TIG LXIX: Meeting at the House of Usher

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Quite frankly, I am astonished that anyone could think the ‘friendly Wolf’ idea to have been a ruse by a baddie to sow confusion. Now that I understand the correct meaning of the passage concerned, I am at a loss to see how anyone who immediately understood its correct meaning would even have spotted the opportunity to misconstrue the narrative, let alone have had any confidence that such misconstruction would provide the opportunity for sustained confusion (which would have required a good portion of the Village to accept, or go along with, the misconstruction as the true position).

Hey, it's day 1 and we need to vote for someone. Misconstruing the facts is a very good tactic for a wolf. My very next post was to state that I believed you were confused. You're being very jumpy about this.

One thing which might well have been a ruse, however, was Roa’s apparent initial belief that there were only three Wolves. It could well have been intended to suggest, even if only subliminally, that she cannot possibly be a Wolf because otherwise she would have known that there were four Wolves.

Actually, it was me only skimming through the rules initially. Oops on my part. But Morsul also thought there were only three wolves, and you thought that there were only three wolves working against us. Making a mistake is not the same as a ruse, and a lot of people were confused by the rules.

It’s not much on its own but, combined with her quickness to jump on my misunderstanding and her expressed suspicion of Nerwen, seemingly based only on Nerwen’s early accusations (which were clearly flippant, in my view), it makes me rather uneasy about her, moreso than anyone else at present.

Again, it's day 1. My suspicion of Nerwen is based on the way she jumped on your statements to Inzil. It's not much, but it's basically the only thing that looks really suspicious right now, except for your clearly wrong friendly wolf theory, and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt on that one, because it would be pretty silly of you.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Roa

Hey, it's day 1 and we need to vote for someone.

Indeed.

Still, I am some way off the point where I need to vote, and there are a fair few who have not yet spoken, so I am reserving judgment for now.

[wilwarin538]

I am here, sorry I'm so late, had a test and a bunch going on this morning, but I will be around randomly for about the next 3ish hours, then again later tonight to vote.

reading....

[Pitchwife]

What's going on between Roa and SpM at the moment looks like a classical suspicion match between two active innocents to me. Nice TV for the wolves.

Originally Posted by Roa

My suspicion of Nerwen is based on the way she jumped on your statements to Inzil.

For clarification, you're referring to this here, right?:

Originally Posted by Nerwen #30

Also, perhaps the fact that at the same time Inzil seems to be sort of leaving himself the option of suspecting Greenie too:

However, he may have thought I was being more serious than I was. I should have thought my "Another guilty post" comment was pretty obviously over-the-top, though.

As in, a wolf latching on to and feeding an innocent's suspicion of another innocent, you mean? (Not that we know either Zil or SpM are innocent, of course!) I see your point, but wouldn't make that much of it, as she leaves open the possibility that Zil made more of her statement than she meant. Still, this looks like the most serious suspicion she's voiced up to now, the rest having been more playful, so it bears thinking about.

EDIT: typo fixed.

[Roa_Aoife]

Yes, Pitch, that is exactly what I am referring to. And as I said, it isn't much, it's just the best I have at the moment.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Brinn

I also wouldn't be surprised if it turned out a wolf or cobbler (though probably more likely the latter) was encouraging the Friendly Wolf idea, since that could be used to their advantage to make the village think that a baddie was on their side.

While the Friendly Wolf idea (henceforth abbreviated FWI) would indeed make a great cover for a wolf or cobbler, the idea itself isn't per se suspicious - there have been precedents (witness Zil in Eönwë's Night Guard game). Anyway, it wouldn't have taken much brains to reckon with the possibility that such a cover would rather sooner than later be blown by a Moddess clarification, so that would have made a rather short-lived strategy.

EDIT: bolding (I'm a pedant, I know)

[Pitchwife]

Continuing from my last - what Brinn says here could just as well be a furry attempt to use the FWI discussion for sowing suspicion among the innocents involved in it. But that's pretty tenuous too, and the rest of her post sounds sensible.

[wilwarin538]

To be in theme: we should all just go to everyone's rooms and be really quite, and if we here a heart beat under someone's floor boards then we gots a baddie..... *loves Poe*

anyway.....

Originally Posted by Nerwen

We'll just lynch anyone who looks evil, as usual. Including the cobbler. In fact, after last game, make that especially the cobbler.

mwahahahahaha (I actually agree with this statement, it just made me giggle a bit)



4 wolves?! Wow.....well, our chances of getting one is fairly high, cause there are so many, and then we just have to hope that the Bear kills a wolf and the wolves kill the Bear and we'll be off to a great start.....aslong as the gifteds don't all start revealing again.

I don't understand this "Friendly Wolf" talk, I get where it came from but the Moddess cleared up it's non-existence so I don't really understand why it's being talked about. Any baddie would have known the mod would eventually clear it up, so I doubt they would have tried to use the confusion to their advantage.

I will agree that Bears are tough, they can quite easily hide behind the fact that they could care less whether the wolves die or not, but anyone trying overly hard to go under the radar will look more suspicious to me then usual. The Lovers worry me aswell, with the large number of wolves they may think it more beneficial for their survival to act cobbler-like and help the baddies along, but I don't have much experience actually playing with that role being around, so I really don't know what type of strategies they use.

Hmm.....no one is jumping out at me yet. I need to do a bit of homework and then I'll come back and re-read everything again, and maybe make a little list or something....

[Nogrod]

If Roa is reserving the raven then I must have the pendulum! That's the nightmare from my childhood as I went and read the story a bit too young...

On other news: it's always disappointing to come in a bit late on the Day and see that all the interesting things you had discovered during your read-in are discussed in the few posts just before yours...

Well, it just tells one that certain things do raise the eyebrows...

But I still think I have something to add on a few things that have been mentioned recently. Just a moment.


And btw. this has been a very good Day1 indeed. Unlike sometimes, people have been quite forthcoming - the non-posters excluded - and there seem to be a lot to think... and rethink.

[Nogrod]

Sorry it took time, but I had two long calls to speak...

Okay. I have thought that so far Spm, Greenie and Roa have given me some food for thought as to why they do what they do.



Spm

In his first post he playfully argues why all the three first posters are wolves and then adds that Nerwen's "audacious accusation" towards Sally (saying she is too self-conscious in remarking about the first posters) is very suspicious.

In his next post he addresses the Bear; "how good you are, no pressure..." (and a smilie). Followed by a kind of humorous self-revealment for Nerwen's remark ("Lightning never strike in the same place twice, except in horror stories, of course... er ..." (and a smilie).

In his third post he introduces the "Friendly-wolf" -interpretation and talks about "ungraciousness" if we killed him.

In his fourth he turns now to Inzil who had questioned him of getting after Nerwen too readily and says Inzil looks suspicious for making that interpretation (like reduplicating his own suspicion on Nerwen).

In his fifth he says the friendly wolf would not turn against us if he was left the last one.

In his sixth he agrees with Nerwen on not willing to kill the friendly wolf before he has gotten a chance of "leaving trails or helped in other ways".

In his seventh he backed down from the "friendly wolf" interpretation (as it started turning more and more obvious it was not the case - I mean how did you read that from there to begin with???).

In his eighth he is sad because the friendly-wolf -stuff would have confused the wolves. Starts suspecting Roa for jumping on his Friendly-wolf -hypotheses and says it would be bad for a wolf to try that (which might be true, but it would be very good for a cobbler... and even better for one to say just this).

In his ninth he defended himself (very reasonably indeed) and went on the suspicion raised by Brinn against Roa, adding to it his own suspicions (Roa suspecting him & Nerwen from early posts).

So what should I say, other than he looks like a cobbler to me?

All this creating of confusion, all that could be seen as "contact-making" (more of that with Greenie), all the suspicion thrown around like at random (well that could be argued for as a tactics of an innocent as well) and to top it; his defence of himself of saying it would be bad for a wolf to do what he did... heh, so not a wolf, but... a cobbler?


Blah... this is taking ages...

I need to have a cigarette and be a bit less thorough with Greenie & Roa...

[Nogrod]

Greenie

She seems to be the "Bear-addicted" one. And interestingly she goes talking about whether we should "concentrate on the Bear or not" (obviously saying we should neither concentrate nor forget her/him).

But what is this "concentrating on the Bear" -stuff anyway? How does one concentrate one's search for baddies to a Bear that has no mates and to whom every lynch but her/his own is just okay? The Bear's role is the most unfathomable there is: no loyalties, no cares, no bonds... So no possibility of catching the Bear by what s/he says in regards to other players, no voting "footprint", nothing. So how to concentrate on finding her/him?

I must say I must suspect also those others who used this way of speaking being just fine talking about "concentrating the search on the Bear or not"... I mean really.


If you say that, you're not trying to find anyone in earnest! Only a person faking to "try and find someone" can say s/he tries to focus on the Bear / not to focus on the Bear. Anyone who really is trying to find a baddie knows the Bear is not to be found by just concentrating!


But I probably wouldn't have set my eyes on all this initially were there not Greenie's post...

Originally Posted by Greenie

Drat. Got caught already.

... and my suspicions on Spm being the cobbler. It was just an hour before Spm had made his own version of this "heh, you got me" -stuff and now Greenie was responding? It does look like a cobbler / wolf / bear -probing to me.

Now if I would have to make a quess now on who's the Bear, I would say Greenie is. The way she talks about the Bear all the time ("no Bear would talk of her own role that much") would be just fine for a Bear. Also the idea that getting the Bear is a question of focusing is not one an innocent villager could have as an innocent would see there is no way to "search for" the Bear. And the tone she does it... well, I'm not sure I can formulate an argument on that. I just get suspicious of it.

And let it be known I tend to be suspicious of Greenie everytime we play together... So a pinch of salt here.


And drat. I promised myself to be shorter with the rest...

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by wilwa

...aslong as the gifteds don't all start revealing again.

Unlikely. As long as the Bear's around, any reveal would be pretty suicidal, in other words highly unadvisable unless they feel it's really really really worth the risk.

Originally Posted by still wilwa

I will agree that Bears are tough, they can quite easily hide behind the fact that they could care less whether the wolves die or not, but anyone trying overly hard to go under the radar will look more suspicious to me then usual.

Indeed, I'm beginning to see the merit of the System of Doctor Nog and Professor Rod... Which reminds me we've heard nothing at all yet from Fea, Hakon, Lottie, McCaber and the eponymous Doctor/Professor himself, and nothing but early banter from Boro, Lari and sally. An appalling proportion of submarines at the moment... but then, the Day isn't done yet.
As for the Lovers - what she said (btw, is that phrase copyrighted or public domain? It seems to be a special trademark of sally's). But they can't kill anybody and are in just as much danger of being killed as anybody else, so I'd treat them as harmless innocents.

(Ah - x'ed with Nog.)

EDIT: (And Fea. Nice to see you both.)

[Nienna]

*hands Fea a cookie*

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

*Accepts cookie with grace.*
*Stuffs cookie into face.*

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

As for the Lovers - what she said (btw, is that phrase copyrighted or public domain? It seems to be a special trademark of sally's). But they can't kill anybody and are in just as much danger of being killed as anybody else, so I'd treat them as harmless innocents.

(Ah - x'ed with Nog.)

EDIT: (And Fea. Nice to see you both.)

Actually, when one lover is killed, the other gets to kill someone else. That can work to our benefit however, as they can them aim for a wolf. It's not a guarantee they'll hit one, but it's something to consider.

(Yes, I went back and read the rules thoroughly so that I don't make another mistake.)

Also, Fea, you rock.

People fall into the Monte Carlo fallacy (also known as the "he's been a wolf for the past four games, he can't possibly be a wolf this time" fallacy) quite often, so I'd be disinclined to hold that against Morsul. It's only his second game.