Tol-in-Gaurhoth XLIX - At the Source of Darkness

[Thinlómien]

Q: Why was Lalaith killed?
A: No idea.



No reason stands out to me as for why she's dead. If we had a ranger, I would be tempted to say she was killed just to avoid the ranger. I mean, her death was pretty unexpected, at least to me. Maybe it was meant just to baffle us? And of course, the wolves might have been scared of her quick wits and killed her. Or then, Gwath or tp might have been worried about her going after them in future and eliminated a dangerous foe. And no one really suspected her. But is any of these reason enough to kill her? I don't know, I just have a feeling that it's a bit far-fetched. The obvious seer-explanation could be it, but I don't think her posts point to any seerish knowledge on anybody. So was it, like someone said, just general seerishness in the eyes of the wolves, or - like someone else said - simply the fact that she didn't look too cobblerish? I could kind of agree with that last part, for at least in my opinion she was one of the few people who didn't look cobblerish yesterDay.

Originally Posted by Fea

There are no criminals until after the first day is over. First day posts, therefore, hold no evidence of crime.

I think we've debated about this before, but I must say I disagree. The wolves know they're bad and sinful etc, so that might make them act guiltily. Also, they might do lots of things normal innocents are not so enthusiastic about - like trying to make friends, getting gifted-looking people lynched or give advice to each other, just to give a few examples. Oh, and they also have their packmateness to hide from the others. So I think there is plenty of evidence even without a wolf kill.

Going back to the Kitanna lynch, I have come to a rather unhelpful conclusion. The wolves might have gone along the Kitanna lynch to go with the flow and please others. The wolves might have protested against it to get an extra death. The wolves might have only interfered later and made a throwaway vote to avoid attention the following day. The wolves might have had timetable or other problems and not voted at all. So, we can't really conclude anything like "there must be a wolf among those who protested against lynching Kit" but rather, we have to examine individual behaviour and manner. Which means yesterDay's lynch gives us as much to go as any Day1 lynches, or actually less, because so many were absent and the debate was mostly dominated by one issue.

Originally Posted by Shasta

We lost two innocents yesterday. Had we lynched someone OTHER than Kitanna, it would have been three. I'm interested to hear just why it's a bad thing that we have one more person alive than we would have had.

We lost two innocents yesterDay? No, we didn't, unless you include the Night kill... Like Form, I really wonder how can you know we would have lynched an innocent. We would have had a 33,33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 % chance to lynch a baddie (and you silly people didn't take it. Argh. Oh, I guess I promised no to rant about it. )

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Actually, tp, I was wondering myself yesterDay whether Lalaith might be the Seer (hiding behind accusations of cobbler-ism), so I don't think it's THAT far-fetched.

I'm not sure if it would be wise of the seer to do so. She needs to leave the villagers a message of a found wolf, and in a game with four cobblers messing around it would be quite silly to mask suspicion towards the wolf as a suspicion of cobblerism.


edit: xed with tp and Nerwie