Werewolf CXII - Dueling Wizards III - The Living Thread

[Thinlómien]

One observation from the voting yesterDay: in order to prevent a tie (and thus no lynch) in the future, please keep your actual voting posts short in the future (you can reason in a subsequent post) and refresh the thread before you post your vote!

I read Nerwen's summary of Morsul's posts. The only thing that keep standing out to me is that he seemed very much like an ordinary innocent villager. What the??

Also is someone *side-eyes Eomer* really suggesting the EW would kill a wolf??? I'm astonished by Kuru's latter clarification that the EW can kill a wolf in the first place. O tempora, o mores!

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Secondly I'm quite strongly opposing Eönwe's plan of trying to tie the hands of those in the Dead-thread beforehand to some easily misguided scheming where the dead-vote is used with insecure methods trying to communicate possibly things that are not of any consequence even if the living might think so. Having spend basically the whole last game in the Dead-thread I did swore quite often to the stubborn and arrogant hubris within the Living-thread where they thought they were doing something witty and productive when they actually had no idea what was really going on. And I was not the only one thinking like that.

Let's remember that the Dead are a lot wiser than we the living are - and the gap between their understanding and ours widens everyday.

So you think we should just let the dead empower who they want and affect our vote that way? Or?

It's not a fault in your plan it's a fault in general but I really don' like the fact that once the dead start empowering people we are even more likely to cause a tie by accident. But what can we do about it? Tell the dead not to empower anyone?? Surely that's no desirable either.

Originally Posted by Legate

Which we should pay attention to, btw - because while yesterDay it was either one or two baddies (presumably two), which gets easily lost in a village like this, if it's three now and four (!) toMorrow (or potentially, at least), this can get off the rails very fast.

Hear, hear! Remember to watch out for odd shifts in behaviour OR odd stagnation to previous Days' ideas. Or sudden loss of willingness to play, which can happen when you are 'forced' to switch sides.

Originally Posted by Lottie

There will be three clear options - empower someone from one group of people if person x was innocent, from a second group if evil, and from a third, failsafe group if something is wrong. That way, the Dead have options for who they want to empower in order to convey the information, and we can avoid the situation where the Dead don't want to vote for the person we selected as the "person x was innocent" message.

I'm in favour of this "empower someone from this group" plan. It gives the living some information and the dead some leeway.

Originally Posted by Boro

If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.

But it's not fruitless because the EW himself may be lynched either way.

I don't understand why what Zil said would have been a slip?? And the suddenly escalated Zil-Nerwen spat is very interesting. Doesn't make either of them look better in my book tbh.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

the Dead might not see as the most beneficial course of action to be the "messenger boys and girls" who make insecure attempts at telling the living who someone (of lesser consequence by game terms) was or is if they can for example lynch a baddie with their vote - or point to a known villain with it.

How can the dead point at anyone without the living having given them rules how to do so? I mean that would actually be useful, but I can't see a way of delivering such a message in practice... which now that I'm thinking of... something along the lines of empowering votes for known villains? But how can that be foolproof? I mean maybe there aren't any known villains or no votes for them to empower?? The dead can't be epected to abstain, because one dead wolf can mess everything up. Ideas?


disclaimer: xed with everyone after my last because I was slow and also had a half an hour phone call in the middle of typing this post... gonna catch up with everything next

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

But it's not fruitless because the EW himself may be lynched either way.

Well the EW wouldn't be lynched...we would be notified of a failed lynch and not know whether it was the GW or EW. But the EW would be essentially revealed to the GW...still then the GW wouldn't be able to challenge and take out the EW until D3 at the earliest...so there would still be time to make some wolves. Although that would be kind of the worst situation for the EW

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Well the EW wouldn't be lynched...we would be notified of a failed lynch and not know whether it was the GW or EW. But the EW would be essentially revealed to the GW...still then the GW wouldn't be able to challenge and take out the EW until D3 at the earliest...so there would still be time to make some wolves. Although that would be kind of the worst situation for the EW

Yes of course, I didn't mean the EW would die but he'd be revealed to the GW and he doesn't want that. I mean there may come a time when he doesn't care about that (which is a good thing to remember btw - that at a later point of the game the EW could prefer getting "lynched" to seeing a wolf die for example) but I doubt that would be on Day1.

eit: xed with Lalaith

[Nogrod]

Here's the D1 lynching-story squeezed into a list with minimal comments.


.xy are the minutes before the full hour the vote was cast (all the votes were cast during the last hour).

X -> Y means X voted for Y, naturally.

(idjaofh "sohgopiefh padhpiavs") is a comment or actual quote ("in quotation marks") from the person voting about her/his view of voting in general - or if not available, explaining her/his vote)


.23 Lommy -> Boro (strongly for “using the only ammo we have”)



.42 Lalaith -> Nerwen (“no vote is a cop out”)

.47 Morsul -> Lottie (“the evil side has more to lose”)


.55 Mith -> Lottie 2 (“putting money where her mouth is”)
.56 Inzil -> Nerwen 2 (was careful all the time not to commit on any view)
.57 Legate -> Boro 2 (“should be a tie?” – after a lot of to-and-fro leaning on the no-lynch side)
.58 Shasta -> Lottie 3 (“this vote sucks”)
.58 Lottie -> Boro 3 (“to hopefully break the tie” – after a strong campaign for no-lynch)
.58 Brinn -> Lottie 4 (for lynch – Lottie for advocating no-lynch)
.59 Boro -> Boro 4 (“fully intended” to vote and said no-lynch is a bad idea – then sealed it)


Some comments in a moment...

[Nogrod]

If Lottie and Boro are the EW and a wolf that was some darn daring gaming they played and worth a bow! Which – even if I think them both as capable players to pull off nice tricks I just now can’t see them have orchestrated together – especially if they have not had a chance to discuss things.

Although there is one scenario… Lottie might have looked who had been around lately and realized that all others but herself and Boro had given their votes – and then enter Shasta with his vote on her – and Lottie comes up with the brilliant idea that she votes for Boro to make a tie (knowing he wouldn’t mess with that tie but would vote for someone else). But then Brinn comes out from nowhere and votes as well – forcing Boro to the only way he could save both him and Lottie.

Nice. Possible… but not plausible, I’d say.


Of those who did not vote in the end (but participated) Nerwen is kind of a hard one to say: she has her own timezone quite afar from others and her not appearing at the DL is not unusual – she was quite vague with her attitude towards the no-lynch policy though so that + not voting might be a nice lay-low tactics.

Eomer on the other hand was strongly against lynching and at least followed his stated conviction true. And his arguments were, I think, pretty sound (which means nothing in the end as a baddie can make sense talking about abstract issues).

Sally I think just came in and went out early on the Day and that was all?


Just to cut things short, I kind of feel okay with the four first votes (Lommy, Lalaith, Morsul, Mith). They were consistent with their discussions about voting and voted for people I found myself also suspicious (well, the latter actually applies to all votes now that I look at it again! ).

Legate was maybe a little too to-and-fro on the voting issue in general, like he was watching from where the wind would blow, but then again took quite openly sides in the end and looked like trying to gain a draw – although it was a bit early to try and do that in one sense, but well...

Shasta’s late and sudden vote stands out (after just saying he doesn’t want to vote any of the vote-gainers), well, screams out (“this vote sucks”) – but maybe just because of that looks like a more innocent one?

Brinn appeared even more sneakily and out farther from nowhere than Shasta and made some very roundabout arguments for her vote as the second. She wrote a bit longer post so she might have actually X’d with some of the late votes: so no one can say for sure how knowledgeable she was of the situation when she voted – but she sure did drop from out of the blue there at the last (second last) minute.

In general Eönwe and Inzil raise my eybrows a little with their game – sadly with both I think a lot of the issues are more or less the same I have suspected them so many times before whether they have been innocents or not.


Oh, this is hard...

I had kind of forgotten how complicated making decisions in this game were.


EDIT: X'd with basically everyone after my last post.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Thus we shouldn't take anything they say as a fact or a strict rule (X is innocent, Y is a wolf) even if we had very smart systems to make that kind of questions to them. But we should increasingly trust their evaluation of the situation as a more informed fellow-villager's (party-guest's) advice.

But exactly, how to interpret their "advice"? They don't know the roles of the living anyway, and especially early on they won't necessarily have any feasible suspicions either. So say the dead empower Samwise Gamgee who voted for Gollum. What are we to think? That the dead think Gollum is guilty? Or that they think Samwise is innocent? And what if the dead don't suspect anyone, or they don't suspect anyone who's got any votes on the living thread??

Originally Posted by Boro

Lommy made a really good and logical argument behind her vote yesterday, and I was thinking ya know, I'd hate to be turned and used as a pawn in the contest of wizards and dwarf schemes. I much prefer to be my own master.

I'm tempted to give you the benefit of doubt (because why would a baddie self-vote in such dire straits?), but this?? How exactly was my argument "really good and logical"? It was an absolutely standard "trying to be reasonable on Day1 but quite possibly failing because of lack of information" Day1 vote if you ask me. You constantly praising it is weird, and even weirder given it was against yourself. (Or maybe I just can't take a compliment. )

Originally Posted by Lalaith

However despite this I'm still feeling a bit concerned about the people who are arguing that there might have been no wolf created on Night One. Maybe I'm just a simple uncomplicated sort of girl but I maintain that it seems such a weird and risky strategy for a EW to adopt that as a theory it's exactly the sort of bone a bunch of wolves might concoct to throw to the crowd to get them off the scent. So Nerwen, Eomer, Boro, ho hum to y'all.

Yes! Another simple uncomplicated sort of girl here! It just doesn't make sense. Like sure it's an option but in my opinion not one worth dwelling on.


edit: xed with Boro 88th the Latter

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

I'm tempted to give you the benefit of doubt (because why would a baddie self-vote in such dire straits?), but this?? How exactly was my argument "really good and logical"? It was an absolutely standard "trying to be reasonable on Day1 but quite possibly failing because of lack of information" Day1 vote if you ask me. You constantly praising it is weird, and even weirder given it was against yourself. (Or maybe I just can't take a compliment. )

From your D1 vote post, from which I said that halfway convinced me to vote for myself:

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Boro seems the most fishy (see: list) so he gets my vote.

I also think innocent Boro would be a reliable dead thread presence and a guilty Boro an entertaining one.

Good night!

An innocent me would make a reliable dead thread presense, a guilty me would be entertaining. I was pretty flattered, but also got to thinking that if I do get turned I could be a rather scary asset for the EW. Then I got to thinking I don't want to be an asset for any wizard. So if I'm going to be carefree, reckless, and completely random...it might as well be at a time early on where it only effects my own fortunes and not at a time that turns the tables against the GW.

Then there's the matter of who we want populating the Dead thread. I did make a rather interesting note of after D1 when I first said you've halfway convinced me to vote for myself, how many other people in making their D1 vote said basically the same "I'm voting Nerwen because if innocent she'd be a good dead innocent.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Yes, sometimes I just want to find peace and quiet and let go the earthly burdens. Nothings changed over N2 and into D2 but (and you know nothing that comes before the "but" really matters), but that doesn't mean nothing will happen in the future to change my circumstances. And that doesn't mean I want to have to vote for myself again today. Lommy made a really good and logical argument behind her vote yesterday, and I was thinking ya know, I'd hate to be turned and used as a pawn in the contest of wizards and dwarf schemes. I much prefer to be my own master.

Ok, I understand at least some of this, though I am not really entirely sure. Well, if I got you right, then that eases my thoughts about you somewhat, but I am probably going to mull over this for a while still.

It seems also really confusing to try to make some sense of things here. I have been trying to look all Day for some signs of people acting differently than yesterDay, but I am getting the feeling people are acting just more the same, it even seems more the same than usual. Which by itself is an interesting sign, by the way. Because obviously Wolves would be aware of both.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Here we seem to disagree. The Dead don't need our help, we need theirs. they may know, we definitively don't. So let us give them the initiative as they are the ones who most probably know where to look.

Ok, here I didn't want to talk about this any more, but just a reaction - the problem with the Dead is that they cannot, by definition, have initiative because they are dead. Like they can come up with nice and dandy plans on their thread, but they won't have a way of communicating them to us!

Like, for example they think that hey, there is a perfect way to win the whole game if we lynch person X, but how are they going to communicate that to us? Think of it as a encryption device. Somebody is sending us a code, we receive a code, but we need to have the decryption device, the language of the code, to understand it. And that needs to be established either beforehand, or from us to them. It can't go from them to us (except via the Visitor, which, you said yourself, might be a bit late).

Correct me if I am misinterpreting this, but it just doesn't make any sense whatsoever to me. Offering flexibility is one thing, but this is completely misleading.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

One observation from the voting yesterDay: in order to prevent a tie (and thus no lynch) in the future, please keep your actual voting posts short in the future (you can reason in a subsequent post) and refresh the thread before you post your vote!

Exactly.

Originally Posted by Lommy

I read Nerwen's summary of Morsul's posts. The only thing that keep standing out to me is that he seemed very much like an ordinary innocent villager. What the??

This just confused me - what is the "what the" refering to here? Are you shocked by Nerwen, shocked by that Morsul seems innocent to you, shocked by that he was killed if he seemed like an ordinary villager, or?

EDIT: x-ed with the double Boro and onwards

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I just realised how late it is getting and I would prefer to vote soonish.

In terms of "fishy", Boro is clearly at the top, but his replies are just... really, I would have thought of a Cobbler. Like I am not sure if "fishy" in this sense qualifies as that he should get my vote.

Otherwise, I just realised from what Zil said, he may not be back anymore to offer any more clarification to his voting reasoning, the consistency of his suspicion on Nerwen and so on. In any case, I didn't think him suspicious during yesterDay and toDay there was not anything particularly standing out until his sudden exchange with Nerwen, which originated from her. Although ok, I just reread that and it was rather sudden response from him which escalated it.

Anyway, I have been also going through people's posts and would like to sort out my thoughts about everyone. Will be back in a moment with something more.

EDIT: x-ed with Eönwë