[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Mänwe

Quieter folk are the easiest to tarnish with the same brush and leave the greater possibility for a judgement error on behalf of their would be jurors. Although I would concede the more quiet the less likely you are to say something that'll give you away. But this reminds me of something Rikae mentioned that irked me a little

I don't see how some of the most talkative ones can be considered more helpful due to the possibility that every word they say is designed to mislead or indeed because they write so long a post people don't want to read it

Quiet can't be so black or white, for in those names that Legate mentioned there are those who have made the odd post, and those that have popped in to vote; two very different quiet "strategies" if you will...elronds_daughter being case in point with two very wild votes.

Also, Legate

May I ask you to clarify this point about Greenie not wanting to vote Oz or Kath?

Maybe more questions ought to be asked of the two extremes, those who just pop into vote and those who do the most talking..

Okay, since I am answering your question, first a comment also to the first part - of course I am not putting all the quiet ones into the same cathegory, and I in fact usually don't make such generalising suspicions, but this was just a thought: and for this time, of all, it would make sense. Because of the awkward kills, indeed. So I am actually considering such possibility, or at least, thinking that the "quiet" ones might be the key. Anything is possible.

And as for the thing about Greenie not killing Oz and Kath: I am not 100% sure (well, not by far! more like 50%, but still), I believe Greenie might have raised some objections to Ozzy being killed so early on, given that they haven't been playing together much, and this is Ozzy's second game. It is slightly meta-reasoning, and I am not giving it that much weight, like I said, but if the kills were made completely randomly (as it seems to me - no real Seer-reasoning, etc.), I could imagine she would have chosen somebody else for a random first kill. Similarly with Kath, I could imagine her wanting to play with her for longer time than just one Day, if possible. Of course, like I have already said before about similar subject, one Wolf's choices can be overriden by packmates etc., but still, it is a factor: usually, if one Wolf says: "No, I would prefer not to kill XY", then others usually follow it, unless they have really good and really important reasons to do it.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I think I was in the game myself and it had to do something with Legate changing his opinion into the opposite.. and there were some drastic consequences if I recall it right.

Someone else with better memory might be able to fill you up.

Indeed, drastic consequences; just to clarify it, I was innocent and ended up lynched after being accused of unexplainably changing my opinions.

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Two people who suspected Skip more or less strongly are dead. I find it hard to believe that the wolves would be so obvious in killing off dangerous villagers. I mean, if you have two kills, would you dare to get rid of two who suspect one particular wolf at once? I would think that's too obvious.

I agree with that. I am really wondering what kind of Wolves we have. What makes the most sense would be WWs who are quite logical and are trying to lead us away by planting fake baits (Nessa, Zil...) in front of us: but in that case, who would that be?

This is most puzzling, as basically most my suspects turn somewhat less likely to be actually Wolves. Skip would now make a lot less sense. There is still Rikae or Boro. I am just... puzzled.

And for that matter, I would really most likely drop Zil for toDay. Let's also not forget what he himself had said, that he was the likely target for a Seer dream after what he has done. Maybe we should not worry about that.

Originally Posted by Cailín

As if. When I am a wolf I don't kill awkwardly. I kill with poise, always.

Well, haven't played with you much, so I cannot say how would you kill, but in any case, you haven't been playing recently, which means that you would not probably make any difference between killing Ozban was here just in his second game and others who haven't likely been around when you have last played (quite several people, I'd imagine).

Originally Posted by Boromir88

The thing with Inzil's clear 180 flip is it's an extremely obvious tip-off. I don't know if the wolves would stick out their neck that far to save another, even with the 2-kill incentive, since that basically condemns both of them.

Unless, with his packmate Nessa being the one in danger, and in order to preserve the 2-kills saved her, and then went after two people who suspected him, fearing the seer had dreamed of him already?

If the latter was the case, we are living inside a horror. *dreads* I mean, if the WWs are already for two Nights doing nothing more than worrying about that they have been basically all caught this far and it is only a matter of time before they are lynched one by one, and yet still we in fact don't lynch either of them this far, it must be a rather pleasing picture for them.

But in general, I agree with the preceding statement - that is, it indeed condemns both of them, and it would mean at most one more Day of life - unless they indeed counted it being so obvious that we would not dare to count it as a Wolf-save. A true double-bluff.