Second: Maca's death might suit to a "wolf-Noggie", but either one's death (Maca or myself) would suit the actual wolf and I think there are reasons why the wolf might have thought that Maca was less probably guarded that night.
Third: I might refer to yourself "babbling" here a bit. Sorry, in a hurry to reach the last point. I'll be back if needed...
Fourth:
Quote:
|
Wouldn't a wolf want to sway the ranger to waste his/her defense on himself? Wouldn't you, as a wolf, want to sway the ranger to protect yourself and leave Maca unguarded?
|
I just don't see the point here. After either myself or Boro had been tried to kill, I thought of reminding the Ranger that the next Night's guarding probably is in vain as the wolf will visit the same one another time and kill him. So s/he should think most of who to guard not the next Night (no matter who as the last Night's victim will be dead anyhow) but the next after that. I was not sure whether fex. a ranger-
Volo would have realised it because I had no memory of that rule being stated in this game although it's quite common (meaning no double rangering on the same person).
As a human innocent who felt that either I myself or Boro was under attack heavily, I thought it wise to make that note (it might have been myself dead and then the ranger might have protected Boro the next Night). I know that many of the players were familiar with the rule and were perfectly capable of getting the idea themselves, but there were at least one who - being the ranger - mightn't have known it...
X-talked with Lommy