[Volo]

I'll try clearing up the misunderstandings briefly.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Agreed that who isn't with us is against us, but what exactly do two you mean with "the BW can even be really useful later on" (to whom?) and "whether she plays for us or for the wolves"? The BW's stunnings may happen to work in favour of one party now or the other next, but xe wins if xe's the sole survivor, so xe wants all of us dead in the long run.

When I wrote that I hadn't realized exactly what you mention here, I thought that the BW wins if either the Innocents or the Wolves win and the BW is still alive. So from the post you are refering to, I have changed my mind, and while the BW can be useful by stunning the last Wolf, it would probably be unintentional.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

How will the BW have these "educated hunches"? Xe will know who xe decided to stun, but not necessarily whether xe hit a wolf or a Gifted. How could xe know if xe hit the Seer and caused the loss of a dream, or caused Ferny to be unable to spy for the Night? The only concrete information the BW could get from xer stunning actions is if two wolves are gone already and there isn't a kill during a Night, meaning xe nailed the remaining wolf.

This is a game where certain knowledge is rare. Post-mortem role revelations and the dreams of a dead Seer are of such quality, but not much else. However players are making accusations based on little hunches, glimpses and clues, which are not definite. The BW also plays by these rules, being quite similar to an Ordo. However, xe can stun, which affects xer way of looking at players' roles. The knowledge of someone being stunned will certainly affect the way the BW looks upon xer victim next Day and might notice things others wouldn't necessarily notice. By "mildly eductated hunches" I meant a wider perspective than that of an ordo's.
Related to this was my comment of not angering the BW, which has also been understood in a way I didn't mean it. Based on basic WW psychology I see the following scenario very likely: The BW is suspected for one reason or the other and is very likely or certainly going to be lynched. Xer reaction to this is, probably, wanting revenge to those who caused xer demise, who, in the case of a lynch, are the Innocents (the lynch being the Innocents' way of killing). Xe can revenge by making the game more favourable to the enemies of xer enemies, the Wolves. And this is done by the BW telling on the game thread who xe thinks are the Gifteds - something a Cobbler would do in the similar situation. All in all this is a minor point explained in a long way and this discussion should perhaps be forgotten in favour of using up time for the real game, instead of meta.

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

Quite a lot of people talking about 'might' with nothing to back them up. And what's this about 'we'? As far as I know, innocents don't kill anything "quietly during the Night".

What I meant by the Innocents killing a Cobbler quietly during the Night was TB ('we') using his power during the Night to get rid of the BW, who is not unlike a Cobbler, which is an advantage to the Innocents. Refer to aforementioned reasons.

Originally Posted by The Elf-warrior

I'm gonna go with
++Volo.
I think Shasta found a freudian slip. I haven't read any farther than Nogrod's post after Shasta.

I assume you refer to the part I quoted. Well, I hope this post clarified enough.