Tol-in-Gaurhoth LI: The Pain of Wargs

[Gaunt]

Ok, I think I am starting to get the hang of this now.

As far as I can see suspicion is divided into two categories:

1. Suspicion based on heavy participation and aggressive or at least confident accuastions and public theorising (this type of suspicion seems to me what led to the lynching of Samwise and suspicions now being directed at Nogrod)

2. Suspicion based on light or non participation

Regarding the first theory, Nogrod is, it seems, the prime suspect at present. Now, judging by the other posts, he is behaving in the way he normally does when playing werewolf. However, i'm not convinced by Legate's theory below:

Although there's one thing, I don't belive Nog-wolf would pick Kitanna for a first kill. That'd really testify strongly against him in my eyes. He would pick some quiet one to "punish" him.

If he is a werewolf, wouldn't it make sense for him to kill someone who had been involved? That way he gets rid of a player who is more likely to successfully analyse his behaviour, and creates the impression of one of the quieter players lurking in the shadows, picking off the more talkative wargs. And by decrying their non-involvement and threatening to vote for them, he further polarises the group and hopes to direct suspicion on to those quieter wargs.

Even as I write this i'm not sure, but it does seem very convenient that his past reputation in the game clears him from suspicion in the eyes of some.

More thought is required.

As for the second theory, it doesn't give us much to go on - how are we too choose between the players who have not been heavily involved? The only way I can think is by anlysing the posts they have made explaining why they have not, or will not, be posting very much. But I for one would not be confident enough to make a prediction based on this

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Gaunt

If he is a werewolf, wouldn't it make sense for him to kill someone who had been involved? That way he gets rid of a player who is more likely to successfully analyse his behaviour, and creates the impression of one of the quieter players lurking in the shadows, picking off the more talkative wargs.

Sure, that would make sense but it would also be the most unsporty way of playing this game. I mean there are result-oriented players who only care for the win and then those who like a good game whatever the end-result. I'm definitively of the latter type. What's the fun in a quiet village where there is nothing to play?

Which brings me to this next one:

As for the second theory, it doesn't give us much to go on - how are we too choose between the players who have not been heavily involved? The only way I can think is by anlysing the posts they have made explaining why they have not, or will not, be posting very much. But I for one would not be confident enough to make a prediction based on this

Exactly! That is why I like to press those non-players as much as I can (call it threatening if you wish - to me it's a way of trying to make them post and talk eg. to play in the first place) and if there is no better candidate I'm more than willing to lynch them so that there would be an actual game in the end - if I ever make it there myself or not.

The problem with this inbalance is that it's always easier to find this or that from someone who actually posts a lot than from one who just says "Hi, let's bag the wolves". As you Gaunt said, the latter "cause" doesn't make one confident with one's vote.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Brinniel

But the problem is I really had nobody. No one single post caught my eye as suspicious. My random vote would've literally been random...I would've closed my eyes and pointed at a name. That's not a fair way to vote which is why I didn't do it, and I truly didn't have time to consider my options. Surely if I had voted, I would probably be criticised for my choice and how I went about it....so it's a lose-lose situation for me.

A vote will always be more fair than no vote, maybe not to the one voted on, but to the rest of us wargs.
Anyways I shall drop this subject now and move on.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Which brings me to this next one:Exactly! That is why I like to press those non-players as much as I can (call it threatening if you wish - to me it's a way of trying to make them post and talk eg. to play in the first place) and if there is no better candidate I'm more than willing to lynch them so that there would be an actual game in the end - if I ever make it there myself or not.

[Nogrod]

Okay, Groin would you mind answering a question or two?

You've had quite a crusade on me toDay but I really can't find any reasons why that is. Looking at your determination with it one would think you had something.

First: if you "have always a bad feeling about me in WW" then how do you justify that to yourself as a reason to suspect me in any given particular game?

Now let me give you a suggestion and do answer if you feel you need to. An innocent needs to be careful not to help in lynching an innocent and will thence be a bit careful with his suspicions - not that we shouldn't suspect everyone, on the contrary that's what we need to do - but an innocent should not monomaniacally go after one person if there is no good reason for it. Were you a wolf or a no-brainer (which I know you are not) I could understand the way you play...

Secondly: you say "He is always the perfect wolf because he behaves like a wolf all the time". I'm still waiting for any clarification on that matter both generally and even more so in this game in particular... It's easy to say "X doesn't sit right with me" or "I'm feling bad about Y" or "Z behaves like a wolf" if that's all you say. It requires some actual playing to then elaborate why. But looking at the situation where this was said suggests the intent of the comment was not so much to give further arguments to lynch me (that would clarify or add to the reasons for it) but to just keep up the spirit / discussion of lynching me. An innocent doesn't behave that way if he doesn't have a strong case - or at least I can't see the rationale behind that from an innocent.

So are you a wolf then?


Gollum: I said yesterDay that I won't be suggesting lynching you in your first game just because you decided to make your only suspicion on those that had been the only talkers - without any other reason. But it looks like you are continuing the game in the same mode, not giving forwards even a tiny little bit of reason for your suspicions. Please speak. No "threats" this time. I think I need not do that any more...


Reading through that wannabe-bandwagon gave me bad news as well. Looking at the way Lommy, Legate and Rune go to and fro there between being nice and considerate and backtracking a bit to keep the issue alive fits perfectly with the way a wolf would act...

Okay that's for that thing. When I come back I hope there are other issues to tackle as this may be more or less wasting time.


And to add...

Gwath's explanation is taken in and his status in my suspicion-list has fallen back to where it was yesterDay. Also Mith seems innocentish alongside Brinn (I don't see where you guys see her suspicious - nice, yes, but the RL explanations are too convincing as she wouldn't be that unsporty). Also Gaunt looks very good right now.

Of Di, Kath and Shasta I have nothing to say... for the obvious reason. Let's hope they can change that before the Day draws to a close.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

You've had quite a crusade on me toDay but I really can't find any reasons why that is. Looking at your determination with it one would think you had something.

Wow, Nogrod. Looking back over toDay's posts, you're certainly right about that. When Groin says anything at all, it's usually about you. Huh.

[Diamond18]

I've only had time to skim the posts, and unfortunately I have a lot of stuff to do today before work but I'll try to check back in with a vote. I hope to have time to read more and find something to base it on, but I don't know. Sorry for not being around at all; busy RL has collided with a bad cold and left WW in the lurch.

[Brinniel]

Phew, I made it back. And I barely made it to class on time.

I was going to vote then, but as you can see I ran out of time. Now I have some extra time on my hands...not much, but at least a little more time to consider who I should vote for.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Okay, Groin would you mind answering a question or two?

You've had quite a crusade on me toDay but I really can't find any reasons why that is. Looking at your determination with it one would think you had something.

First: if you "have always a bad feeling about me in WW" then how do you justify that to yourself as a reason to suspect me in any given particular game?

I have given a reason: the way that you told Gollum to back off, but like you said that is a pretty flimsy excuse and you're right that was not the real reason why I made a "crusade" against you on toDay.

Like I said before I have bad feelings about you in WW, this being from what I saw in the last game we played together, so I decided to see if you are a Were Warg by trying to cause you to slip. The obvious way of doing this is to accuse you right on, very loudly I might add, so that you will start pointing fingers and hopefully someone who is better acquainted with you Were Warg personality would jump on you *smiles an evil smile.* However, the more esteemed players seem to have low suspicions of you, so there might be no real danger.

EDIT: X'ed with Thinlomien

[Gaunt]

Nogrod: "Sure, that would make sense but it would also be the most unsporty way of playing this game. I mean there are result-oriented players who only care for the win and then those who like a good game whatever the end-result. I'm definitively of the latter type. What's the fun in a quiet village where there is nothing to play"

Fair point Nogrod, but I believe, and think someone like you would also believe, that a game only really works if people play competitively to the best of their abilities. Now if you, who I gather to be an experienced werewolf player, knew that you could do something to improve your chances of winning, I think you would do it, and in that light I see your claim to just be in it for a good game to be insincere, and a futher attempt to throw people off. I think you would really think that people trying to win MAKES for a good game.

Or I could be completely over-analysing this.

[Gwathagor]

Good morning, everyone. I am here and I am reading.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Gaunt

Now if you, who I gather to be an experienced werewolf player, knew that you could do something to improve your chances of winning, I think you would do it
...
I think you would really think that people trying to win MAKES for a good game.

First sentence: I agree in part; the second one: agreed fully. A game where there is winning and losing isn't a good game if someone tries to lose in purpose. But playing by trying to only maximise one's chances of winning or staying alive is not my piece of cake. *maybe that's the reason I never became an investment banker*

When I'm a wolf I want to have challenges and keep the dangerous players around - then I either lose with dignity and pride or win with the greatest spoils there are. When innocent I try to keep the discussion going, suspecting everyone as much as I can to really open the discussions and to help other people who will actually play and not just hun'ker down to stay alive - it oftentimes leads to an untimely death because I'm not rubbing all the people the nice way, but it has been worth it if it's been fun or if it later helps the village to find out the culprits.

Or I could be completely over-analysing this.

The level of analysing is fine. It's very good indeed! But you only over-estimate my thrive to win with any means.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Alright, I am running late and have little idea who to vote for, but hopefully I will by the end of this post.

Lets start with the people I am not going to vote for:

Groin: He has this air of innocens around him. . . It is not that I agree with him as such, but it is the fact that he does not seem the least bit manipulative.

Kath: It is annoying that she is not around, but I really want her around at least for another day.

Nogrod: Because he seem very Nogrod-ish and this normaly means he is innocent, but I am probably going to change my mind later in the game. . .I mean it is Nogrod.

Gaunt:I need more time to analyse

Lommy: A mixture of what I said about Nogrod and Gaunt.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Might vote for:

Mithalwen: She does the same as yesterday, she is hear says some not too controversial things and the nothing. (unless you count that thing about Lommy acting weird as controversial) Whenever I encounter this I get a fear that people are trying to fly under the radar, I might vote for her again today.

Brinn: She insists on not voting and then appologises, says she has to vote soon because of RL things and then seems to leave. I might have misunderstood her though. Does some of the same as Mith, take that middle ground where you are not vocal and not non-vocal.

Legate: He just confuses me, I simply cannot get a read on him. . .but since I have no actual case other than that it seems unfair to vote for him at this stage.

Allright I am going to go for Mith again . . . . It is not a personal thing, but I just haven't had the chance to do proper analysing today. (one should not think so with all the posts)

++Mithalwen
[/FONT]

EDIT: Cross Posted With Nogrod and Gwath

[Mithalwen]

Great - Rune has voted for me for having a job. Or maybe being ill or having to spend time with the Ancient Parent on his birthday. Fantastic.

May as well go home now and be ill in comfort. Frankly it does seems personal. "It isn't personal" it is -one of those phrases where the meaning is the exact opposite of the literal semantics like "With the greatest respect", "it's not you, it's me", "I'm FINE". And if I seem irritable - that is because I am. Fever and nausea does that to you.

[Gaunt]

I am not going to vote for Nogrod today, I think. I will give it some more time to see if he is innocent or if he is manipulating me very skillfully.

And part of my reason for this is that Redbeard does seem to have made the case against Nogrod based on little more than him once lightly criticising a player for not taking part enough.

Hmm

[Brinniel]

The age old question: Can we ever get through a WW game without the quiet/loud player debate? I think it can be mutually agreed that wolves can fall into either category just as easily...

Okay, as far as voting candidates go (coming from my earlier process of elimination):

Lommy: I actually agree with others that she does seem to be acting a bit differently. I don't know what it is...perhaps her tone. In earlier days I probably would've thought this suspicous...but then I think back to a couple games ago when Lommy was a wolf, yet seemed so innocent to me...she actually managed to fly under the radar in that game. And this time it's completely different. I almost want to say that there's a cobblerish feel to her posts, but we don't even know if there is a cobbler. But as of right now, she just doesn't look furry to me.

Legate: I think the same thing can be said of him as I said about Nogrod: He's dangerous as a wolf, but very helpful as an innocent. I can't get a good read on him right now, but I can't help but feel wary. I know how a Legate-wolf can easily fool an entire village.

Gwath: Looking through his posts toDay, I think he seems innocentish. I just feel that there's an honest quality about him.

Groin: Not so innocent, I feel. From the very beginning of toDay, his arguments just feel fabricated and his tone false. I don't know exactly how to describe it, but his words just seem too carefully placed.