Tol-in-Gaurhoth XXVI - Úcenite Valto

[The Saucepan Man]

Some thoughts/points to consider from my review of the thread.

I must say that the phantom does appear to have been uncharacteristically “flip-floppy” in this game. Esty, for example, went from his “lynch list” on Day 1 to someone whose innocence he was apparently convinced of at the time she was lynched, and who he claims to have been sorry to see killed in only her second game. Strange that, given that he was willing to consider lynching her on Day 1.

On the other hand, he was originally convinced of the innocence of Nogrod and Anguirel, only to come round to suspecting them shortly before they both died. He was so convinced at Nogrod’s innocence, in fact, that he declared him innocent at one point, and also implored Mithalwen to retract her vote for him (on Day 2, I think). Yet he was considering him a definite Wolfish possibility yesterDay.

Yes, I know that he has explained all this (mostly ex post facto, I might add), but it almost seems that his views change depending on the way the village is thinking. And that is most unlike him, strong-minded as he generally is.

The kills – mormegil, Elempi, Roa and Nogrod.

What do they all have in common? They are all logical, analytical players. Yet, as the phantom has said, logical, analytical thinking has not got us very far to date (although, to be fair, there was a logical basis for suspecting and lynching Eomer).

Who would be more likely to target the logical, analytical players? Unpredictable types, such as Diamond and Mithalwen, since it suits them to keep the more unpredictable players around? Or the more logical, analytical types, such as phantom, Kath and myself, who may fear the sword of logic being used against them?

I really don’t know. There are reasonable arguments either way.

One of the indicators that led people to suspect Eomer was that he was quiet on Day 1. In this game, the best course for a Wolf has perhaps been to lie relatively low, while maintaining a presence. After all, there is little to lead us to a Wolf save in what people say. A Wolf would be well advised, therefore, not to say too much, and to avoid saying or doing anything controversial. Of those still with us, Kath best matches this pattern of behaviour. Although I still wonder whether a Wolf would have absented herself for a full Day. Then again, Children in Need is hardly a great excuse (for those in the dark, it is a charity telethon).

And while on the subject of Kath, Mithalwen said the following a day or so ago:

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Kath The assassin wolf par excellance would be an excellent contrast to Eomer - she has a knack of never being quite the most suspicious person.

Very true. And she has still managed never to be quite the most suspicious one here.

I was also interested by the following comment:

Originally Posted by Kath

I think that many of the people who said my silence would be a fantastic tactic for a wolf are absolutely right.

The self-confessed Wolfish behaviour ploy? That said, the kills do not bear her hallmark. Generally, I think, she tends to go for the more logical kills when she is a Wolf.

As regards Wolfish location, of those left, three are in the UK and two are in the US. Going on Mithalwen’s theory of one Wolf either side of the Atlantic, that would point to Diamond or the phantom. But I have never been overly convinced by that theory, particularly as I believe the remaining Wolf to be the one randomly (or at least indirectly) selected.

I’m not really sure where these thoughts are leading me. As I said, I could make a plausible case for anyone here being a Wolf right now. But I would like to hear from the phantom on the points that have been raised toDay, and from anyone who might have any useful thoughts, whether on my musings above or otherwise.