T-I-G LXVII: The Rangers of the North - The Fell Winter

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

But I'm not, in fact, entirely convinced a wolf would want to be a Captain. Maybe they wouldn't mind the tie-breaking normally, but when it comes to breaking a tie between a fellow and an innocent? Either decision can be dangerous. And would they want to manipulate innocents in Nightly discussions or would they dread the extra chance to get caught? I think it's more about individual wolves (and incidentally, I would see Roa and Legate as wolves wanting to be Captains, whereas I wouldn't want to be one - not because of the tie-thing, I can do that, but because I would not want innocents questioning me during the Night-time...).

Here's my take: the wolves don't need to get one of their number into the Captain at the beginning of the game, since the innocents are more than likely to kill each other anyway - but as the game progresses, it will become more and more important for the wolves to have that lynch-canceling, tie-breaking power of a Captain. Maybe it's not a problem now, but it certainly will be in a Day or two. We'll have to be extra careful who we elect.

Sorry I've been gone so much.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Okay, just a note. Even if you were innocent, I think this is a rather unclever way of thinking. If you are afraid of having a Cap in power for too long, is putting totally random people into power any better? And okay, nothing against Gwath, but he certainly hasn't been around the most, and I didn't notice that you would have expressed any strong feeling of his innocentishness in order to make you vote him. (And if it's a bait for us to start suspecting Gwath after you are lynched and revealed as a Wolf, then I am not going to take it, at least. But let's see.)

Ha ha. Seems like it would be a waste to endow with Captain powers someone who's not likely to a) be around enough to be able to use said powers in an informed way or b) even be around at DL to put said powers to use. Right? But consider this - while it may look for all the world like Roa is trying to establish some sort of artificial, damning ties with another player (me), she may also be just trying to force me to be more involved. As you can see, it's working.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

Here's my take: the wolves don't need to get one of their number into the Captain at the beginning of the game, since the innocents are more than likely to kill each other anyway - but as the game progresses, it will become more and more important for the wolves to have that lynch-canceling, tie-breaking power of a Captain. Maybe it's not a problem now, but it certainly will be in a Day or two. We'll have to be extra careful who we elect.

Hey, now that was a really, really good point and well said - so I think enough to excuse you for being away for long otherwise. (That doesn't mean, though, that I'd be encouraging you in being away ) Anyway, that's just what I thought of at this moment - it's not a problem yet, but definitely for the future, let's say in a Day or two, I would be against having Captain for more than one Day. Now before everybody of the "no power for Captains" party starts shouting "We were telling you from the very beginning!", I emphasise that it goes for the late Days, when a lynch-cancelling power in an innocent's hands would be more powerful than ever, but in Wolf's hands even more disasterous than ever. With many people in the village, the Wolves will yet, I believe, not dare to misuse the lynch-cancel in any drastic way. Because if they did, they would need to explain themselves and may end up lynched themselves. But in the end, there might as well remain nobody to perform the justice on them. Thus, if our numbers thin in the future, then I am against multiple Captain Days.

And maybe even... once the Captain loses the power to communicate with his Nightly mates (not sure when this occurs, maybe it's only with some really low number of players, but anyway), maybe from that point on it would be the best to have no Captain at all. (But certainly not as long as he still can elect his BG! That is a VERY strong means to protect fellow villagers.)

EDIT: x-ed since the post I quoted

[Gwathagor]

Continuing with this theoretical train of thought, eventually it might even be best to elect no Captain at all unless they are practically a known innocent. Theoretically.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

Continuing with this theoretical train of thought, eventually it might even be best to elect no Captain at all unless they are practically a known innocent. Theoretically.

Oh sorry Legate, you already said this.

[Gwathagor]

Ha, here's an idea - Legate, I'd be interested to hear you summarize what Roa's arguments against you are. It would be informative to hear your perspective on it. Plus I'm lazy and don't feel like trying to find the original posts.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

Ha, here's an idea - Legate, I'd be interested to hear you summarize what Roa's arguments against you are. It would be informative to hear your perspective on it. Plus I'm lazy and don't feel like trying to find the original posts.

(EDITEDIT - sorry, misread - what I am replying to here is MY points against Roa)

Okay, you have one point right above - well, will it be enough if I linked you to one post of mine where I say it all? Or at least I think most has been said in one particular post... I will find it...

EDIT: okay, it's basically my post #450. That sums up the most things, as that is where I brought my points into the open. But the post above is equally important.

EDITEDIT: Oh sorry. I misread. You meant what is MY perspective about ROA's points against ME? Okay. Wait a while!

[Gwathagor]

Regarding post #486, Legate - ok, interesting, but isn't that a little complicated??

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, so you are asking, what is my perspective on Roa's points against me?

I have more or less been replying to it in the particular cases, so I really cannot sum it up. But more or less what was recurring was that she said I was "keeping repeating that Rune is innocent" (which I didn't, I said that "he could be innocent Rune" or something like that maybe once or twice, but mainly I just kept saying that I'm uncomfortable with lynching him, which is not the same, and the reasons for why I said that see below), "pushing myself for being a Captain" (not true, never said that), "having no real opinion" (or something of that sort, which I don't really understand) and that's probably it.

All in all, everything she brought against me can be described in one word: shallow. And I mean, really. It is no real case at all, and unless she voted me, I would not have even considered it anything "serious". I mean - if I was completely different player and been watching her saying this about another player, it would have seemed to me that she is just randomly babbling on the person's address. Neither of that is what I would call "a serious case". Like, I think she didn't even try to make any association of me with any Nightly kills, or try to provide my connection to some bandwagons or whatever. The thing which is closest to "proper" suspicion in her case would be my "support" for Rune (as she says it, whereas I have been discouraging people from voting Rune for Captain). Otherwise, like I said, I consider it rather "unserious" way of suspecting.

What I dislike of her accusations is her "dodging" - she never comments on my explanations (like that I was worried that Rune might be a Hunter and since he voted me, I was worried that he might target me and that is why I didn't dare to vote him) and seems to completely disregard them, pass them, let them be forgotten, and then she brings again the same case or makes a different one.

Well, hope that's enough for you.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

And maybe even... once the Captain loses the power to communicate with his Nightly mates (not sure when this occurs, maybe it's only with some really low number of players, but anyway), maybe from that point on it would be the best to have no Captain at all.

Originally Posted by the Rules about the Captaincy

He will appoint to him two bodyguards (with 18-13 villagers, with 12-7 he chooses one and with 6 or less there are no BG’s anymore)

So with 6 players left there will be no BG's, nor NG's to that matter, and the Captain will stay up the Nights alone... vulnerable to attacks as anyone else.