Tol-in-Gaurhoth (Isle of Werewolves)

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by the guy who be lupine

But... but... the Hunter would kill the last wolf upon his or her death! So it would be a Moderator Wins scenario.

Ah, but take that to its logical conclusion and every game (or at least every game that allows double lynching) which ends with a single ordinary villager and a single wolf would result in a moderator win.

Let me explain.

Going into the last Night, there are two ordinary villagers and one wolf. Naturally, the wolf kills one of the innocents overnight, leaving one villager and one wolf on the final day. Both vote for each other and there is a double lynching, leaving the village empty and the mod victorious. If double lynchings are not permitted, the lynch victim (and therefore the victor) is chosen randomly.

But that doesn't happen because the rules specifically provide that, when the game ends with an equal number of innocents and wolves, the wolves are victorious. That rule applies, in my view, even if the sole remaining innocent is the Hunter.

[the guy who be short]

But that doesn't happen because the rules specifically provide that, when the game ends with an equal number of innocents and wolves, the wolves are victorious. That rule applies, in my view, even if the sole remaining innocent is the Hunter.

And the rules also state that, when the Hunter is killed, he or she may choose one person to take to the grave with them. Hmm. I guess you have a point, my oft inebriated friend, seeing as we could consider it a wolvish victory is three wolves were left with three innocents, one the Hunter.

I suppose it will have to depend on the Moderator's opinion. If it were me, rest assured, Mod wins would be an option.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Wouldn't the math take care of such a scenario? For example:

2 wolves vs 1 hunter 1 innocent.

The two wolves kill the hunter first who takes a wolf with him, that leaves

1 wolf vs 1 innocent

I may be wrong, but I think this very thing happened in an early game...

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by tgwbw

If it were me, rest assured, Mod wins would be an option.

But surely "Mod wins" is just another way of saying it's a draw. And draws are dull and to be avoided at all costs, imho.

Unless you are suggesting that the Mod is actually an active player in the game? I don't like the sound of that, as the Mod's imparitiality should be beyond question.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

I may be wrong, but I think this very thing happened in an early game...

Yes - WWII, which I modded. The final day found the Hunter (BW) and an innocent (SoN) up against two Wolves (the phantom and dancing spawn). Although the innocent also happened to be the Cursed. One Wolf attacked the Cursed , who began to transform. The Hunter then shot the cursed ( ) and was savaged by the two Wolves. Wolf victory.

It could have been different - the Hunter and one Wolf could have cancelled each other out, leaving a Wolf v an innocent (albeit, in that case, the Cursed).

The position is slightly different where you have one Wolf and the Hunter at the end, though, as there is no second Wolf to survive the Hunter's attack. Still, my preferred option in that situation would be a Wolf win. Another possible rationale for this is that the Hunter is only permitted a kill when lynched by the villagers or attacked by the Wolves at Night - not when attacked by day by the sole surviving Wolf. Not entirely logical, I suppose, but it fits in with the general principle that an equal number of Wolves and villagers equals a Wolf victory.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Hmmmm....just looked more closely at the scenario imagined by Saucy with 1 wolf, 1 hunter and 1 innocent....that one is interesting...

In that case, wouldn't it be in the wolf's best interest NOT to kill anyone that Night?

If the wolf takes out the Hunter and dies, wolf loses.

If the wolf takes out the Hunter and the hunter kills the innocent, wolf wins.

If the wolf takes out the innocent, then next day double lynching and wolf loses.

So, only 1 in 3 chance of winning the game. But if the wolf lays low that Night then the next day:

Hunter gets lynched, wolf wins.

Innocent gets lynched, wolf wins.

wolf gets lynched, wolf loses.

So there's a 2 in 3 chance of victory by NOT acting in the NIGHT. All of which leads me to ask two questions:

1) can wolves choose NOT to hunt in a given night? and

2) how much longer can I hold out before playing in another game?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Fordie

If the wolf takes out the Hunter and dies, wolf loses.

True. I had forgotten that the Wolf would know that there was a Hunter about. Applying the rule that 1 Wolf v 1 Hunter = Wolf victory, though, the Wolf would have a 2 in 3 chance of victory either way.

Originally Posted by Fordie

1) can wolves choose NOT to hunt in a given night?

Well, the Hunter can, so why not the Wolves. The situations in which that would be a useful tactic, however, are very limited. I would leave that one up to the Mod.

Originally Posted by Fordie

2) how much longer can I hold out before playing in another game?

3) why bother holding out?

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

3) why bother holding out?

Because I want to keep a life for myself outside the Downs for a while.

Uh oh....EAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHH...Chat Skwerels!!

[Aiwendil]

The Saucepan Man:

It could have been different - the Hunter and one Wolf could have cancelled each other out, leaving a Wolf v an innocent (albeit, in that case, the Cursed).

But wouldn't wolf vs. innocent on the last day be a wolf victory?

Well, the Hunter can, so why not the Wolves.

Not necessarily - when I was the Hunter in Alcarillo's game, I had to hunt every Day and every Night.

Fordim:

If the wolf takes out the innocent, then next day double lynching and wolf loses.

If wolf vs. hunter were deemed not to constitute a wolf victory a priori then this would be correct and the wolf would have a one in four chance of winning if he/she killed someone (1/2 chance of getting the hunter times 1/2 chance that the hunter hunted the innocent). And there would be a 1/2 chance of a draw and a 1 in four chance of a villager win.

But if wolf vs. hunter is a wolf win (as I think it ought to be) then it's a 3 in 4 chance of winning for the wolf and 1 in 4 for the villagers, assuming the wolf attacked someone.

But I think you've incorrectly tallied the probabilities for the other scenario (wolf does not attack anyone):

Hunter gets lynched, wolf wins.

Innocent gets lynched, wolf wins.

wolf gets lynched, wolf loses.

I would correct as follows:

1. 1/3 chance that the hunter gets lynched, in which case:
a. 1/2 chance he hunts the innocent that day (wolf wins)
b. 1/2 chance he hunts the wolf (villagers win)
2. 1/3 chance the innocent gets lynched (wolf wins or draw depending on wolf vs. hunter rule)
3. 1/3 chance that the wolf gets lynched (villagers win)

So if hunter vs. wolf is a draw then we have a 1/4 chance of a wolf win if the wolf attacks that night and a 1/6 chance if he does not.

If hunter vs. wolf is a wolf win then we have a 3/4 chance of a wolf victory if the wolf attacks that night and a 1/2 chance if he does not.

Either way, it's better for the wolf to attack.

[the guy who be short]

Originally Posted by Man of Pans

Unless you are suggesting that the Mod is actually an active player in the game? I don't like the sound of that, as the Mod's imparitiality should be beyond question.

Of course the Mod is impartial. It is really just a fun way of saying "draw." I'd rather play in a game where the Mod ultimately wins than in a draw.

In any case, if the whole village dies, it's not even a draw. It's a multi-loss.

Originally Posted by Fordim

Wouldn't the math take care of such a scenario? For example:

My mistake. Yes, the wolves would win then.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

But wouldn't wolf vs. innocent on the last day be a wolf victory?

Yes, sorry. I meant a different way of narrating the Wolf win - ie with only one Wolf surviving, rather than two. But I thought in that game that, the way that they had played, both Wolves deserved to survive.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Not necessarily - when I was the Hunter in Alcarillo's game, I had to hunt every Day and every Night.

That's quite harsh. When I was the Hunter (WWXII, I believe), my decision not to Hunt the Werebear on the final Night played some part in our victory as, had I hunted and got it wrong, it could have spelled disaster. In "game logic" terms, it makes sense to allow the Hunter to take a conscious decision (acting on the basis of his rational assessment) not to hunt, while there are grounds for ruling that the Wolves (acting, arguably, more on cunning and instinct than on logic in their transformed state) should be compelled to kill at night.

I defer to your far greater abilities of mathmatical assessment, Aiwendil.

Originally Posted by the guy who be carnivorous

It is really just a fun way of saying "draw." I'd rather play in a game where the Mod ultimately wins than in a draw.

But, if it is just a fun way of saying draw, then it is a draw. Which is a boring outcome imho.

Originally Posted by the guy who sprout fur

In any case, if the whole village dies, it's not even a draw. It's a multi-loss.

Precisely. Draw = everyone loses.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Either way, it's better for the wolf to attack.

Only if he does so using his sliderule....

[littlemanpoet]

My request was in post # 2231.

Yours, Farael, was in post # 2208.

After you, which means you get XX. My 'Dueling Wizards' game can wait until XXI. By the way, I have two volunteers for my two submods already lined up. Looking good! And thanks!

[Lhunardawen]

So it's

Nilp
Farael
Elempi
Kath

?

Oh dear, what torment! I must have some rest!