The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Tol-in-Gaurhoth LVII

Isabellkya · 02-23-2009, 04:07 PM

Which causes a bit of o.O in my head at the moment.

In post #258, you talked about the black opening side because of the starting positions notated next to the list of dead people.
Which seems to mean, that you know a thing or two about chess.
Yet in #264, you say that the table did not specify which Q it was, but as already said - you'd already pointed out that the pieces were on the black opening side.
So wouldn't that alone, tell you that it was the BQ responsible?
Why the.. waffling (best word which comes to mind at the moment.) ?

On the other hand -
In #258 you also said that the opening starting positions may not tell us anything because of the lynching and killing of Gwath and Shasta.
Here is a theory - couldn't those things, mainly such as lynchings - be for the sole purpose of the plot? So they are a part of the game, but not falsely incriminating someone? When I say falsely incriminating - let me elaborate. I don't think Shasta could or would in his notation attribute the lynchings to the WQ/BQ/WB/BB etc.. Wouldn't that in a sense, not make sense?

Drat. Got sidetracked with my rereading.

X'd with Shasta and Nog.

02-23-2009, 04:07 PM	#269
Isabellkya Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Amongst trees. Posts: 919	Which causes a bit of o.O in my head at the moment. In post #258, you talked about the black opening side because of the starting positions notated next to the list of dead people. Which seems to mean, that you know a thing or two about chess. Yet in #264, you say that the table did not specify which Q it was, but as already said - you'd already pointed out that the pieces were on the black opening side. So wouldn't that alone, tell you that it was the BQ responsible? Why the.. waffling (best word which comes to mind at the moment.) ? On the other hand - In #258 you also said that the opening starting positions may not tell us anything because of the lynching and killing of Gwath and Shasta. Here is a theory - couldn't those things, mainly such as lynchings - be for the sole purpose of the plot? So they are a part of the game, but not falsely incriminating someone? When I say falsely incriminating - let me elaborate. I don't think Shasta could or would in his notation attribute the lynchings to the WQ/BQ/WB/BB etc.. Wouldn't that in a sense, not make sense? Drat. Got sidetracked with my rereading. X'd with Shasta and Nog. __________________ But I was clinging to her like a homicidal monkey.