TIG LXIX: Meeting at the House of Usher

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

I mean we have to kill three(or is it four?)wolves to eliminate their nightly kill

Good point. I assume that the friendly Wolf counts in the Wolves’ numbers for the purposes of determining victory, just as the Cobbler counts for the Innocents. But, he is, of course, playing for us, so it would be somewhat ungracious to kill him, if we can possibly avoid it.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

But actually, I think we shouldn't concentrate solely on the Bear, and yet we shouldn't forget him either.

Quite so. Killing the Bear early would be good from the point of view of limiting Nightly kills, but the Bear will be much more difficult to spot. So, we should not lose sight of either enemy.

I wonder whether it might be worth pondering the dynamic between the Wolves and the Bear further. From the point of view of both, double kills at Night is good because, the more innocents that die, the better their chance of victory. On the other hand, while the Bear is alive, there is always a reasonable chance that he may kill a Wolf at Night. Accordingly, while I presume that the Wolves don’t need to kill the Bear to win (although it is not entirely clear), they will no doubt want to get him out of the way at some point. In a funny kind of a way, therefore, the Innocents and the Wolves have a mutual interest in finding and killing the Bear. The same goes for the Innocents and the Bear, I suppose, since the Bear needs to stay alive to win and is as vulnerable as anyone, I think, to Wolf attacks. What do people think? Is there any way that we might use these dynamics to our advantage?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Inzil

You seem a bit quick to label her 'guilty'.

I rather got the impression that Nerwen was being flippant. In which case, your readiness to seize upon this as suspicious is, in itself, somewhat suspicious.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Good point. I assume that the friendly Wolf counts in the Wolves’ numbers for the purposes of determining victory, just as the Cobbler counts for the Innocents. But, he is, of course, playing for us, so it would be somewhat ungracious to kill him, if we can possibly avoid it.

Have I missed something? Since when is there a 'friendy' wolf?

Originally Posted by Mirandir

"Upon entering this house," he continued, "All but seven of you were infused with a spirit. Five of you have been infected by evil. You will attempt to kill your fellows when the Night falls, but only four work together. One of the others wants you to win and will help you trick the others during the Day.

'Five infected by evil', but only four working together. I read that as four wolves, and a bear. And then one working for the evil side during the Day, the cobbler. If I'm misinformed in this regard, I'd like to know.

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I rather got the impression that Nerwen was being flippant. In which case, your readiness to seize upon this as suspicious is, in itself, somewhat suspicious.

I considered that, but the lack of a smilie left room for some doubt.

x/d with Nerwen, SPM, and Morsul

[Morsul the Dark]

Actually do the math....(I should have realized this earlier...)

17 people

Only 7 ordos

2 lovers
1 Ranger
1 Seer
1 Hunter
(5 good)

1 cobbler
1 Bear...
that leaves
3 Wolves Not Four!

The sentence is written incorrectly It SOUNDS like four wolves it means 3 wolves and a bear(the four) then the cobbler....

There is no good wolf....

Crossed with nerwen

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

The sentence is written incorrectly It SOUNDS like four wolves it means 3 wolves and a bear(the four) then the cobbler....

There is no good wolf....

Crossed with nerwen

Ah... I guess everyone assumed– I know I did– that it was only the card-carrying villains– the shapeshifter roles– who had been "infected by evil".

Well, then, there may not be a good wolf after all, but then there's only three wolves!

[Inziladun]

All right. let's look at the full text about who is 'infused with a spirit' here.

Originally Posted by Mirandir

"Upon entering this house," he continued, "All but seven of you were infused with a spirit. Five of you have been infected by evil. You will attempt to kill your fellows when the Night falls, but only four work together. One of the others wants you to win and will help you trick the others during the Day. One of you will be able to protect someone from their fate, but for only two Nights. One is sworn to take down their choice in game if - or rather when - they are killed themselves. Yet one more will be able to have the role of another sent to them in a dream. The final two are paired together, and their survival depends on each other.

There are 17 of us in all. Only seven do not have a spirit of some sort, whether good or evil.

Ordos- 07
Ranger- 01
Hunter- 01
Seer- 01
Lover Pair- 02

That's 12 for the good side.

Which leaves 5 evil ones, wolves, bear and cobbler.

Since the bear and cobbler do not work with the wolves, I don't see how 'four' could be in collusion. Perhaps we could get some enlightenment on this?

x/d with SPM and Roa

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

All right. let;s look at the full text about who is 'infused with a spirit' here.



There are 17 of us in all. Only seven do not have a spirit of some sort, whether good or evil.

Ordos- 07
Ranger- 01
Hunter- 01
Seer- 01
Lover Pair- 02

That's 12 for the good side.

Which leaves 5 evil ones, wolves, bear and cobbler.

Since the bear and cobbler do not work with the wolves, I don't see how 'four' could be in collusion. Perhaps we could get some enlightenment on this?

x/d with SPM and Roa

Either the 4 wolves was a typo, or the 7 ordos was a typo. They can't both be true.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Have I missed something? Since when is there a 'friendy' wolf?

Originally Posted by Mirandir

1. "Upon entering this house," he continued, "All but seven of you were infused with a spirit. Five of you have been infected by evil. You will attempt to kill your fellows when the Night falls, but only four work together. One of the others wants you to win and will help you trick the others during the Day.

'Five infected by evil', but only four working together. I read that as four wolves, and a bear. And then one working for the evil side during the Day, the cobbler. If I'm misinformed in this regard, I'd like to know.

Ah, you think the "you" in that sentence refers to the wolves? I think you may be right. Drat.

EDIT:X'd with Morsul.

[The Saucepan Man]

Erk, my bad. I assumed that "you" in the passage quoted by Nerwen referred to the Innocents and that there was therefore one Wolf working for the Village. However, reading it again, I fear that I was wrong and that Inzil is correct.

Originally Posted by Morsul

3 Wolves Not Four!

Alas, no ...

Originally Posted by Brinniel, in the narrative

So we have four wolves, a werebear, a Hunter, a Ranger, a Seer, a cobbler, two Lovers, and seven ordos

I think the maths is wrong. But only to the extent that there are 6 ordos as, according to the narrative, there are definately four Wolves. And a Werebear. And a Cobbler ...

Great.

Still, on the bright side, it improves our odds of lynching a baddie.

[Mirandir]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I think the maths is wrong. But only to the extent that there are 6 ordos as, according to the narrative, there are definately four Wolves. And a Werebear. And a Cobbler ...

Erm so this one time Mira can't count. There are six ordos. Epic fail on my part. And just to clarify, there are four wolves and a bear and a cobbler. No friendly wolf. Sorry for the confusion.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Mirandir

Erm so this one time Mira can't count. There are six ordos. Epic fail on my part. And just to clarify, there are four wolves and a bear and a cobbler. No friendly wolf. Sorry for the confusion.

Well, three wolves would have been better, but thanks for the clarification.

[Roa_Aoife]

First things first: being a native of the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area, and my home team being the Ravens, I demand that my death involve ravens if/when I die. (Little known fact, the Ravens are so named in honor of Edgar Allen Poe, who is still well loved in the area. There's even a restaraunt named Annabel Lee's.)

Originally Posted by SPM

(three out of four Wolves, on the basis that one of them is on our side, ...).

Sorry, where did you get that from? Did I misunderstand the rules? Where does it say we have a Friendly wolf?

My impressions thus far:

It's nice to see that people aren't being shy with their accusations. At least we'll have plenty to discuss.

SPM, are you suggesting "The enemy of my enemy is my friend?" Keep in mind that the wolves and the bear could ultimately try to work together and turn on the village as a whole. I odn't know if we can count on that dynamic playing out.

Nerwen has been throwing suspicion left and right, and seems very ready to jump on SPM's comment towards Inzil.

We seem to have a lot of confusion regarding the number of wolves. I thought there were only three this game, plus one bear and one cobbler to equal all the baddies. Are there really 4 wolves? If so, is one of them a lover? I thought the lovers were both innocent. A modgod intervention would be appreciated.

SPM's idea about this friendly wolf, if flawed, looks a great deal like someone trying to spread confusion, and perhaps open a doorway for "Don't lynch me, I'm the friendly wolf!"

So right now, my two main suspects are Nerwen and SPM.

Edit: crossed with Nerwen and SPM

[Roa_Aoife]

Alright, I can accept that SPM was confused by the posting. (I could have sworn we were only having 3 wolves...)

[Pitchwife]

Hi everybody, just caught up, got very confused by all the mathematics and then deconfused again by Mirandir's clarification. Thank Moddess that's settled.
So, the Bear. Last game I played with a Bear in it started with a heated discussion about the question whether it would be feasible for the village to strike an alliance with the Bear against the wolves, which led to some ill-guided lynchings, if I remember well. I think we'd do well to remember the ancient adage Ursus communis hostis omnium - the Bear is everyone's enemy.
Of course it would be best if we could catch the Bear and reduce the Night kills rather soonish, but I think it won't get us anywhere to concentrate too much on the Bear per se, as our chances of getting them are no better (or even worse) than those of getting any other baddie. Following Nerwen 's advice in #19 , let's lynch everybody who behaves evil, and hopefully we'll get the bear as well as the wolves.

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by SPM

What do people think? Is there any way that we might use these dynamics to our advantage?

Excellent point about the relations between wolves and bear. Hmm. The answer to your question is, of course, that we should use them to our own advantage. Wait... that didn't answer the question, did it? Ah well. At least we know that accusing and possibly helping in the lynch of a baddie doesn't make a player seem innocent (not that it normally does, either, but...) But that is certainly a question that deserves to be given some thought.

I feel oddly like doing a list but there's no point I suppose since a majority hasn't posted yet and I don't have much to say about the ones who have.


EDIT: x-ed with SPM and Morsul

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Morsul

why Completely? You just said Don't forget him.

Well my point was exactly that. I fear I'll forget about him while hunting for the connections between wolves, and wanted to caution others of doing exactly that. We shouldn't forget about the Bear; I just fear I accidentally might, at some point. Sorry if I was unclear.

By the way, I love it when people are around the same time as I. Dunno why.


EDIT: x-ed with SPM and Roa

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Good point. I assume that the friendly Wolf counts in the Wolves’ numbers for the purposes of determining victory, just as the Cobbler counts for the Innocents. But, he is, of course, playing for us, so it would be somewhat ungracious to kill him, if we can possibly avoid it.

I don't see how we can possibly avoid it, except by losing. It is to be hoped, however, that we won't end up killing the Friendly Wolf before he has managed to leave trails to his packmates, or helped in other ways.

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I wonder whether it might be worth pondering the dynamic between the Wolves and the Bear further. From the point of view of both, double kills at Night is good because, the more innocents that die, the better their chance of victory. On the other hand, while the Bear is alive, there is always a reasonable chance that he may kill a Wolf at Night. Accordingly, while I presume that the Wolves don’t need to kill the Bear to win (although it is not entirely clear), they will no doubt want to get him out of the way at some point. In a funny kind of a way, therefore, the Innocents and the Wolves have a mutual interest in finding and killing the Bear. The same goes for the Innocents and the Bear, I suppose, since the Bear needs to stay alive to win and is as vulnerable as anyone, I think, to Wolf attacks. What do people think? Is there any way that we might use these dynamics to our advantage?

*shrugs* They may end up working to our advantage– whether we can deliberately aid that is another matter.

EDIT:X'd since SPM at #20.

[Morsul the Dark]

Good point. I assume that the friendly Wolf counts in the Wolves’ numbers for the purposes of determining victory, just as the Cobbler counts for the Innocents. But, he is, of course, playing for us, so it would be somewhat ungracious to kill him, if we can possibly avoid it.

Of course if the "bad" wolves figure out who the "Good" wolf is then it's just a matter of turning him in and if done properly we could lose "our" wolf easily enough. I doubt when he dies he'll be listed as "Good wolf" just "wolf" there'd be no way to tell if we got the right one.

Mostly, killing the first wolf is not a matter of tracing connections, either– and there's only one Bear. We'll just lynch anyone who looks evil, as usual. Including the cobbler. In fact, after last game, make that especially the cobbler.

HAHA Good point made my morning

aw man time to get read for work bleh just when things were heating up

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I rather got the impression that Nerwen was being flippant. In which case, your readiness to seize upon this as suspicious is, in itself, somewhat suspicious.

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

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Could be either, but I can't necessarily read anything into that post of hers. You seem a bit quick to label her 'guilty'.

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.

EDIT:X'd since my last post.