:rolleyes:







Yes! :D

Well well... Guess I'd better get out my Rikae page...
Well, maybe. We'll see. We knew this would/could happen, heh. A WW would false reveal just for the pleasure of making us use our Night pick on them instead of elsewhere. You're perfectly right, Mac, but do forgive us if we seem overly trusting of Rikae, as we're rather hungry for information.

Anyway, Rikae, my early notes on you truly echo your lament. When I did my readthrough of the thread I gave G marks (for possible Gifted) plus marks (when someone seemed clearly innocent) and checks (for red flags). You received zero G marks, so if you are the Seer that is fantastic Seer play, I must say! *claps* But, but, you received zero check marks while simultaneously receiving the highest number of pluses in the village, i.e. you looked incredibly innocent. Thus if you are a Wolf, fantastic play again. (Except for the fact that being too innocent gets you killed, ha ha.)

Anyway, who would want you dead if you were the Seer. Not Green's pack, since she isn't a Wolf. You mentioned liking Mac and Morm and voiced suspicion of Lottie, so a pack with Lottie but neither of the boys in it might target you.
Yes, you'll note we hypothesized Legate's Seership here during the Night, and if he was targeted as the Seer then the pack that killed him did not include Nerwen, Lommy, or Mith, because they would've been his innocent dreams.

Now Boro listed Rikae, Shasta, Lommy, and Legate as his innocent group of four yesterday. Why wasn't he suspected of being the Seer and killed? Because he had a Wolf from each pack listed as innocent? That would certainly take him off the kill list. Or if he himself is in a pack and listed a Wolf (or two) from another pack.

If I may ask...

what did I get plus marks for?

phantom, I agree with everything you say, except:
I think a wolf kind of expects to be a highly likely Night pick, and confirming a wolf is among the best information we can get. So I think a werewolf would rather not be picked, and not the other way around. A low-credibility false reveal doesn't benefit a wolf much at all, since all s/he gets is one day of general confusion, but a high-credibility one that people are willing to believe without a check, that is very dangerous.

I give pluses whenever I find myself nodding and saying, "Yes, they have the measure of it and aren't flavoring the opinion with careful slant."

You received pluses because you kept being right. You weren't painting situations inaccurately, or trying to make them look scarier than they were, or hedging your bets, or trying to discredit ideas by discrediting a source... You didn't take a calculated approach to my plan proposal, but rather you saw precisely its potential and thought that others were downright suspicious for claiming we couldn't do it, or shouldn't attempt it, or that it was oppressive, you didn't try to over-simplify or complicate it etc. A Wolf would have a reason to be spooked and poke holes in a foreign idea that had the potential to hurt them down the road, but an innocent would simply see potential and decide that the opportunity should be grasped.

You didn't even feel that you had to trust me to employ the plan- you were willing to separate guilt from sound tactics, which showed a pure desire to win. Those threatened by the plan could try to weasel out of it by associating it with ME, and thus "We can't just trust Phantom therefore somehow that means something negative about the plan" where as you did not make that error. I also noted your reluctance to lynch Agan, which seemed sensible given her possible Gifted status.
I was trying to say there that even the most obviously guilty Wolf would have a reason to bait themselves as a Night pick. In this situation it would apply to you, if say you "revealed" now as the Ranger who had been biding his time to see what the false Seer was attempting. You would know such a reveal would be suspect but perhaps you do just well enough that we simply have to check you. OR it could apply to Rikae if she feels the real Seer is still alive on the thread and will probably reveal today (and possibly reveal her as a Wolf), thus she can insist she is the real one and we feel pressured to check her. Whereas if she wouldn't have revealed we might've been more likely to simply trust the Living Thread reveal and write her off as a WW and check someone more interesting. (Basically my statement was less immediately applicable and more hypothetical.)

By the way, I note that both here and in the Living Thread, Kuru clearly lists Legate as the final member of the dead.
His narration in this thread in particular seems to paint Legate as the odd one. Is anyone willing to interpret that as "Legate was NOT one of the two WW kills"?

Because that certainly would change our pack analysis.

Possible.

I wondered why he put "how ironic" behind Rikae in both narrations. Could be just because of our relationship, of course.

I feel obliged to chime in here to say that you should not place that interpretation on it. Kills are always posted in the narrations in the order they either happen in the Living Thread or the names are turned in by the killers.

It is sequence of events, nothing more.

I just wrote it the way I did because it amused me.

I put ironic in because you were turned in to me one after the other. That too I found amusing. ;)

In other words, if we want to figure out who was killed by what, we're on our own.

If Legate wasn't Wolf-killed, then that means he wasn't a quality Seer suspect, despite the fact that he kept gunning for Green and she was then brought down by the Hunter. The Wolf packs would have no way of knowing that Green wasn't a Wolf- they would assume she was in the other pack. Thus why would they doubt his Seership? Only if he listed one or more of them as innocent- Nerwen, Lommy, Mith were his innocents.

Assuming Rikae is telling the truth, Lommy is cleared, which leaves either-
(1) Nerwen in pack A and Mith in pack B
(2) Legate in pack A and Nerwen and/or Mith in pack B

Is this line of reasoning too ungrounded to explore further? I mean, maybe the pack(s) wasn't even targeting the Seer. Why would they target Rikae? If Lottie was a member? Why would they target Mac? Once again, Lottie would've had cause, but she obviously can't be in both packs. Was it Mac himself that did away with Rikae?

Darn it!! That completely ruins any possibility of getting a clear handle on the things if we don't even know who was Wolf killed. I mean, that's the ONE thing the Living and Dead were counting on for forming suspicions- the fact that the Wolves would be purposefully killing people each night. But tonight we don't even know who they killed. :mad:

Considering that I'm dead...

It may be that my case against Lottie hit the mark. I actually thought Firefoot was the worse of the two at the time... yeah. *grumble*

Anyway I've been looking for Mac-pack in the living thread, and there isn't a whole lot to go on.

Pardon me if the following is sloppy... it's the Riesling.

Post 121, morm votes for Mac, early vote, " something in a number of the posts felt off"

131, Mac says of morm, "mormegil - I was originally going to put him under the radar, until I realized I was about to put morm under the radar. Can't be, especially since he did post a few times."
Says nothing about getting voted.

Trusts me, Firefoot, Nilp, Legate, Greenie
Nilp or Legate would be in a cozy place there among all those innocents.

Calls Agan, Rune & morm slightly suspicious.

post 168, Mac feels better about morm for the points he raises about Nog
Mac 188 "I don't really suspect morm anymore now, and I'd rather not vote for Rune. Nogrod made his way up my suspect list, but I feel quite unconfident about it.
Unless something unexpected happens, I will vote for Aganzir. "

Mac 281
"There's something odd going on in #247,248,250:
First, Sally suggests Rune might have been a wolf killed by the other wolves. I'm not following her reasoning really. Also, I don't think that's their priority yet.
Then Morm is all over it for this reason, which is ok, but also because she's "trying to make a case against a dead man". How else are we going to figure something out at this point before we get any evidence back from the dead?
Then Lottie is all over morm for being "weirdly defensive", making him highly suspicious. I get criticizing him, but that's too quick over too little.

...aaand then Greenie mentions the exact same thing, just more eloquently. Well, actually not the exact same thing, since I'm raising half an eyebrow at morm, too.
"

285, morm on Mac:
"Yes, and I've felt odd about Mac since early yesterday, hence my vote. Something feels very off. It seems a very forced attempt at being normal. Too much effort into it if that makes sense. To quote Frodo:

"Well, if he was one of the enemy, he would look fairer and...well, feel fouler, if you see what I mean."

He seems opposite to me, he's attempting to look fair but feels foul.
"
In 312, Mac's saying morm looks fine. He's suspecting "wolf-on-wolf people" (wrt Lommy/Agan): me, Form, nilp, Firefoot.

then he says never mind when I correct him (327).

350 morm votes for Mac again

352 Firefoot suspects Mac

378 Mac trusts me, Lommy, Lalaith, Eomer, Mith
puts morm, Nilp & Legate in "leaning innocent" (with McCaber, Boro, Greenie)
Suspects Agan, Sally, Lottie, Firefoot

"Reason tells me the case against Agan is clear, but my gut hesitates. I don't like any of the present alternatives, though, especially since one of those alternatives is me. "

384 Mac votes Agan
386 Nilp "And my vote make it six for

++Aganzir"

Edit: X'd with phantom

EDIT: my following post #253 at 12:05

I wonder why that might be. :rolleyes:

edit: oh, you.... :mad: :D

*double-checks rules to make sure there are no cobblers in the game* ;)

Ok, this is perfectly in line with what an ordo-Rikae would do, so that makes me inclined to trust her.

Would a wolf-Rikae do, too? I think my dear old friend Riesling may have the answer. :smokin:

Oh man, so far it looks like the living are going to ask us to confirm Nog's role.

Hope they give us an option for Greenie... although knowing it won't do them a whole lot of good.

Ha ha ha ha! :D

Even if you're somehow evil you've won my loyalty regardless. I'm willing to lose if my opponent is entertaining.

Okay then... back to the drawing board...

Well, he just called Eomer "den-dweller", so... If he is the Seer, hopefully his other dream last night wasn't Mac. It'd be nice if he's paving the way for a reveal with two WWs in hand.

Did you see the latest developments on the Living thread? If Sally is seriously going to reveal and purposefully ask to get lynched, why don't we just flippin give up. Geez. I mean, she only gets to return to the living IF her Lover stays alive, and the Wolves will have FOUR shots at that lover (plus the following day's lynch). Why take that risk? Why give up the opportunity to lynch a Wolf to purposefully lynch a Gifted that is unlikely to gain you any benefit?!

OK so now Sally pulled a Lover reveal and went to bed? Brilliant.


EDIT: x-ed with phancypants

Meh, I'm tired, and I don't feel like sticking with this thing at the moment. Hopefully when I return I'll find the village on a more sensible course.

I agree, it's insane! And she could bring back, like, the alignments of two dead people at most? God, I hope they don't do that!!

I did tell you. :rolleyes: Still, I suppose being a known innocent makes a nice change.

Wishful thinking, love. Not testing you for the time being? Sure. Trusting you? No way, barring a Seer reveal. ;)

I hadn't thought of that, but whether the Seer is Boro or someone else, they could be trusting that their dreams can be transmitted to the Living after they die via a Ranger or a Lover, and thus leave less hints than they normally would to avoid detection from two wolf packs on the lookout for them. It's risky that way, too, of course, and leaving a lot to chance, but it's a possibility.

Erm... what? You were super convinced I was a wolf, and yet you think we should have checked phantom instead of me? Really?

Also, I adore you two. :D And Rikae? You are a troll and I adore you too. <3

I'm kind of hoping the Seer, whoever s/he is, will reveal toDay because the village is clueless (my condolences, it must be frustrating). But I mean - seriously considering the purposeful lynch of a Lover? Seriously?

This isn't going very well... but it's fun nonetheless! :)

But really with two extra-kills and none avoided we're behind an already tight schedule with regards to our chances of really helping the Living. With 1/3 of people here and only two known innocents - and no known wolves - we're doing pretty bad.

Add to that the latest fact that we don't know who of last Night's kills was the special-role kill.

Haha. I know I was against an intentional tie on D1, but had I known this is where we get, well I might have thought differently. :(


If we have a lover or a ranger here now (who has stayed anonymous) or one is lynched toDay, we can send that person back on D4 (right? like if the gifted died during the Night s/he will remain here until the Day after the next and not return immediately?) with two names - to a Living village of (most probably) 12 players left.

If we're able to send info on D5, it will be three names to a village of (probably) only 9 left.

So I do hope the Seer is making this sort of calculations as the number of villagers really is dwindling pretty fast.

Optimistic opening for the Day from me, I can see.

I'll be back later with hopefully something more constructive to say.

Yaaay somebody noticed!

Nog, if sally (or another lover) is lynched today, she'll spend all of day 4 here and will be back among the living on day 5 - at least that's how I understood it. Unless they find her lover (although to be fair, sally hasn't said a whole lot about people, and knowing the speciality of their role, the lovers would be extra careful not to leave hints).

I hope she's not lynched but left to the wolves, though. That would tell us so much more - if neither pack attacks her, it would imply a member of each is here. Etc.

Okay, that makes it clear (or doesn't actually, but yes in the case that I was also wondering whether I am here for some totally different reason and am especially marked there. Seems like not. So now it's up to what in the name of all is happening here).

You two are brilliant :D Just saying.

I also assume that's your confession that you are totally definitely not any Lover after all ;)

Well, not really really, since then I would keep thinking you are a Wolf (and half the Dead with me, at least). Maybe that was bad phrasing, but I meant it mostly that checking the phantom is among one of the first things I would have done, and would suggest to do it in the future.

Although now, of course I started thinking about checking one of our other two newcomers... meh. I liked the way Rikae tried to stir things up here, just thinking about Mac's reaction to that. Btw I totally hope those two are not Wolves together and this was an ad-hoc performance for our entertainment, that would kill me. (Oops... sorry, forgot I am already dead.)

But if I go with common sense (or plain impression, rather), I would be ok with thinking Rikae innocent and Mac's reaction to her reveal nothing horrible either. But then we are back to the question: whom should we check? And since some have mentioned it, in regards to checking me, obviously I'll tell you it's a waste, I'm totally normal innocent.

In any case, for that, let's consider if we get anything out of checking a person besides their own role. (As in, connections...)

But we don't get to do it until the Night, right? And now we should think about empowering somebody on the Living thread, or whatnot? (Gotta go reread that thread, didn't have chance to do it yet, just woke up. Yeah...)

Exactly, it should happen, because the Wolves would totally kill the Seer toDay, I mean the chances are ridiculously high at this point. So let's hope.

That much is obvious. I was uncertain about a situation where the lover / ranger is killed by Night, not when s/he is lynched by Day

Lynched gifted stays here one Night (24 hours) and goes back for the next Day. Simple. But if the gifted is Night-killed, will s/he then reside here 1Day + 1Night (48 hours) or will s/he be thrown into some kind of a limbo for the Night (to be here only 24 hours)?

Whoops, sorry. Yeah, that's how I understood it - one day cycle meaning at least 48 hours. If she came back at the beginning of the night, the wolves could just finish her off again.

Hm, total chaos there in the Living thread. The biggest problem is, I am afraid even if they come up with some "pass us info via extra vote"-scheme, they will totally say something like "okay, if Nogrod was innocent, give vote to X, if he was not, give vote to Y", and then we are like "great, we didn't actually check Nogrod, you know"...

Anyway, this lynching of lover is total madness. Especially since if they are lynched (as opposed to killed), now it's been confirmed the remaining lover has to survive one phase longer. (For what it's worth, it makes me think Eomer is like totally evil for suggesting that ridiculousness in the first place, and Firefoot is innocent because she's been posting deeply sensible stuff today.)

So that said...
So as I said, Kuru just confirmed that she comes back Morning in any case, if I am not mistaken. I would assume she'd join us as soon as she dies, so if she is lynched, she will be with us for the Night, and thus spend Night, Day, Night with us and then go back. If her Lover survives three phases. They are all mad.

Adding this as reference to what I just said:

Obviously. therefore I was wondering about some kind of a limbo... :)

But yes, it sounds more practical that a Night killed visiting-gifted just stays here longer than a Day-lynched one.

Just a minute - seeing Legate's Kuru-quote...

So no-one goes back to the Living Thread in 24 hours aka. spending only one "shift" here?

That's actually even worse I thought. Totally freakishly slow looking at the situation we're in.

So a Night-killed spends 48 hours here (D+N), but a Day-lynched spends 72 hours (N+D+N)!

Yeah, if it's that way, the game will be over by the time they go back. (If they do.)

It's okay! I was suspicious of your insistence at first, but then going along with it seemed less and less important because your gleefulness seemed so genuine (unlike Lommy's who was all "GOTCHA you're so dumb haa haa haa"). Still, I'm super careful when I'm a wolf.

I also think Mac's reaction to Rikae's fake reveal makes him look good. It would take a lot of self control for a wolf not to do a little dance in Schadenfreude if he had reason to believe the seer had died with only one wolf.

You know what makes me laugh though? If Kuru hadn't changed the "Hunter picks her kill each NIGHT" rule to include DAYs as well, I would've hunted sally on DAY 1. And if I'd been lynched, the only information she could have brought back would've been... pretty much the only two people whose roles can be proven in this game anyway (okay okay there would've been somebody on NIGHT 3 but still).

I'm wondering - if Legate was killed as a presumed seer, the pack must have assumed Greenie was in the rivalling pack. Would they kill somebody based on that assumption, or leave it to the pack suspected by the "seer"?

It's very easy for the wolves to hide behind the "please check this person and let us know" agenda. If they can convince us to check ordos, or make it so difficult for us to vote without risking giving them wrong information, they will effectively impair our ability to influence the lynch. Especially this in Lottie's #445 was, well-meaning or not, very low-risk for the wolves:

Yes. Well almost.

Quick counting with average ratios of dead...

lover lynched D4 - goes back D6 (if goes back): the tally then 6 villagers left - add the lover (7 villagers left) and it's still a game if there are not more than three wolves living at the time...

Blah.

So you're slowly understanding why I was against this kind of complicated deals for information-sharing as both tying our hands and possibly misleading rather than helping the goodies while giving ample stuff for the wolves to toy with?

Earlier, he called you strategy-maker and Mac number-cruncher. I don't know if the hyphenated pet names mean anything but it's something I noticed.

Noggins dearie, I understood why you were against it. But there are still advantages to it, one of them right now being - if you're innocent - scrutinising people who loudly advocate checking you.

https://33.media.tumblr.com/c8e2543c...iqbdo1_500.gif

Meawhile in the living thread:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y62...psypgppxui.gif

Hmm what's this? Is she preparing to reveal as something?

Why do people think I thought Legate was the seer? I voted for Greenie rather than Mac because I thought Rikae was the seer. :Merisu: (Well not really but I wasn't going to chance it.)