Ooo, I like Wolves that are willing to play ball. We'll have to think about this...

Not quite following you here, unless you're talking about an ordo sacrifice.

Wouldn't it be cute if Lottie and phantom were actually packmates?

*gasp* :D

Lommy posted in the living thread about having to watch me crack up laughing at this thread. This was one of those moments. :D

Ooh what did you cook?

I think this is a very good plan, especially given it's easier for us to lead than to follow. Timezone-wise, I mean. ;) I hope Legate turns out innocent too because what's better than dead Europeans controlling this thread?

Sadly, your reaction to Nerwen's reveal wasn't as convincing as to Rikae's reveal. Anyway - what do you think she was up to?

Scroll up then. I thought about some possibilities up there. None of them seem likely, but one of them is probably true. (Unless something completely different is going on.) Obviously I can't explain them. I don't know what Kuru is up to with his secret rules either.

Top level argumentation from the 'Downs Werewolf
;)

Firefoot and Lottie could indeed be a company rather than rivals. A bold tactics but in this kind of a game possibly worthwhile. With Lottie going like maniac there clearly is room for Firefoot to say "do you honestly listen to that madWoman" - and she can nicely remind everyone that naturally the wolves don't know the real identities of their rival-pack so Lottie is hitting in the dark as anyone else and well, is just a raving lunatic.

Kind of a nice trick, actually. If they pulled it.

Exactly. But how likely is it that other Ordos would do what I would do? (Basically, does my reaction matter at all in determining whether Ff reacted properly?).

It's kind of hard to get motivated to post some long-ish maybe-helpful stuff if nobody appears to be reading my posts anyway. :rolleyes:

That is a good argument for Lommy in this case. If player X is against killing player Y, but then player Y is Night killed, it is less likely that player X was a part of it (packmates would've had to go strictly against that player). Yes, that assumes player X is telling the truth, but it certainly seemed that she was.

Pretty good work there, Agan. For that matter, obviously if it comes to reasons for killing people, there might have been other reasons than just because they suspected someone; they might have just seemed Seerish (based on behavior, based on suspecting someone the Wolf-pack thought was a Wolf from another pack etc.). But generally, yeah.

Thanks, you will. But I am innocent anyway.

I believe you are innocent! Now, tell me?

Now now, guys... behave :D

Yes, that was one of the possibilities that crossed my mind: but it would still expose Firefoot, and since people know there are two packs, it would be dangerous. Of course, unless Lottie counted on the villagers not lynching FF because they would think "let's not waste our lynch on FF, the other pack will get her" and the Wolves from the other pack thinking "haha, Lottie probably framed an innocent, let's leave her around for the village to lynch."

Personally I hope it is not the case, although anything is of course possible. Depends also on the village, and on the Wolves.

Just reminds me of those old logical games. What if you put it that way for us, for instance, so that we could decipher it? You know, such as: "I will tell you three statements, one contains two truths, one two falsehoods, and one contains one truth and one falsehood. 1. I did not kill Rune. I killed Legate. 2. The other pack killed Legate. I killed Rikae. 3. I did not kill Rikae. I killed Rune."

A late-night salad (lettuce, new cucumbers and baby-tomatoes) of smoked whitefish (cisco) and new potatoes with eggs and dill-oil.

It was decent for an early summer night. Missed the cool Riesling though. :)

Ah, you know, I do recall one of your theories, Mac.
(goes to get it)
Why couldn't the power have been sending THAT night's dreams (and that night the Seer picked you and Lottie). Thus Nerwolf could feed the village Lottie and pretend you were guilty and never be caught (because the dream went to her rather than the Seer.

How about that as an explanation?

I am actually interested.

Also, we're getting some (probably) quite interesting things going on here when the Day starts, so if you Mac want to be heard, or want to help, I think this could be the time.

I would probably have reacted similarly to Firefoot, but then, I have a tendency - wolf or innocent - to defend myself vocally against poor suspicions (you could argue all suspicion seems groundless to me though :rolleyes:). And in this case, Firefoot had indeed voted for Mac at a critical-ish moment.

Aw sorry Mac I went back and saw the post phantom just quoted here - I'd forgotten about it because that's pretty much when friends used strong language to tell me to stop stalking the game on my phone.

I want to say I'm not convinced of your guilt. At the moment it seems more convenient to assume Nerwen was telling the truth, but I want you to know I'll listen to whatever you have to say. I kind of wish we'd checked you toNIGHT just to be on the safe side about this, but it is true that Legate has more leads.

Sounds lovely! I had a nicoise salad and actually now that I started talking about it, I think I'm going to get another plate.

This occurred to me earlier.

Julius Caesar, Napoleon and a few others would want a word with you.

I think we all miss Mac and Rikae's Riesling even more...

Possible, I suppose. It doesn't make a whole lot of difference whether it was the most recent dreams or the seer's "best of", though.

Not Lottie and me, Lottie and one of her own packmates. She couldn't be truthful about the second dream, so she substituted me. I know how full of holes this theory is as well.

QUID RIDES, VERVEX? http://forum.barrowdowns.com/image.p...ine=1218680343

Tell your friends that we are more important. :)
If Nerwen is lying, why couldn't it have been you, just dreamed as innocent instead (so Nerwen just lies about that)?
Your Mom wants a word with you.

Why would she have lied about that? Little benefit (some confusion), high risk (seer knows she's lying). Unless it's her main plan to flush out the seer? If so, the seer is, thank God, staying mum about it.

Who says the Seer even knows the results of the dreams? Why would he/she know Nerwen was lying?

So the seer's dreams of just one Night are sent to someone else instead of him/herself? That sounds random and not very likely.

It would be very useful if it was believed the Seer was about to die though.

Perhaps the power of the unknown role is he/she can take the Seer double-dream and have them sent to a random Living innocent on a night of his/her choosing. BUT, in order to make the power work correctly, the unknown has to correctly guess the Seer.

So, perhaps the Unknown believed Legate was the Seer and was about to die, and so chose to use the power. But because the Unknown incorrectly identified the Seer, the power still worked but as a consequence the dreams were sent to a Baddie.
OR as a consequence an innocent dream subject (Mac) was killed and labelled as guilty.
OR if Lottie is lying about the kill, the incorrectly guessed Seer (Legate) is killed and the dream is sent to a Baddie.

Could be the mystery role at work, either intercepting for herself (in case it's Nerwen), forwarding it more or less randomly, or forcing the seer to forward it to somebody else (with or without seeing it themselves).

edit: xed with phantom

Ooo, gotta run! I'll check in before the Deadline.

Run, phantom, run. :smokin:

Let's draw the basics for the old folks...

So Nerwen

1) Actually received the message she told she received and was true with it's content - whatever her own alignment. Thus we should trust both Lottie and Mac are wolves.

2) Actually received the message she told she received but was not true with it's content - because it implied herself or another one of her pack (which would be an interesting thing if the letter (PM) told her to refer it true - what kind of sanctions would breaking that kind of ruling by the mod have?). Thus we could probably trust she has Lottie correct (with her own admittance) but would be kind of in dark with Mac.

3) Is a lover with Sally and made it up to gain time - and happily managed to hit at least one wolf (Lottie, with her own admittance - wouldn't that be annoying Lottie?), but that wouldn't tell us anything about Mac - but maybe that lover-Nerwen probably suspected him seriously?

4) is the seer and gave everyone her two wolves as she saw it was time to do something. Thus we should trust both Lottie and Mac are wolves.


Something seems to be wrong in all the scenarios (except maybe the first)...

I mean could you disobey a clear rule in a game like this? Without sanctions? (2)

What is the idea of coming up with that kind of out of the blue scenario if you're a lover? There must be something I have missed with the arguments for this scenario. (3)

Why would the seer kind of reveal but yet not make it so the ranger would feel it her/his duty to protect her the next Night? Or is she counting on the wolves thinking that she's just an ordo with this kind of luck fallen on her and thus not worthy of killing? (4)


But then there is also the matter of this special role: if the special role is that someone get's the seer's dreams then who did the extra killing? Or is there a kind of merry-go-around -role when someone is for one day the seer-receiver, one is an assassin another etc.?

And what has all this to do with itching and scratching?

If this is the correct version, I'll eat my hat... Oh, I don't have one - well the next time I meet tp I'll bow very low indeed and buy him a dinner. :rolleyes:

I'll take a very quick look at her and sally's posts to see if there's anything that would suggest this is the case.

This option 3 is something I've seen people talk about (I don't remember who) and it kind of escapes me - like what's the point? Or where did this speculation come that Nerwen is a wolf? Surely she hasn't been in a position where she would have been forced to make that kind of thing up?

Anyway, bedtime for me too.

Looking forwards to seeing who can we share the company of come the Day.

Buy one of them another day by making the wolves prioritise Nerwen over sally while simultaneously letting the Ranger know sally may need protection. It is a gamble though. But if this is the case, they managed to flush out a wolf nicely so I'm not complaining.

NERWEN...

• Mentions the lovers for the first time in her second post (it's always the case that signs of pack behaviour may point at the lovers as well).
• Questions Firefoot's vote tying plan in #44 partly because it may expose the lovers.
• Says the NIGHT 2 narration indicates the lovers are still alive (this is like her fourth post).
• Lottie calls morm highly suspicious for suspecting sally. Nerwen indirectly defends her, calling morm eyebrow raising rather than highly suspicious.
• Asks if sally (or Boro) gave a reason for voting Nog on DAY 1.
• Quote:

  Okay. So that’s what you are, Sally. Let me think about this.

• Quote:

  We could certainly do with some information– and now the wolves will be searching frantically for Sally's lover, so the longer we delay her death the more chance she has of not getting resurrected at all. On the other hand, or paw, she isn’t a wolf. (At least, I don’t see why a wolf-Sally would be making a false reveal right now.)

• Really hopes Kuru won't answer Nilp's question about the lovers' gender.
• It was over 7 hours into the DAY before she started asking questions about Lottie and others.
• Says the village need to think the lynching sally business over, and voting for her right now would be very suspicious. This a little before her reveal.

SALLY...

• Before her reveal she didn't say anything about the lovers or about Nerwen.
• Mentions they have a new plan to protect her lover and it requires the ranger.
• Her belated DAY 1 commentary ends with:
  Quote:

  More on that in a bit. When last I read the thread, it sounded like Nerwen had something important to share, so I’ll check in on that and then sink my lack of teeth into Day 2 after I grab some lunch.

• Explains to Lalaith Nerwen very rarely votes on DAY 1.

Not conclusive but nothing suggests they couldn't be lovers.

(Why did I spend half an hour on this at 3 in the morning?)

That she's a lover? I joked about it. Well, yesterDay, before Lottie confessed, I thought it might be some sort of lover-scheme, but that doesn't make sense now.

I discussed it briefly shortly after Nerwen's reveal. Still don't think it's impossible.

Unlikely wolf pairs in alphabetical order
 

I took the phantom's list from a few days back and expanded it based on DAY 2 voting. DAY 3 votes don't tell us much - looking at people's suspicions might, but I don't have the time for it now.

• Firefoot/Mac - dangerously placed vote, unless she'd decided to bus Mac.
• Kath/Form - low-risk vote on DAY 1 but just not worth risking it.
• morm/Lottie - Lottie voted morm early on DAY 2.
• morm/Mac - a DAY 1 vote would be totally useless, voted Mac again DAY 2.
• Nerwen/Mac - early DAY 2 vote, likely to be followed.
• Shasta/Lottie - throwaway vote very late on DAY 2, but he was the first person to cast a vote for her.

DEAD:

Nog/Boro
Nog/phantom
Nog/Lottie
Nog/Eomer
Nog/Shasta

Rikae/Lommy

It seems, though, that it would have been too risky... what if Lottie had been gifted?

Maybe they were just so sure of her guilt? I don't know though. It's just, if Mac is lying, he's doing a better job than I would have given him credit for (:p).

Also, we're fewer than 70 posts from catching up with the Living thread!

I wonder who are joining us tonight. Not that I'll be here to see it until much later because I should be in bed right now. :smokin:

If it's Nerwen and she's not sally's lover, I'll feel extra dumb for staying up late to look at their posts. :D

I kind of had a feeling Boro and Nerwen had some kind of understanding yesterDay, so I went back over Nerwen's posts and noticed this:

#461 "By the way, didn’t Agan say something on Day One about how gifteds should signal to each other?"

And then a few posts later she links it, Agan's post #86:
" I wouldn't presume to advise the seer (still never having been one), but if they happen to dream of another gifted, establishing a connection (if it can be done discreetly enough not to endanger either party) might not be a bad idea at all. That way at least there'd be somebody to steer the village (discreetly or not) in the right direction at the event of the seer's death."

And then Nerwen says in #466
"Now, what do people think of our little snow flower, Lottie?"

And then Boro in #481
"Lottie, I haven't formed much of an opinion on, she's skating under my nose."

Snow flower? Skating?

Boro also "I'm feeling better about morm today"

but he didn't say anything about Mac.

"I've been in a deep slumber from any WW games until recently."

Anyway, looks like Nerwen was looking for confirmation from the seer before her reveal, and got it.

65 posts in just under 2 hours... c'mon, dead folks, we can do it!

Ha ha, no, we don't have to pass them now! :D
We can keep close to them through the day and leave them eating dust tomorrow night. (Unless, for instance, Boro and Nerwen die tonight, in which case we'll pass them during the day quite easily I would guess.)

I'm not sure I see the connection. Something in Nerwen's phrasing caught my eye when she mentioned my idea of gifteds signalling each other, but I don't see how they could have reached an understanding in such a short time. Did Boro say anything about Nerwen before?