Agreed. If everyone on the thread had been asked to pair the night kills at least a couple of people were bound to get it right even without reasoning (based on chance).

And I don't know if it's too early to mention, but it seems pointless to attempt a check of a dead Lottie tonight, right?

Are we willing to assume the same for Mac or not?

I've been reading through Firefoot and just checked here...

A thought before everyone gives their votes for toDay.

Wasn't the other one (than Shasta) Nilp?

I mean Nilp is the one who proposed the idea toDay in the first place - so it would be poetically right to give the vote to him rather than Shasta.

Just saying.

I think we should check Mac. It will tell us something both about Nerwen and Rikae's "dreams".

For the time being, maybe yes, but I'd give it some thought though before deciding.

Wait, what did he propose today?

If Nerwen is the seer this is a very risky move with little payoff. Let's hope not.

A traveling special role, I could buy. It fits with what Kuru said about everyone being on their toes.

I'd rather not waste our scry on Mac or Lottie. Legate seems like he has more of a trail than the rest here, so he'd be my preference.

This.

Firefoot answered that post like this and then continued to carry the idea forwards...

I can tell you all about my dreams right now: I never had any.

Nerwen will most likely join us soon. If she's bluffing, she might just tell us so (although after Lottie's confession I think it's unlikely).

I think, for now, we can operate under the assumption that Mac is a wolf.

From looking (albeit drunkenly) at Mac last night I had the impression Nilp was a possible packmate of his.

Not that it matters much, but I'd prefer to give our vote to Shasta for that reason.

Yeah I was referring to Mac's reaction to your "reveal" and what you said earlier - he could have been so genuine because you listed his fellow as innocent.

Me too, I don't like Nilp.

The reason (or the way it was achieved) itself might not be "fair enough" but it might be fair enough as a guideline for our vote.

Not sure what you mean here.

One thing we should be on guard against, though, is a tying our vote. That's one way the wolves could prevent our message about Greenie going through (and keep the village thinking Legate was the seer... maybe even to the point of casting doubt on a real seer reveal down the line).

There's going to be at least one probable-wolf around at deadline. Let's not give him room to mess things up for us.

I was going to just follow Green and vote Shasta, but give me a minute to look at the options...

Okay-

If Boro is the Seer we want the vote to go to Shasta (he dreamed him innocent).

If Firefoot is the Seer we want the vote to go to Nilp (she suspects Boro earlier perhaps reflecting on Shasta).

If Nerwen is the Seer we want the vote to go to Shasta (dreamed him innocent).

Any other factors we need to consider in this?

Same thinking. Like tp said, it was even likely somebody might hit it right just by pure chance. And look, Lottie also thinks I am the Seer, thus a good example how one can make even totally wrong conclusions based on "facts".

I probably would not check either of them, at least for the time being. If there was anything uncertain about Mac or whatever it was that Agan was trying to say (not sure I got it right), if you wanted to shed some light on Mac and Rikae's yesterday conversation with "I am the Seer - you are the Wolf", then I'd rather check Rikae.
Understandable, if you are all so uncertain about me, but I think it really should be someone else. Because I am not sure if learning my role would give anything else besides my role. Once again, as I said earlier, I think it would be the best to learn the role of someone whose role could point to other info, or other players. I think we have lot of info that's been linked to me revealed fairly well (you checked my main suspect Greenie already...), and now it should be at least clear I am not a Wolf from Lottie's party after she claimed they killed me.

I don't really care and it might be nice to give credit where credit is due, then again he didn't actively pursue it (unlike Firefoot did) and out of the two options, Shasta is really more trustworthy-looking player. I'd prefer to give the vote to him also in case the village wishes to guess something based on our preference.

Oh my... :p

Anyway.

Let's pick Shasta then and secure all vote the same so the wolves have minimal chances of swaying the vote, right?

Btw. there are some interesting things with Firefoot... I'll try to make it shortish - and soonish (to go to bed early today).

Good point. Because especially now, that we will be (hopefully) getting a known (hopefully?) Wolf here to the thread, regardless of how many are already present, we should start to stick a bit to some rules. Therefore, I suggest we all vote as unanimously as we can, and so for Shasta, since he already has a vote. Nogrod's argument for "being fair" is not really worth the confusion.

Oh, and putting my money where my mouth is...

++ Shasta

Indeed. No need to delay, right? They also apparently have Lottie bagged, can't imagine what would have to happen to turn it over...

++Shasta

And really, Firefoot is now making so much sense there (e.g. raising the possibility that I might not be the Seer... unless, of course, unless she knows because she is a Wolf and knows I got something wrong? But then again, what... I didn't really post anything that conclusive). I really hope she's innocent, and she started acting really helpfully and all.

Getting hints from someone's reactions in RL can't always be avoided. But using those reasons then publicly is another thing, and not quite fair - I mean you can't avoid getting things into your mind seeing someone's reactions but in the thread we probably should stick to the written stuff... gah... it's not worth a discussion now.

Earlier toDay she argued for lynching the ranger... :rolleyes:

It is an interesting read, her posting that is.

I'll be back with it soon as I can.

I suppose the most likely scenario is that Lottie & her pack found me seerish.

Going on that assumption:

Day 1 I said "Anybody who is suggesting an ordo self-sacrifice toDay (Nilp? Phantom? Lottie?) fie on you."
and made a point of saying I liked tp's ideas "whatever he is"
Argued against lynching people who always look suspicious (I was thinking Rune, McCaber, Shasta... not sure if others were thinking the same)

Day 2
Right off the bat I talk about being somewhat suspicious of Mac & Lommy
Joked about Lommy setting me up.
Voted Lommy. I was going on a hunch. I could see a wolf-Lommy finding the
way I was after her all day seerish.
Still making a point that I liked tp's ideas but didn't necessarily trust him.
"Ugh. I suspected Agan earlier but she's been looking better to me lately. I also definitely don't want Form lynched. And Nog is creating confusion but I suspect it's just sleep deprivation, not evil, to blame.
"
Suggested voting Lommy, Greenie, Mac or tp. Voted Lommy.

Day 3
I first said "that takes care of that" of tp's death, then went to look at the Nogawagon.
Concluded it wasn't to defend Agan.
Suggested it was defending Lommy.
Looked at Lottie and Firefoot. Found Lottie quite suspicious and tried to get others to vote her, unsure of Firefoot.
Voted Greenie as a preferable lynch to Mac or Agan.

So from this alone I could conclude:

Lommy might well be in Lottie's pack.
Rune most likely was not.
Mac most likely was not.

Not sure how that makes sense in light of their interactions at the moment, but yeah.

EDIT: My post #385, at 6:35

But didn't she deny killing you? She confessed to killing me. So she couldn't have killed you, if she isn't lying (which, of course, she could... I find this whole "now I'm gonna tell you villagers who killed who" very illogical in this game where the main advantage of WWs is that there is no info at all).

Wait, are you saying Lottie was lying about the pack kills?

Didn't she say her pack killed Rune and Legate?

(x-post, saying the same as Legate)

Well, why wouldn't she lie, especially if I was on the trail of her packmate...

However, I just noticed in #490, Lommy calls for someone to look at me for
seer-hints. Would she do that, knowing it would point back to her?
Then again, that could be exactly what she'd do... call for someone else to do it in the midst of a long post, and then distract everyone with Legate-was-the-seer talk.

How much reason (sorry if I missed something, I haven't been reading 100% carefully) did Lottie have to kill you, anyway?

Hmmm... Guess I'll have to do a separate exam with the kills flipped.

Um... because she thought I was the Seer? I mean look at it, even some innocents thought I was the Seer because I was being so steadfast in going after Greenie (even before she died) - especially since not very many people suspected her? Isn't thinking that I am a Seer enough of a reason for a Wolf to kill me?

Firefoot


She seems to start every Day with a theoretical analysis of something. D1 it is the deliberate tie, on D2 it is how different sides would have either wished or not wished for the tie, and on D3 she counts possible innocent vs. wolf ratios among the dead / living.

The third one is actually followed by an interesting thing: How come she thinks about these things as the very first thing of the Day - maybe it's something very close?


On D2 she clearly goes nudging both Rikae and Mac in a way I'm used to see more from the wolves - but it is not anything conclusive of course as the innocents can test the waters as well.

With Rikae she jumps quite fast to Nerwen’s question whether Rikae actually knew Rune was killed because he was looking gifted (#253) by saying With Mac (#284) she makes the classic:
Being clearly more active on D3 she has been all over the place doing many things - like taking care we set up this information line Nilp had reminded should be there. And being invaluable in there.

But then in #419 She first makes a pretty detailed speculation as to how the wolves could kill if the lover sacrificed - and then turned to speculate with the possibility of rather lynching the ranger!

#427 is the post which Lottie-wolf spotted in her frenzy and where she puts the Night-kills nicely in place.

And then of course her #534 where she defends herself by saying that And since when has consistency been anything but the privilege of those who already know something?


It seems her suspicions have been pretty consistent though - and yes we can also speculate if she then is the seer (happily we can do it here). But I'll check them and leave you with this thus far so that you can get some first ideas about how interesting Firefoot is (I mean she could be anything).

What do you think?

She doesn't say how, though.

Just looking through Legate's posts, Seer-Legate mostly points toward wolf-Greenie. In fact, it strongly looks like she was the only wolf he dreamed of - he sets her apart from everyone else, consistently.
Perhaps Lottie is betting we didn't scry Greenie (or that she was in the other pack).

Now, that leaves the question... who killed Mac and Legate? I mean, assuming Mac isn't in Lottie's pack, and knowing Greenie is innocent.

Perhaps Firefoot (and Mac) killing Legate, assuming he was a seer about to dream her and that Greenie was in the other pack?

Special role killing Mac of course makes sense.

Lottiewolf had more reason to think I was the seer. Even though she might have noticed that you were going after Greenie seerishly and thought Greenie was in the other pack, I would certainly have been a more immediate danger to her own pack.

I mean, if she had us both on her potential-seer list. Killing you would have been less urgent, since your one "wolf", if you did have one, was "in the other pack".
And she'd absolutely want to throw the village off her pack's trail. Why on earth would she give an accurate confession?

Well I certainly still think we should not trust the "revealed kills" completely. And rethinking now what Rikae said... it really is possible she was the target of Lottie's group, and she lied, and I was the other one's target, but either way, it does not really give us much. There are no stronger arguments for it being either way, and it does not really give us any solid info we could use.

Interesting thought. Although - not wishing to be a spoilsport, but we sadly can't do much with this analysis from our perspective on this thread :)

Nah, I looked it up, it wasn't that bad. She's got a point, the whole argument is about that Ranger technically could bring the info back from the dead more clearly than the Lover - which is true. But it is also true that getting rid of the Ranger for one Night is pretty bad. In fact, outing him is really bad. So yeah. Depends just how well she has thought it through (if she had an innocent, simple motive, or a well-thought, evil one).

Couldn't Lottie just mess around while being devastated of being blown out? I mean putting the kills in the wrong order - and if really against Firefoot (aka thinking her a wolf from the rival pack) that would be also annoying to Firefoot?

I mean that's how we people are, irrational in times and being fex. accused of killing someone you thought was a bad idea while you were - in your own mind at least - being really clever, and now are in risk of looking like a clumsy one - or something? No, I don't have any evidence for the "intelligence of the kills", but just reminding we might have other reasons here besides purely tactical ones...

I suppose Lottie could lie about spotting Legate in order to hide legate's likely dreams (Nerwen/Lommy/Mith) because one or more is in Lottie's pack...

Lommy seems to turn out from behind several different corners...

And Lommy again.

"Seer"!me went after her, "seer"!Legate protected her.
Conveying Greenie's role could actually be quite useful after all.

And why is everyone believing the wolf...????

So, tentatively...

Loslote, Lommy, ????

Mac, ????, ????

If the Macpack killed Legate as a potential seer, presumably Mith and Nerwen aren't in it.

Edit: X'd with Nog

Definitely want to scry Legate.