely wait until N2 until creating a wolf. If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.And this is exactly the question I was asking (and Kuru hasn't answered yet)!

Absolutely secure innocent-lynch (unless lynched herself) on D1 and still a possibility to kill someone on N2 when recruiting her first wolf only on the very same N2 would be a no-brainer for the EW.

Kuru's answer was not to this question. He answered to a question (which I at least didn't intend to ask), whether the EW could Nightkill the same wolf she turns into a wolf the same Night. It is a totally different question and not one that would help us determining whether there was a wolf around on D1 - aka. whether reading yesterday's voting fex. is totally worth zero or worth at least a try.


Another quick point - just as a remainder - the Dead might not see as the most beneficial course of action to be the "messenger boys and girls" who make insecure attempts at telling the living who someone (of lesser consequence by game terms) was or is if they can for example lynch a baddie with their vote - or point to a known villain with it.

The Dead know who is important to know for the living - the Living only shoot in the dark - well not necessarily in the first Days but later the difference becomes remarkable - and at least later on the Living should not think they are the ones on the driving seat because they are the blind ones while the Dead are not.

*Goes back to read more*

[Boromir88]

*Boro grabs an apple out of his pack. Sits down. Watches this interesting back-and-forth between Inzil and Nerwen*

*Ponders...was it a slip? An innocent assumption? On first appearance, Inzil looks like he's trying to back away from it and pass it off as an innocent joke.*

"Appearances are deceiving though" Boro whispers to another participant and offering a bit of the apple.

[Loslote]

The Dead know who is important to know for the living - the Living only shoot in the dark - well not necessarily in the first Days but later the difference becomes remarkable - and at least later on the Living should not think they are the ones on the driving seat because they are the blind ones while the Dead are not.

The communication plans are absolutely less useful in late game. For one thing, the groups become smaller and smaller for each option, giving the Dead less flexibility and power. For another, the Visitors will have started to come into play, giving us more information than can be communicated via the empowerment vote. Probably around Day 5 we would have to drop the plan to some extent, or make serious alterations. That's fine, though. It doesn't have to work for the whole game. This kind of plan is extremely useful in the early game, and having it in place early on can help us get our footing. One vote is not likely to change the lynch when we still have 10+ people voting, and the Dead are not likely to be online en masse close enough to DL to tailor their vote to how the livings' votes are going anyway. Pretty much all the empowerment vote can be used for the first few times is communication.

EDIT: xed with Boro

[Eönwë]

In theory, maybe the EW didn't create a wolf N1. So, D1 there was no wolf and the EW was just trying to get a lynch/small chance to expose the GW/gifted. What would be the advantage to create a wolf N1, other than create a small chance of possibly losing the wolf in a lucky D1 lynch? If by creating a wolf N2, the EW then gets to make a kill on N2, I'd definitely wait until N2 until creating a wolf. If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.

Following on from my last post, this actually seems like what a suicidal wolf would say to try to throw us off the scent. Since there is one spare/disposable wolf, getting one into the Dead Thread on Day 1 could definitely derail it for a while, as I mentioned in this post (quoting it here for ease and because I can't be bothered to write it out again):

If we lynch someone now, we have the following situation:
N1: 0 in DT
D1: 0 in DT
N2: 1 in DT
D2: 2 in DT (1/2 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N3: 3 in DT (1/3 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
D3: 4 in DT (3/4 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N4: 5 in DT (3/5 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
... etc.

This means that at each Night, there are 2 unknowns. Of course, if we now agree to a certain rule (e.g. always vote for the unknown that's spent the longest time in the DT), then it could be easier, but there's always the chance of a wasted Night vote early on with 2 unknown wolves overpowering the general vote, and there's also a risk of wolves messing stuff up in moments where people would be tempted to break this rule, e.g. when a Visitor is there.

If we didn't lynch someone today, we'd have:
N1: 0 in DT
D1: 0 in DT
N2: 0 in DT
D2: 1 in DT
N3: 2 in DT (1/2 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
D3: 3 in DT (3/3 known roles) - can vote to strengthen a vote
N4: 4 in DT (3/4 known roles) - can vote to find out a role
... etc.

Of course, this is super hypothetical and I can imagine a few situations where it would break down (e.g. Ranger save, Wizards' duel, etc.), but just thought I'd put it out there.


Of course, in this case, it would be beneficial to get a wolf into the Dead Thread immediately, as their strength in that thread would wane as soon as it gets populated by innocents following any kind of protocol (this actually brings to mind a super-crazy strategy, but I think I'll save that for another post).

So given that the EW does have a disposable wolf (that could actually be useful to them lynched on D1), I can't see why they wouldn't pick one on N1 for that reason alone. I believe we still haven't found out from Kuru whether or not the EW can make their first wolf and pick a kill on the same Night, but even they can, there is a greater risk on N2 of the EW picking an unwolfable person (the GW and their pickee) and therefore not being able to make a kill - on N1, there is a 2/16 = 1/8 chance of hitting an unwolfable, while by N2 this could potentially be raised to 3/15 = 1/5.

edit: x-ed since my last post.

[Thinlómien]

First off, I'm a bit puzzled by the choice of Morsul. It does lead tracks to Lottie, but that seems like a hasty conclusion - especially in a game with no seer. I'm sorry but my first idea of "why Morsul" is because in the last dead thread game he was (at least from my pov) majorly confusing the communication between the living and the dead, so maybe the baddies are wishing for a reprise. :p Or maybe they just wanted an entertaining start to the dead thread. :cool:

Also the vote yesterDay was a bit of a fiasco. I'm looking at Boro especially, who has continued being very shady toDay. Would it make any sense for the EW to act cobblerish and try to make people not take him seriously???? :D

Now, off to do a classic read-and-comment post!


edit: xed with Eoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeo

[Nogrod]

*Surfacing back before reading all of toDay just to bring forth an idea*

How about this?

We the Living consider the votes of the Dead as a kind of advice of an older sibling or parent - they know more but are not infallible. And we should probably do this in an increasing scale of trust that there is a point in who they want to help lynch.

Like toDay (with no-one lynched on D1) there will only be Morsul voting there and he doesn't know anything more than we do - so we'll consider his vote as his suggestion, with the already statistical probability that he is more likely an innocent one, who could be as far off as anyone of us could be.

I'd say D3 is the most problematic and we should take anything coming from there with a pinch of salt - but yet most probably it would be an assessment of some fellow-villagers.

After that the dead should have settled their game with five or more people in and the goodies should have the upper hand (even if that is in no way a safe bet) - and the more Days go by, the clearer view they will have of the situation and the more we should listen to them in regards to whom they try to get lynched with their vote.

This kind of attitude wouldn't lessen the fun of people playing in the Dead thread neither lessen the need of the Living to consider thoroughly what to do with the suggestions the Dead are making.

And really: if the EW decides then to try and crowd the Dead thread, she'll soon fall short of baddies to use (she's only allowed 4 in total and only 3 at a time) and then quite inevitably lose by numbers here in the Living thread as well...

EDIT: Managed to X with at least Lommmy & Eönwe

[Nogrod]

Okay, decided to clarify my point in another short post as I truly realized the point with all (most?) of it's ramifications myself just thinking about it again.

The problem in the Dead thread is that they only know approximately half of the people. With two people entering there (on average) per one D/N -cycle and them being able to check only one in the same time-frame, there's going to be some confusion at least in the beginning (they'll know only half for sure). But like I said, the good side should eventually come to grips with that.

Thus we shouldn't take anything they say as a fact or a strict rule (X is innocent, Y is a wolf) even if we had very smart systems to make that kind of questions to them. But we should increasingly trust their evaluation of the situation as a more informed fellow-villager's (party-guest's) advice.

And like I said, the EW wouldn't want to throw all her gang into the Dead thread as then it would be a game over immediately when the Duel takes place. She needs numbers in the Living thread to make the game continue...


*Ok. back now*


PS. Has anyone or is anyone going to make a look at the voting yesterDay? With the assumption that here was a wolf there already on D1 (most probable I'd say) and how fishy the voting looked there just could be a chance there was some foul play involved - at least chance enough to merit a check. I'll look at it soon - unless someone is doing it already right now.

[Inziladun]

Why, though?

I would also like to hear your reasons for voting Nerwen, both toDay and yesterDay, if you have the time. I thought your vote yesterDay came from not a lot of build up, and I don't know that I see where your suspicion comes from, even though it has been very consistent. I don't know that I buy that your slip is necessarily proof of evil, but your comments about the Dead Thread earlier did seem to be aimed more at distraction and prolonging the conversation than actual clarification. I could see a [wolf trying to keep the discussion on Dead Thread mechanics in order to prevent us from looking for wolves.

Yesterday's vote I (very) briefly explained here (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=707402&postcount=100)

ToDay, I face a similar situation in that I'm going to have to vote fairly soon. I thought her jumping in my 'slip' had a pouncing feel to it. And like I said, a lot of people haven't been around much, if at all.

As for my 'prolonging the conversation' about the Dead Thread, it took two (or more) to tango. If it was thought I was trying to waste time or distract, people could have ignored me.

x/d with Nog

[Eönwë]

Like toDay (with no-one lynched on D1) there will only be Morsul voting there and he doesn't know anything more than we do - so we'll consider his vote as his suggestion, with the already statistical probability that he is more likely an innocent one, who could be as far off as anyone of us could be.

Morsul doesn't get to vote toDay.

After there are TWO residents of the Dead Thread, every DAY the dead get to vote on giving one of the living an extra vote.

edit: x-ed with Zil

[Inziladun]

So:

++Nerwen

[Loslote]

I am feeling better about Nog after his more recent posts, and worse about Zil, who has seemed more defensive than I would have expected. His suspicion of Nerwen also feels strange - it's too insistent for the justification of "she feels off and would be good in the Dead Thread if guilty", which I think is all he has thus far offered. That, plus he didn't like how she jumped on a possible slip, which I thought seemed like an innocent spotting what really did look like a possible slip. I wouldn't mind voting for Zil toDay.

[Kuruharan]

Based on that, it seems like the wolf isn't actually a wolf until dawn breaks. I think. Could we get a rule clarification, Kuru?

Sure. :)

And the answer is more or less.

While "everything" is assumed to have happened during a NIGHT phase, this does also implicitly create an order in which things occur. For example, Ranger Pick effectively has to come first in order for the skill to be used at all, then Evil actions, and so on and so forth.

And I'm afraid that is as much of an answer as I can give to Nog's question too.

The answer to that question is baked into the geography of the game.

I know it may be frustrating and seem like I don't understand the question, but I could not possibly answer that particular question. It is part of the game. The most definitive statement I can make is that the game is still going on right now. The Party has not won. Everyone can make of that what they will.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I was intending to break a tie. But I'll take the rest to the grave with me.
This sounds so awfully fishy that you must be aware that it does. What Lommy just said about the Cobbler-acting. I am not really sure what you are playing at here, but either you adopted some really awkward style or there is something else you are running here.

I mean this goes exactly into the book "a Wolf or EW would not act so boldly, except if they wanted us to think just that". Maybe a straight question, then - do you still want to be lynched or not?

Well, they don't have to empower anyone, do they?
The Dead don't have to empower anyone, but if there is at least one Wolf there, they could simply vote regardless of what other people want and cause a mess. I remember in the last game dead Mac was trolling as if there were no tomorrow, and mostly only by sheer numbers did he not succeed.

Zil - according to what you linked, yesterDay you said you voted Nerwen because she felt more "guarded" than usual, is that still valid? Because now you said that you are voting her based on her jump on you, but these are two different things. Just seems to me like purposefully going after one suspect (which a Wolf could do to seem "consistent").

Also, all this talk about Dead thread is all fine and dandy, but I would too prefer to vote early-ish toDay and I think we can still specify any exact rules for communicating with the Dead thread toMorrow, when it will (presumably) finally be relevant.

(Although then again, as early as possible. Because we don't want to end up with leaving the Dead with no directions until two minutes before DL. At least there won't be a host of them yet, so they will probably be able to react more flexibly.)

EDIT: x-ed since Zil's vote

[Nogrod]

Sure. :)
And I'm afraid that is as much of an answer as I can give to Nog's question too.

The answer to that question is baked into the geography of the game.

I know it may be frustrating and seem like I don't understand the question, but I could not possibly answer that particular question. It is part of the game. The most definitive statement I can make is that the game is still going on right now. The Party has not won. Everyone can make of that what they will.
Okay.

That makes one think indeed... :smokin:

When there is not a clear-cut answer, something is tricksy. :eek:

Without any major light bulbs immediately flashing over my head I'll pull back to reading how D1 went, but this sure is interesting indeed. We need to thinks about this as well.

[Mithalwen]

OK, so I Inzil, you don't think it is worth considering looking at Morsul, you don't think trying to get information out the dead will be useful and you have voted for one of the people who seems to have a good grasp of the situation. I fully appreciate we don't have a lot but it makes it even more odd that you dismiss it. I didn't miss a cobbler role in the list did I?

[Nogrod]

Because we don't want to end up with leaving the Dead with no directions until two minutes before DL.
I'll promise not to come back to this issue any more toDay, but... should we learn to think that the Living (who are blind and contested more strongly by evil) are in no position to "leave directions" to the Dead (who will eventually know and understand things) but they should be "leaving directions" to the Living?

:smokin:

Now off to other issues... aka. back to yesterDay's voting.

[Boromir88]

This sounds so awfully fishy that you must be aware that it does. What Lommy just said about the Cobbler-acting. I am not really sure what you are playing at here, but either you adopted some really awkward style or there is something else you are running here.

I mean this goes exactly into the book "a Wolf or EW would not act so boldly, except if they wanted us to think just that". Maybe a straight question, then - do you still want to be lynched or not?


Yes, sometimes I just want to find peace and quiet and let go the earthly burdens. Nothings changed over N2 and into D2 but (and you know nothing that comes before the "but" really matters), but that doesn't mean nothing will happen in the future to change my circumstances. And that doesn't mean I want to have to vote for myself again today. Lommy made a really good and logical argument behind her vote yesterday, and I was thinking ya know, I'd hate to be turned and used as a pawn in the contest of wizards and dwarf schemes. I much prefer to be my own master.

[Lalaith]

I've read over today's posts. Brinn, Legate and Mith are offering opinions that are both trenchant and sensible and thus to me feeling non-wolfish.

Well...Kuru's "clarification" is interesting. However despite this I'm still feeling a bit concerned about the people who are arguing that there might have been no wolf created on Night One. Maybe I'm just a simple uncomplicated sort of girl :Merisu: but I maintain that it seems such a weird and risky strategy for a EW to adopt that as a theory it's exactly the sort of bone a bunch of wolves might concoct to throw to the crowd to get them off the scent. So Nerwen, Eomer, Boro, ho hum to y'all. Nogs is coming up with lots of theories all scattergun-like, including the no-wolf-on-N1, but that's his way, as I recall, and so I'll hold off there for a while.

[Eönwë]

I'll promise not to come back to this issue any more toDay, but... should we learn to think that the Living (who are blind and contested more strongly by evil) are in no position to "leave directions" to the Dead (who will eventually know and understand things) but they should be "leaving directions" to the Living?


I mean, yes, but that's what the Visitors are for, aren't they?

I think the main benefit of having as rigid as possible rules is that it means that even if we in the Living Thread sometimes get a false signal, it will help those in the Dead Thread work out what's going on.

[Boromir88]

Yes, sometimes I just want to find peace and quiet and let go the earthly burdens. Nothings changed over N2 and into D2 but (and you know nothing that comes before the "but" really matters), but that doesn't mean nothing will happen in the future to change my circumstances. And that doesn't mean I want to have to vote for myself again today. Lommy made a really good and logical argument behind her vote yesterday, and I was thinking ya know, I'd hate to be turned and used as a pawn in the contest of wizards and dwarf schemes. I much prefer to be my own master.

And while on this topic...

Personally I feel Inzil looks the worst/most sinister today. Where myself, I'm trying to make the best of being stuck in this pit of despair Kuru calls home, without also being reckless/careless, or if I am reckless/careless it only impacts my own luck in life.

[Nogrod]

Nogs is coming up with lots of theories all scattergun-like, including the no-wolf-on-N1, but that's his way, as I recall, and so I'll hold off there for a while.
I've been thinking it most probable that there was a wolf already on D1 - why would I have spent the last hour reading the posts from yesterDay if I didn't think there was?

If there was only the EW on D1 the D1 was mostly futile as there is no relations to read - as there were none. But if there was a wolf and an EW, then it becomes at least theoretically possible to find something.

I asked about it because I wanted to know whether we could actually KNOW it or whether we could only think it probable. I mean if N2 kill is impossible with a wolf turned only on that very same Night, then it is a proven thing there was a wolf on D1 in the game (as there was a confirmed kill) - if it is possible for the EW to make her first wolf and make a kill during the same Night, then it would be only probable there still was a wolf among us on D1.

The only thing that now kind of troubles me is the way Kuru has avoided answering that question... but without any better leads I'lll stick to the idea that there was a wolf on D1 and I'm currently looking for any jackpots on D1 voting which ended in a tie - so is there anything looking like a helping hand -situation where a baddie helped another to avoid the gallows?

Hope that cleared my meaning...

[Nogrod]

I mean, yes, but that's what the Visitors are for, aren't they?
They are the Bonus - if we ever get that far.

Last time we never get the "returner" to go back in time. So I'd not count on them, but like I said, it would be a nice bonus if we got one.

I think the main benefit of having as rigid as possible rules is that it means that even if we in the Living Thread sometimes get a false signal, it will help those in the Dead Thread work out what's going on.Here we seem to disagree. The Dead don't need our help, we need theirs. they may know, we definitively don't. So let us give them the initiative as they are the ones who most probably know where to look.

Okay, I promised to shut up with this issue toDay... :rolleyes:

[Thinlómien]

One observation from the voting yesterDay: in order to prevent a tie (and thus no lynch) in the future, please keep your actual voting posts short in the future (you can reason in a subsequent post) and refresh the thread before you post your vote!

I read Nerwen's summary of Morsul's posts. The only thing that keep standing out to me is that he seemed very much like an ordinary innocent villager. What the??

Also is someone *side-eyes Eomer* really suggesting the EW would kill a wolf??? I'm astonished by Kuru's latter clarification that the EW can kill a wolf in the first place. O tempora, o mores!

Secondly I'm quite strongly opposing Eönwe's plan of trying to tie the hands of those in the Dead-thread beforehand to some easily misguided scheming where the dead-vote is used with insecure methods trying to communicate possibly things that are not of any consequence even if the living might think so. Having spend basically the whole last game in the Dead-thread I did swore quite often to the stubborn and arrogant hubris within the Living-thread where they thought they were doing something witty and productive when they actually had no idea what was really going on. And I was not the only one thinking like that.

Let's remember that the Dead are a lot wiser than we the living are - and the gap between their understanding and ours widens everyday.So you think we should just let the dead empower who they want and affect our vote that way? Or?

It's not a fault in your plan it's a fault in general :p but I really don' like the fact that once the dead start empowering people we are even more likely to cause a tie by accident. But what can we do about it? Tell the dead not to empower anyone?? Surely that's no desirable either.

Which we should pay attention to, btw - because while yesterDay it was either one or two baddies (presumably two), which gets easily lost in a village like this, if it's three now and four (!) toMorrow (or potentially, at least), this can get off the rails very fast.Hear, hear! Remember to watch out for odd shifts in behaviour OR odd stagnation to previous Days' ideas. Or sudden loss of willingness to play, which can happen when you are 'forced' to switch sides.

There will be three clear options - empower someone from one group of people if person x was innocent, from a second group if evil, and from a third, failsafe group if something is wrong. That way, the Dead have options for who they want to empower in order to convey the information, and we can avoid the situation where the Dead don't want to vote for the person we selected as the "person x was innocent" message.I'm in favour of this "empower someone from this group" plan. It gives the living some information and the dead some leeway.

If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.But it's not fruitless because the EW himself may be lynched either way.

I don't understand why what Zil said would have been a slip?? And the suddenly escalated Zil-Nerwen spat is very interesting. Doesn't make either of them look better in my book tbh.

the Dead might not see as the most beneficial course of action to be the "messenger boys and girls" who make insecure attempts at telling the living who someone (of lesser consequence by game terms) was or is if they can for example lynch a baddie with their vote - or point to a known villain with it.How can the dead point at anyone without the living having given them rules how to do so? I mean that would actually be useful, but I can't see a way of delivering such a message in practice... which now that I'm thinking of... something along the lines of empowering votes for known villains? But how can that be foolproof? I mean maybe there aren't any known villains or no votes for them to empower?? The dead can't be epected to abstain, because one dead wolf can mess everything up. Ideas?


disclaimer: xed with everyone after my last because I was slow and also had a half an hour phone call in the middle of typing this post... gonna catch up with everything next

[Boromir88]

The only thing that now kind of troubles me is the way Kuru has avoided answering that question... but without any better leads I'lll stick to the idea that there was a wolf on D1 and I'm currently looking for any jackpots on D1 voting which ended in a tie - so is there anything looking like a helping hand -situation where a baddie helped another to avoid the gallows?

Hope that cleared my meaning...

Well clearly I was helping Lottie. Take it or leave it by me saying it wasn't intentional...it happened in a mess of day 1 deadline voting fury where I thought I was finally going to have some time all to myself for a little while. And it turns out to actually helping Lottie. Sort of like Gollum and the ring episode? His actions in forcibly taking the Ring, and the Ring being destroyed was merely an unintended effect by Gollum's taking the Ring.

That doesn't mean other people voting last night weren't trying to help for other reasons. Mine were unintentional.

[Boromir88]

But it's not fruitless because the EW himself may be lynched either way.

Well the EW wouldn't be lynched...we would be notified of a failed lynch and not know whether it was the GW or EW. But the EW would be essentially revealed to the GW...still then the GW wouldn't be able to challenge and take out the EW until D3 at the earliest...so there would still be time to make some wolves. Although that would be kind of the worst situation for the EW

[Thinlómien]

Thus we shouldn't take anything they say as a fact or a strict rule (X is innocent, Y is a wolf) even if we had very smart systems to make that kind of questions to them. But we should increasingly trust their evaluation of the situation as a more informed fellow-villager's (party-guest's) advice. But exactly, how to interpret their "advice"? They don't know the roles of the living anyway, and especially early on they won't necessarily have any feasible suspicions either. So say the dead empower Samwise Gamgee who voted for Gollum. What are we to think? That the dead think Gollum is guilty? Or that they think Samwise is innocent? And what if the dead don't suspect anyone, or they don't suspect anyone who's got any votes on the living thread??

Lommy made a really good and logical argument behind her vote yesterday, and I was thinking ya know, I'd hate to be turned and used as a pawn in the contest of wizards and dwarf schemes. I much prefer to be my own master. I'm tempted to give you the benefit of doubt (because why would a baddie self-vote in such dire straits?), but this?? How exactly was my argument "really good and logical"? It was an absolutely standard "trying to be reasonable on Day1 but quite possibly failing because of lack of information" Day1 vote if you ask me. You constantly praising it is weird, and even weirder given it was against yourself. (Or maybe I just can't take a compliment. :p)

However despite this I'm still feeling a bit concerned about the people who are arguing that there might have been no wolf created on Night One. Maybe I'm just a simple uncomplicated sort of girl but I maintain that it seems such a weird and risky strategy for a EW to adopt that as a theory it's exactly the sort of bone a bunch of wolves might concoct to throw to the crowd to get them off the scent. So Nerwen, Eomer, Boro, ho hum to y'all.Yes! Another simple uncomplicated sort of girl here! It just doesn't make sense. Like sure it's an option but in my opinion not one worth dwelling on.


edit: xed with Boro 88th the Latter

[Lalaith]

I


The only thing that now kind of troubles me is the way Kuru has avoided answering that question... but without any better leads I'lll stick to the idea that there was a wolf on D1 and I'm currently looking for any jackpots on D1 voting which ended in a tie - so is there anything looking like a helping hand -situation where a baddie helped another to avoid the gallows?

Hope that cleared my meaning...

Yep - fair 'nuff

[Thinlómien]

Well the EW wouldn't be lynched...we would be notified of a failed lynch and not know whether it was the GW or EW. But the EW would be essentially revealed to the GW...still then the GW wouldn't be able to challenge and take out the EW until D3 at the earliest...so there would still be time to make some wolves. Although that would be kind of the worst situation for the EWYes of course, I didn't mean the EW would die but he'd be revealed to the GW and he doesn't want that. I mean there may come a time when he doesn't care about that (which is a good thing to remember btw - that at a later point of the game the EW could prefer getting "lynched" to seeing a wolf die for example) but I doubt that would be on Day1.

eit: xed with Lalaith

[Nogrod]

Here's the D1 lynching-story squeezed into a list with minimal comments.


.xy are the minutes before the full hour the vote was cast (all the votes were cast during the last hour).

X -> Y means X voted for Y, naturally.

(idjaofh "sohgopiefh padhpiavs") is a comment or actual quote ("in quotation marks") from the person voting about her/his view of voting in general - or if not available, explaining her/his vote)


.23 Lommy -> Boro (strongly for “using the only ammo we have”)



.42 Lalaith -> Nerwen (“no vote is a cop out”)

.47 Morsul -> Lottie (“the evil side has more to lose”)


.55 Mith -> Lottie 2 (“putting money where her mouth is”)
.56 Inzil -> Nerwen 2 (was careful all the time not to commit on any view)
.57 Legate -> Boro 2 (“should be a tie?” – after a lot of to-and-fro leaning on the no-lynch side)
.58 Shasta -> Lottie 3 (“this vote sucks”)
.58 Lottie -> Boro 3 (“to hopefully break the tie” – after a strong campaign for no-lynch)
.58 Brinn -> Lottie 4 (for lynch – Lottie for advocating no-lynch)
.59 Boro -> Boro 4 (“fully intended” to vote and said no-lynch is a bad idea – then sealed it)


Some comments in a moment...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Yes, sometimes I just want to find peace and quiet and let go the earthly burdens. Nothings changed over N2 and into D2 but (and you know nothing that comes before the "but" really matters), but that doesn't mean nothing will happen in the future to change my circumstances. And that doesn't mean I want to have to vote for myself again today. Lommy made a really good and logical argument behind her vote yesterday, and I was thinking ya know, I'd hate to be turned and used as a pawn in the contest of wizards and dwarf schemes. I much prefer to be my own master.
Ok, I understand at least some of this, though I am not really entirely sure. Well, if I got you right, then that eases my thoughts about you somewhat, but I am probably going to mull over this for a while still.

It seems also really confusing to try to make some sense of things here. I have been trying to look all Day for some signs of people acting differently than yesterDay, but I am getting the feeling people are acting just more the same, it even seems more the same than usual. Which by itself is an interesting sign, by the way. Because obviously Wolves would be aware of both.

Here we seem to disagree. The Dead don't need our help, we need theirs. they may know, we definitively don't. So let us give them the initiative as they are the ones who most probably know where to look.
Ok, here I didn't want to talk about this any more, but just a reaction - the problem with the Dead is that they cannot, by definition, have initiative because they are dead. Like they can come up with nice and dandy plans on their thread, but they won't have a way of communicating them to us!

Like, for example they think that hey, there is a perfect way to win the whole game if we lynch person X, but how are they going to communicate that to us? Think of it as a encryption device. Somebody is sending us a code, we receive a code, but we need to have the decryption device, the language of the code, to understand it. And that needs to be established either beforehand, or from us to them. It can't go from them to us (except via the Visitor, which, you said yourself, might be a bit late).

Correct me if I am misinterpreting this, but it just doesn't make any sense whatsoever to me. Offering flexibility is one thing, but this is completely misleading.

One observation from the voting yesterDay: in order to prevent a tie (and thus no lynch) in the future, please keep your actual voting posts short in the future (you can reason in a subsequent post) and refresh the thread before you post your vote!
Exactly.

I read Nerwen's summary of Morsul's posts. The only thing that keep standing out to me is that he seemed very much like an ordinary innocent villager. What the??
This just confused me - what is the "what the" refering to here? Are you shocked by Nerwen, shocked by that Morsul seems innocent to you, shocked by that he was killed if he seemed like an ordinary villager, or?

EDIT: x-ed with the double Boro and onwards

[Eönwë]

ithout any better leads I'lll stick to the idea that there was a wolf on D1 and I'm currently looking for any jackpots on D1 voting which ended in a tie - so is there anything looking like a helping hand -situation where a baddie helped another to avoid the gallows?

Ok, semi-crazy conspiracy theory incoming: What about a Boro-wolf and EW-Lottie? In this scenario, Lottie does genuinely agree that a no-lynch is better for the side of good and decided to sacrifice Boro, who goes with it.

Pros (for the side of evil):
- EW-Lottie doesn't get found out as EW as soon.
- Strong wolf presence in the Dead Thread in the form of Boro (with 3 more future potential-wolves to spare!).
- Lottie manages to distance herself from Boro (if he gets found out as a wolf).

Cons (for the side of evil):
- Does actually mean that a wolf gets killed (but in this case Boro would be the spare one).

edit: x-posted with Legate

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I just realised how late it is getting and I would prefer to vote soonish.

In terms of "fishy", Boro is clearly at the top, but his replies are just... really, I would have thought of a Cobbler. Like I am not sure if "fishy" in this sense qualifies as that he should get my vote.

Otherwise, I just realised from what Zil said, he may not be back anymore to offer any more clarification to his voting reasoning, the consistency of his suspicion on Nerwen and so on. In any case, I didn't think him suspicious during yesterDay and toDay there was not anything particularly standing out until his sudden exchange with Nerwen, which originated from her. Although ok, I just reread that and it was rather sudden response from him which escalated it.

Anyway, I have been also going through people's posts and would like to sort out my thoughts about everyone. Will be back in a moment with something more.

EDIT: x-ed with Eönwë

[Loslote]

Ok, semi-crazy conspiracy theory incoming: What about a Boro-wolf and EW-Lottie? In this scenario, Lottie does genuinely agree that a no-lynch is better for the side of good and decided to sacrifice Boro, who goes with it.

Interesting idea. While we're throwing out ideas that have been (I assume) percolating all Day, I would like to say that out of everyone here, you're the one who feels the most different compared to yesterDay. Also, that you would have been a great candidate to have been turned last Night, since as far as I can tell you were vaguely trusted by a majority of the village - and that killing Morsul offered you pretty good cover. With everyone's eyes on me as the major proponent of the no lynch, your involvement didn't garner any discussion at all. Whereas yesterDay you were at the front of discussion, toDay I feel like you've been trying to blend into the background more.

Now, I'm not saying you *were* turned last Night, but I am saying that if we're floating insubstantial theories, I'd like this one to be out there, too. I'd still rather vote for Zil toDay. I'm much more confident in my suspicion of him than I am in this theory about you. But I'd like to point out the vibes I'm picking up now, just to have them out there in the case that I continue to find you suspicious later on.

To summarize: I don't want to forget that on Day 2, your posts felt more cautious than they did on Day 1. I suspect you might have been turned last Night, but I have no proof, and therefore I simply want to quickly jot that down.

EDIT: xed with Legate

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I'm beginning to suspect Loslote, which has surprised me somewhat because I liked her posts on Day 1.

Go back to the Nerwen/Inzil spat - I had to read this 3 times (and get Cailin to explain it to me :p ) before I understood what the issue was. It seemed very minor to me. Yet Loslote picked up on (post #186) and repeated the term 'slip' in a non-committal way. Also, she criticises Inzil for voting Nerwen with no justification (I agree, but he's not the only one with a vapid Day 1 vote) and focusing on game mechanics (also something which many of us have done today and yesterday).

Then (post #197), it's pretty minor but there's just something about it - she returns to the attack on Inzil but seems to balance it out by 'feeling better about Nog' at the same time. 'Wouldn't mind voting for Zil today" indeed. I dunno - it's just the first time so far I've read something and thought there might be something behind it.

[Thinlómien]

Are you shocked by Nerwen, shocked by that Morsul seems innocent to you, shocked by that he was killed if he seemed like an ordinary villager, or?The last.

Ok, semi-crazy conspiracy theory incoming: What about a Boro-wolf and EW-Lottie? In this scenario, Lottie does genuinely agree that a no-lynch is better for the side of good and decided to sacrifice Boro, who goes with it.I think that's not semi-crazy, that's actually one of the few theories that makes sense. It just seems quite unlikely that our top lynch candidates would have been the wolf and the EW, and bold of them to play it this way. But that's one of the reasons I haven't been too keen on scrutinizing Boro and Lottie toDay - we shouldn't get fixated on this logical but rather wild scenario.

And I agree very much with Lottie about Eönwë. There's something about him that's different, and he would have been a good (but obviously also short-sighted) pick from the EW. I mean picking the villager that is the most widely trusted/ considered reasonable/productive is great if it works but not exactly sneaky. But in this case I wouldn't be surprised... which kinda sucks for Eönwë of course if it's true - imagine being such a good good guy that you're turned evil and then lynched because you were the obvious choice because you were so good?

edit: xed with Eomer

[Nogrod]

If Lottie and Boro are the EW and a wolf that was some darn daring gaming they played and worth a bow! Which – even if I think them both as capable players to pull off nice tricks I just now can’t see them have orchestrated together – especially if they have not had a chance to discuss things.

Although there is one scenario… Lottie might have looked who had been around lately and realized that all others but herself and Boro had given their votes – and then enter Shasta with his vote on her – and Lottie comes up with the brilliant idea that she votes for Boro to make a tie (knowing he wouldn’t mess with that tie but would vote for someone else). But then Brinn comes out from nowhere and votes as well – forcing Boro to the only way he could save both him and Lottie.

Nice. Possible… but not plausible, I’d say.


Of those who did not vote in the end (but participated) Nerwen is kind of a hard one to say: she has her own timezone quite afar from others and her not appearing at the DL is not unusual – she was quite vague with her attitude towards the no-lynch policy though so that + not voting might be a nice lay-low tactics.

Eomer on the other hand was strongly against lynching and at least followed his stated conviction true. And his arguments were, I think, pretty sound (which means nothing in the end as a baddie can make sense talking about abstract issues).

Sally I think just came in and went out early on the Day and that was all?


Just to cut things short, I kind of feel okay with the four first votes (Lommy, Lalaith, Morsul, Mith). They were consistent with their discussions about voting and voted for people I found myself also suspicious (well, the latter actually applies to all votes now that I look at it again! :D).

Legate was maybe a little too to-and-fro on the voting issue in general, like he was watching from where the wind would blow, but then again took quite openly sides in the end and looked like trying to gain a draw – although it was a bit early to try and do that in one sense, but well...

Shasta’s late and sudden vote stands out (after just saying he doesn’t want to vote any of the vote-gainers), well, screams out (“this vote sucks”) – but maybe just because of that looks like a more innocent one?

Brinn appeared even more sneakily and out farther from nowhere than Shasta and made some very roundabout arguments for her vote as the second. She wrote a bit longer post so she might have actually X’d with some of the late votes: so no one can say for sure how knowledgeable she was of the situation when she voted – but she sure did drop from out of the blue there at the last (second last) minute.

In general Eönwe and Inzil raise my eybrows a little with their game – sadly with both I think a lot of the issues are more or less the same I have suspected them so many times before whether they have been innocents or not.


Oh, this is hard...

I had kind of forgotten how complicated making decisions in this game were.


EDIT: X'd with basically everyone after my last post.

[Loslote]

And I agree very much with Lottie about Eönwë. There's something about him that's different, and he would have been a good (but obviously also short-sighted) pick from the EW. I mean picking the villager that is the most widely trusted/ considered reasonable/productive is great if it works but not exactly sneaky. But in this case I wouldn't be surprised... which kinda sucks for Eönwë of course if it's true - imagine being such a good good guy that you're turned evil and then lynched because you were the obvious choice because you were so good?

He also kept a lower profile on Day 1 than some others, though - he didn't actually vote, I don't think, and kept out of the actual fray for the most part. I'm not absolutely convinced, but I wanted to mention it in part because I'm going to have to leave for an hour or so soon, I'm not sure I'll be back in time to do much, and if I end up lynched (which is always a possibility), I didn't want to go to the Dead Thread without ever having said something.

EDIT: xed with Nog

[Eönwë]

Just to clarify how the empowering thing would work (since there's been some discussion):

1. Let's assume we start with today's living as the options. First of all, we alphabetise the list (toDay is an even Day so it's in Z->A order). That gives us:
Thinlómien
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Pervencia Took
Nogrod
Nerwen
Mithalwen
Loslote
Legate of Amon Lanc
Lalaith
Inziladun
Eönwë
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Brinniel
Boromir88


2. Now, if someone is selected from the first half of the names (which includes the person exactly in the middle), then the person is PREY (to use Kuru's terms), i.e., good, and if they are in the second half, they are a PREDATOR (also Kuru's term), i.e., evil. This gives us:

If the person is PREY:
Thinlómien
Shastanis Althreduin
satansaloser2005
Pervencia Took
Nogrod
Nerwen
Mithalwen
Loslote

If the person is a PREDATOR:
Legate of Amon Lanc
Lalaith
Inziladun
Eönwë
Eomer of the Rohirrim
Brinniel
Boromir88


3. Then, based on whether the Target (i.e. the person whose role was found out the Night before) is innocent or guilty, someone who is a known innocent (i.e. someone genuinely found out to be an innocent, or if no such person appears, a Night kill, e.g. Morsul - I assume the Dead Thread can come up with a system, but my suggestion would be to cycle through those lynched and definitively proven to be innocent) picks which of the people in the appropriate PREDATOR or PREY list is voted.

Of course, if we want to be particularly careful about the list (and possibly EW attempts at manipulation), we could, for example, after Day 4 (since this will only start on Day 3), decide to use a different ordering, e.g. Kuru's narration order (forwards one day, backwards the next), and so on.

edit: x-ed since my last.

[Nerwen]

Back. Will post when I've caught up.

[satansaloser2005]

....I need a drink. I'm home though, so there's that.

[Thinlómien]

Go back to the Nerwen/Inzil spat - I had to read this 3 times (and get Cailin to explain it to me :p ) before I understood what the issue was. It seemed very minor to me.Now can someone please explain it to me too. I have read it 2 times and I still didn't see Zil saying anything weird.

Of those who did not vote in the end (but participated) Nerwen is kind of a hard one to say: she has her own timezone quite afar from others and her not appearing at the DL is not unusual – she was quite vague with her attitude towards the no-lynch policy though so that + not voting might be a nice lay-low tactics.You mean, Nerwen never votes on Day1 anyway.

He also kept a lower profile on Day 1 than some others, though - he didn't actually vote, I don't think, and kept out of the actual fray for the most part.That could be considered fishy, but given that he loudly advocated no lynch on Day1 it's not half as shady as you make it sound.

I'd like to go to bed soon, and avoid the voing chaos this time, so I'm gonna vote soon. And please everyone, remember to keep track of the general situation before you vote, we don't want another tie. That novel you want to write to back up your vote can wait until you've voted. You don't want to crosspost with everyone, trust me.


edit: xed with the last trio

[Eönwë]

Also, just to clarify the other part, the idea was that the Target would be the non-Night-killed-person in the Dead Thread who has been there the longest and has not had their role revealed should be picked.

I say non-Night-killed because while it's an interesting idea, it seems pretty crazy to imagine the EW Night-killing one of their own, and even if they did, it seems even more unlikely that it could happen more than once (once they're down to non-replenishable wolves), and one wouldn't screw up the system enough to make much a difference.

edit: x-ed since my last.

[Thinlómien]

Eönwë -

1) good. That makes sense.

2) let's not debate this now when the dl is in an hour and a bit but rather during the first half of toMorrow.

[Loslote]

That could be considered fishy, but given that he loudly advocated no lynch on Day1 it's not half as shady as you make it sound.

I didn't mean it to seem shady, I just meant that of the people advocating for no lynch, he was probably least likely to face scrutiny the next Day, which might have made him a more appealing person to turn. Again, all wild speculation.

[Eönwë]

Eönwë -

1) good. That makes sense.

2) let's not debate this now when the dl is in an hour and a bit but rather during the first half of toMorrow.

Yes, but for my second post what I was getting at was that for toNight, both people should vote for toDay's lynchee (so we don't have a wasted Night on that thread).

[Eönwë]

Now can someone please explain it to me too. I have read it 2 times and I still didn't see Zil saying anything weird.

Basically, I think it's the bit I bolded below:

x/d with the Mod- so the EW and wolves might have had some benefit to going after a possible GW Morsul- except they didn't have this clarification at that time.

[Mithalwen]

I know she hasn't been posting but it maybe would be nice to get Pervinca's name right..

[Eönwë]

I know she hasn't been posting but it maybe would be nice to get Pervinca's name right..

You're right, of course. I just copied Kuru's list.

[Nerwen]

I've read over today's posts. Brinn, Legate and Mith are offering opinions that are both trenchant and sensible and thus to me feeling non-wolfish.

Well...Kuru's "clarification" is interesting. However despite this I'm still feeling a bit concerned about the people who are arguing that there might have been no wolf created on Night One. Maybe I'm just a simple uncomplicated sort of girl :Merisu: but I maintain that it seems such a weird and risky strategy for a EW to adopt that as a theory it's exactly the sort of bone a bunch of wolves might concoct to throw to the crowd to get them off the scent. So Nerwen, Eomer, Boro, ho hum to y'all. Nogs is coming up with lots of theories all scattergun-like, including the no-wolf-on-N1, but that's his way, as I recall, and so I'll hold off there for a while.
Except I, for one, am not arguing it. I began by saying that I believed we could now be certain that a wolf had been created Night One, then realised we technically couldn't be [I]certain[I]. And I believe you'll find this is so of other people you list. The only one I recall actually promoting the idea is Boro- who has been generally weird, sure.

Edit: x'd with many.

[Thinlómien]

Innocent
Legate and Mithalwen - seem like their normal innocent selves, haven't said anything particularly eyebrow-raising.
Eomer - he rubs me the wrong way with everything he says, so it is as it should be. :p The way he commented on the Nerwen-Inzil spat sounded very genuine and innocent to me too.

Idk
Boro and Lottie - yesterDay was weird. I would like to wait at least one more Day and see. But Boro is certainly fishier than Lottie and seems to have a death wish, so out of the two I'd vote for him again.
Lalaith - she's hard to read.
Nogrod - aka the advocate of the dead :D I initially thought his tone was off but it's been getting better. I'm watching him but wouldn't like to lynch him yet.
Brinniel and Shasta and Sally - they are all under my radar atm, will need to pay more attention toMorrow.
Pervencia - where is she (again)?

Suspicious
Nerwen and Zil - I don't like the way the spat escalated, it actually made me think of those times two wolves thought it would be "logical" to suspect each other and went for it and nobody who was actually innocent thought it was logical.
Eönwë - it's maybe not the fairest or best of arguments, but he'd have been a very logical wolf convert pick. Has been markedly guarded toDay and continues to talk about the dead thread which is useful (I really appreciate someone trying to work out a system, I do!) but also conveninetly something else than finding wolves/EW, which is especially bad this late.

edit: xed with all

[Kuruharan]

You're right, of course. I just copied Kuru's list.

Oh.

Have I been getting her name wrong? :o

[Thinlómien]

Basically, I think it's the bit I bolded below:
Originally Posted by Inziladun
x/d with the Mod- so the EW and wolves might have had some benefit to going after a possible GW Morsul- except they didn't have this clarification at that time.But, they didn't??? Unless they asked privately?? And it would be far more of a stretch to assume they did than that they didn't, if you ask me. I would have jumped to the same conclusion as Zil did. *side-eyes Nerwen (and Lottie a bit too)*


edit: xed with Kuru and afraid I've been on the misspell train too!

[Mithalwen]

It is listed as Pervencia.

[Kuruharan]

Ooops. :o

I'll fix that.

[Loslote]

But, they didn't??? Unless they asked privately?? And it would be far more of a stretch to assume they did than that they didn't, if you ask me. I would have jumped to the same conclusion as Zil did. *side-eyes Nerwen (and Lottie a bit too)*

I was more interested in the defensive tone than the actual slip - I saw the point Nerwen was trying to make, and I didn't know that I for sure bought it, but he acted way more defensively than I would have expected for such a small thing, which was what I picked up on.

I'm headed home from work, but I should be back before DL, so I'm not going to vote yet.

[Eönwë]

Eönwë - it's maybe not the fairest or best of arguments, but he'd have been a very logical wolf convert pick. Has been markedly guarded toDay and continues to talk about the dead thread which is useful (I really appreciate someone trying to work out a system, I do!) but also conveninetly something else than finding wolves/EW, which is especially bad this late.
I've mostly just been trying to iron out the flaws and make it clear in case I end up dying toDay/toNight.

You do have a point though - I have been thinking a lot more about that than I should be, at the expense of working out who I actually think is suspicious.

edit: whoa, new page! x-ed with a few.

[Nogrod]

Just looking at Eönwe's plan makes me more confident about not even thinking about that kind of a "deal". There's everything to go wrong and be misinterpreted.

Also it ties the hands of people in the Dead thread, making being there totally redundant (there can be situations where it would be more crucial to know someone else's than the "oldest" residents role)- or nauseatingly infuriating when things even can't go like "decided" (like there are several kills at a time and then there is no communication at all as to which one is checked).

Unless the game ends very suddenly and fast, most of us are going to be there and wouldn't you like to play as well after death? The Dead can't pass any reliable information - as facts to be used in proofs -but they see more. And well you'll be there soon too with all your wits and capabilities of organizing things and seeing what is the best for the villagers you have here in the living thread - but then you will be empowered with lots of other stuff as well the living here have no clue.

The reasonable way - to me - would be that the Dead play the game there and sort things out as best they can and then empower a vote for anyone who is to them the most suspicious-looking. And trust me - "been there, done that" - when you get there yourself, you understand what I mean. If the game lasts any longer than a few Days, the actual game will be there, not here.

Okay. End of my rant. Sorry.

[Boromir88]

Now can someone please explain it to me too. I have read it 2 times and I still didn't see Zil saying anything weird.


x/d with the Mod- so the EW and wolves might have had some benefit to going after a possible GW Morsul- except they didn't have this clarification at that time.~Inzil #158

It comes off as Inzil saying he knows for sure the EW and wolves were not aware of the question whether the GW would be revealed if the EW/wolves tried to kill the GW.

Nerwen asks later how Inzil knows this...for myself it's not the possible "slip" itself, but the posts and reactions afterwards.

Inzil 176:

Ahem. Because Kuru just said it toDay?

Inzil 177:

And yes, I know the baddies could have asked Kuru themselves, but I don't think it likely.

Nerwen's response 178:

Actually, I'd have thought it very likely... and you were so certain a moment ago...

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien
Now can someone please explain it to me too. I have read it 2 times and I still didn't see Zil saying anything weird.
Basically, I think it's the bit I bolded below:


Originally Posted by Inziladun
x/d with the Mod- so the EW and wolves might have had some benefit to going after a possible GW Morsul- except they didn't have this clarification at that time.
Correct, and also his reaction to my pointing it out strikes me as pretty "off". I mean it's not like I immediately started screaming A SLIP A SLIP OH SO EEEEVVIILLLL, but... he almost seems to act like I did.

Edit: x'd since my last.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Ok, semi-crazy conspiracy theory incoming: What about a Boro-wolf and EW-Lottie? In this scenario, Lottie does genuinely agree that a no-lynch is better for the side of good and decided to sacrifice Boro, who goes with it.

Pros (for the side of evil):
- EW-Lottie doesn't get found out as EW as soon.
- Strong wolf presence in the Dead Thread in the form of Boro (with 3 more future potential-wolves to spare!).

It is not so crazy a theory, although would be really bold. The "strong presence in the form of Boro" would make sense in terms of how Boro has been acting here (and I am sure he would be quite a presence), but that is very little to base the whole thing on, in my opinion.

Interesting idea. While we're throwing out ideas that have been (I assume) percolating all Day, I would like to say that out of everyone here, you're the one who feels the most different compared to yesterDay. Also, that you would have been a great candidate to have been turned last Night, since as far as I can tell you were vaguely trusted by a majority of the village - and that killing Morsul offered you pretty good cover. With everyone's eyes on me as the major proponent of the no lynch, your involvement didn't garner any discussion at all. Whereas yesterDay you were at the front of discussion, toDay I feel like you've been trying to blend into the background more.
And I agree very much with Lottie about Eönwë. There's something about him that's different, and he would have been a good (but obviously also short-sighted) pick from the EW. I mean picking the villager that is the most widely trusted/ considered reasonable/productive is great if it works but not exactly sneaky. But in this case I wouldn't be surprised... which kinda sucks for Eönwë of course if it's true - imagine being such a good good guy that you're turned evil and then lynched because you were the obvious choice because you were so good?
I wanted to respond to Lottie, but basically Lommy said it pretty well. It is true that yesterDay, he was much more all over the place posting his suggestions. I think Lommy also has a point in that if he really seemed to be trusted, he would be an obvious pick to make a Wolf out of, but exactly the question is if that would have been too obvious. But also upon re-reading his posts, I am not sure if there is such a big difference in his style. He re-posted some of his yesterDay's charts, then he commented here and there on the proceedings. That style does not differ so much in my opinion.

2. Now, if someone is selected from the first half of the names (which includes the person exactly in the middle), then the person is PREY (to use Kuru's terms), i.e., good, and if they are in the second half, they are a PREDATOR (also Kuru's term), i.e., evil.
Ok, I really don't want to talk about this this little before DL, but just a note - are we sure "prey" and "predator" equal "good" and "evil"? Because if so, why not use such terms. (In other words, like what might e.g. a Ranger, or even more a Hunter identify as. That's a very "predatory" role.)

Ok! Off to finish going through toDay's posts and then I will try to also figure out something sensible out of this and vote.

EDIT: x-ed with some bunch of people somewhere around since my last probably

[Boromir88]

I accidentally hit enter and didn't finish the explanation...

Inzil 180:

Ah. There's Eeevill afoot. ;)

This one in particular just reads as he's trying to sweep it under the table as an innocent/harmless joke.

As I said though, appearances aren't always what they seem.

And then the digging in on the Nerwen vote/suspicions when pressed for why...

So yes, not the possible letting slip to knowing what the EW/wolves knew or didn't know, but just the responses after make it look worse for Inzil.

[Nerwen]

I need to think some more about this Dead Thread situation. Can we make it work?

[Thinlómien]

Okay okay.

Boro and Nerwen, thanks for the clarifications. I actually think Zil looks better not worse because of this. But I also think Nerwen looks a bit more innocent. It starts to look like an innocent-on-innocent spat to me. Argghh.


edit: xed with Boro and Nerwen

[Thinlómien]

I need to think some more about this Dead Thread situation. Can we make it work?I think yes, but I also think we should figure that out rather in the first half of toMorrow when people are anyway going to be slow about getting to lynching business, not less than two hours before the deadline (as no one is going to be empowered toDay anyway).