WW: LXXXIV - Middle Earth in Fifteen Minutes

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Well, here we go - we are not much further than yesterDay, basically the same question remains. I think it's a matter of time, but the Wolves have effectively won a day, because once again, if we lynch one of them now, he/she would be replaced...

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Now, the only person the wolves really don't want to kill is the guardian because then a replacement jumps straight into the same place.

However, they definitely want to kill the Seer, even though another will appear, because otherwise - as has happened - our seer has info on (probably) two people. Just hope dreams weren't spent on Nerwen or Sally.

That's all rather self-evident. I also think that the WWs might try to avoid killing the Hunter, as it poses a threat to them with a replacement for the Hunter - which basically means theoretically, in the best case, trading two dead Gifteds for two dead Wolves (if both Hunters hit the target).

Originally Posted by Eomer

Will check out Sally later, to see what the wolves spotted; participation will be a bit intermittent while I'm at work.

Curiously, sally wasn't one of the most vocal players, for certain. Looking at her posts, I am somewhat doubtful about whether there was something that the WWs might have considered a sign of Giftedness (most of all, Seerishness). Let's see:

Originally Posted by satansaloser2005

Actually, this isn't a terribly bad catch (except for again, kidding). Let's remember, kids, to NOT GIVE THE NEWBIES A BLOODY PASS. Well, for now, yes, of course, because otherwise we'll never actually get to play with her, but not forever.

If we go with the hypothesis that the WWs killed Sally because they thought she was the Seer, this one could perhaps be considered that: like a Seer speaking about a dreamed Wolf. But that would work only in case LRH was really a Wolf, and even then I think it's somewhat overstretched (the "kidding" remark and all... the Wolves might have seen it as an attempt to cover the Seer's trace, but well...).

Originally Posted by sally

Also, I'm not voting for Dun today, because....well, you just have to keep around the guy with the Harry Potter references (if only because I'm not around to make them myself, boohoo).

This is also one possibility, like that the WWs saw this as a Seerish remark about a dreamed innocent... but that's possibly even more random than the previous.

There is of course sally's vote for Lommy, but sally did not say anything outright Seerish to her vote:

Originally Posted by satansaloser2005

Because she seems to me like she is, and I don't think her vote's legit.

And at last, this thing:

Also, I'm making this announcement/offer now. If you must, kill me. I'm an ordo and I won't be of much use anyway. No, seriously, no tricks. I don't want to be killed, but rather me than a gifted (although of course if you lynch me and it's not a tie you're going to lose, going by statistics anyway, so do make sure to read up on what happens in a tie, as I don't have time to do so). Anyway, yeah. If all else fails, I'm expendable. I won't be offended if I'm jumped on to save someone else; the village comes first, my own survival second, especially when I won't be around much.

I am really wondering about this one - so would this look to the WWs like sally being a Seer? If anything, a Hunter, I'd imagine, but would they really think that the Seer give herself up in such way, unless they thought she would be trying to bluff in such a way? But it seems a bit overstretched already. And then again, if they'd think sally was the Hunter, I really cannot think why would they kill her.

Summa summarum, if Ron Weasley Hubbard is a Wolf, or if Lommy is a Wolf, then it might be possible that the WWs would have thought "ha, Seer, and a dangerous one, let's get her!" But it is also possible that it was simply meant as a non-trace kill, as sally really hasn't been around much, which I find even somewhat more plausible (the question then rises, however, what would they get by a non-trace kill in a situation where nobody has any trace anyway). Or they are simply "sportish" and killed the one who asked for being lynched...

Originally Posted by Loslote

I didn't have time to put together a list of youtube links, so you'll have to settle for this one.

"Due to copyright, the video cannot be showed in your country." Ah well.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Legate

"Due to copyright, the video cannot be showed in your country." Ah well.

I assure you, it was nothing worth seeing.

Originally Posted by Legate

I am really wondering about this one - so would this look to the WWs like sally being a Seer? If anything, a Hunter, I'd imagine, but would they really think that the Seer give herself up in such way, unless they thought she would be trying to bluff in such a way? But it seems a bit overstretched already. And then again, if they'd think sally was the Hunter, I really cannot think why would they kill her.

You quote a passage where Sally claims to be an ordo and effectively suggest theories of the wolves considering her anything but that. That's incredibly funny, and makes you look innocent and confused because you're ignoring what seems to me by far the most viable option: the wolves believed what Sally said and decided to kill her so as to avoid killing gifteds (ie avoid the heir's power taking effect) and kind of throwing the ball back to us.

Which makes us have the ball. (Wow what a wonderful speech this is shaping to be! ) I'm inclined to follow Nerwen's lead in what she said before she died: we're facing the same dilemma toDay as we faced yesterDay, so we had better accept the grim situation and start hunting wolves. Otherwise the wolves devour us while we wait them to hit the heir first. On the positive side, I think they can't try to avoid gifteds much longer either because basically all the gifteds become more dangerous for the evil side as the game proceeds.

Now I'm off to play Age of Empires II because I just feel like that. I'll be back in an hour or two anyway and then I'll have a proper look at yesterDay.

[Nessa Telrunya]

Ouch. Two ordos

Perhaps the wolves went for sally because of her Vote yesterDay?

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Really, I'm insulted by that one. Damage control for whom?

My apologies, it was meant as a compliment on your wolfing skills and as a joke about you always being such an enigma in the end-game. If it offended, I'm sorry, I didn't mean it that way.

To be honest I don't know what sense voting Nerwen made - aren't weirdness and "unproductiveness" much more usual signs of ordoishness than of wolvishness? I think the voting reasons of everybody in the nerwagon (including myself) are silly, but so were mostly the reasons of other votes. I think the biggest dilemma regarding analysing yesterDay is whether we can use the votes as valid anything or not, because a big part of the village was thinking they might as well vote random...

Ps. Currently suspecting Zil (too happy, for example: "I wonder if an 13-way tie has ever happened before?") and Nog (somehow artificial, can't pharse it better).

[Inziladun]

Sorry about that, Nerwen.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Curiously, sally wasn't one of the most vocal players, for certain. Looking at her posts, I am somewhat doubtful about whether there was something that the WWs might have considered a sign of Giftedness (most of all, Seerishness).

I think that's a reach. The things you cite as items that might interest the wolves would only have done so if we have an exceptionally jumpy or newbie pack. I'm inclined to think Lommy has the answer.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

You quote a passage where Sally claims to be an ordo and effectively suggest theories of the wolves considering her anything but that. That's incredibly funny, and makes you look innocent and confused because you're ignoring what seems to me by far the most viable option: the wolves believed what Sally said and decided to kill her so as to avoid killing gifteds (ie avoid the heir's power taking effect) and kind of throwing the ball back to us.

Indeed. Sally pretty much begged them to kill her.

Originally Posted by Nessa Telrunya

Ouch. Two ordos

Perhaps the wolves went for sally because of her Vote yesterDay?

Which would make Lommy a wolf. However, like I said, I doubt an experienced pack would have seen anything in what Sally said to have panicked them that she was a Seer.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

To be honest I don't know what sense voting Nerwen made - aren't weirdness and "unproductiveness" much more usual signs of ordoishness than of wolvishness? I think the voting reasons of everybody in the nerwagon (including myself) are silly, but so were mostly the reasons of other votes. I think the biggest dilemma regarding analysing yesterDay is whether we can use the votes as valid anything or not, because a big part of the village was thinking they might as well vote random...

Well, I gave my reasons yesterDay. You're right in that the votes yesterDay were generally even more capricious than usual for Day 1.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Currently suspecting Zil (too happy, for example: "I wonder if an 13-way tie has ever happened before?") and Nog (somehow artificial, can't pharse it better).

I wasn't particularly happy, more bemused at the fact that the votes were so spread out.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

You quote a passage where Sally claims to be an ordo and effectively suggest theories of the wolves considering her anything but that. That's incredibly funny, and makes you look innocent and confused because you're ignoring what seems to me by far the most viable option: the wolves believed what Sally said and decided to kill her so as to avoid killing gifteds (ie avoid the heir's power taking effect) and kind of throwing the ball back to us.

I agree with this scenario - Sally's done the exact same thing before, and anyone who'd seen her do that (including, if I remember correctly, Nessa as well as the usual lot) would recognize that as a genuine offer. So the wolves, not wanting to hit a Gifted, go for the all but confirmed ordo.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Ps. Currently suspecting Zil (too happy, for example: "I wonder if an 13-way tie has ever happened before?") and Nog (somehow artificial, can't pharse it better).

Why are you saying everything I am thinking?

[Boromir88]

I will more or less have to vote randomly again today as I'm going to be swamped with busyness for the remainder of the week, as I'm needed to moderate for this academic/jeopardy-like tournament area schools are competing in.

So, with my apologies of apalling inactivity and to to the Master Mod. I may be on late may not...

++Lommy

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

To be honest I don't know what sense voting Nerwen made - aren't weirdness and "unproductiveness" much more usual signs of ordoishness than of wolvishness? I think the voting reasons of everybody in the nerwagon (including myself) are silly, but so were mostly the reasons of other votes. I think the biggest dilemma regarding analysing yesterDay is whether we can use the votes as valid anything or not, because a big part of the village was thinking they might as well vote random...

This logic just seems all too suspicious, and rather clever. Lommy's in fact pointing attention to the strange Nerwen votes, which she herself was a part of. It looks like an attempt to be fair and reasonable by drawing suspicion on something she did, in an attempt to exonerate herself from voting Nerwen.

[elronds_daughter]

I concur, Boro. Lommy and Legate are both looking a bit unfriendly to me at the moment... Legate mostly because of the completely fallible logic in trying to reason out why Sally got dead. Those kinds of reverse-psychology leaps are just plain weird. But, I may be reading too much into it. (Especially since Lommy herself pointed out how little sense Legate was making.)

But it's still entirely possible that I'm wrong on both accounts.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

This logic just seems all too suspicious, and rather clever. Lommy's in fact pointing attention to the strange Nerwen votes, which she herself was a part of. It looks like an attempt to be fair and reasonable by drawing suspicion on something she did, in an attempt to exonerate herself from voting Nerwen.

I don't really follow this. There's a bit of a jump - that is, we'd have to jump from "she brings up suspicions that could be used against herself" and then manage to make it to "she must be innocent". I don't think we'd make that jump, and I highly doubt Lommy would expect us to.

Originally Posted by elronds_daughter

Legate mostly because of the completely fallible logic in trying to reason out why Sally got dead. Those kinds of reverse-psychology leaps are just plain weird. But, I may be reading too much into it. (Especially since Lommy herself pointed out how little sense Legate was making.)

And yet, I have a hard time seeing a wolf spend that much time talking about logic he did not use overNight. If he were a wolf, I imagine he'd touch on it, maybe hesitantly point to a possible wolf, but not go into it in quite that much detail.

Examining possible Gifted hints has become almost a habit - and often a helpful one - and someone would probably have done it eventually.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

what seems to me by far the most viable option: the wolves believed what Sally said and decided to kill her so as to avoid killing gifteds (ie avoid the heir's power taking effect) and kind of throwing the ball back to us.

Which makes us have the ball. (Wow what a wonderful speech this is shaping to be! ) I'm inclined to follow Nerwen's lead in what she said before she died: we're facing the same dilemma toDay as we faced yesterDay, so we had better accept the grim situation and start hunting wolves. Otherwise the wolves devour us while we wait them to hit the heir first. On the positive side, I think they can't try to avoid gifteds much longer either because basically all the gifteds become more dangerous for the evil side as the game proceeds.

Hmm, it is a tricky one. How many ordos have we left? (I'll count in a minute.)

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

Just thinking out loud here; please judge the idea critically.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Five ordos left, one of whom is the heir. Surely it won't go back and forth too long.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

It'd be better to lynch the Hunter toDay than yesterDay would have been, certainly - we worry less about the Hunter choosing wrongly.

Technically, the Heir doesn't actually need to ever come in play - in the wolves' minds. With three (three? I think three) Gifteds, if the wolves kill off all the ordos, that's it. We either need to hope the wolves accidentally hit a Gifted overNight, or we lynch a Gifted ourselves. The wolves won't take care of the problem for us, at least not if they can help it.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Loslote

It'd be better to lynch the Hunter toDay than yesterDay would have been, certainly - we worry less about the Hunter choosing wrongly.

Technically, the Heir doesn't actually need to ever come in play - in the wolves' minds. With three (three? I think three) Gifteds, if the wolves kill off all the ordos, that's it. We either need to hope the wolves accidentally hit a Gifted overNight, or we lynch a Gifted ourselves. The wolves won't take care of the problem for us, at least not if they can help it.

Loslote, I am most happy to assume and believe that our wonderful and clever Hunter is going to choose correctly.

I am going to look at Sally's posts as I didn't have the chance to do it earlier. Not that I doubt the analysis of my fellow villagers but it's always good to check the evidence for yourself. A seer hint is still possible.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I will more or less have to vote randomly again today as I'm going to be swamped with busyness for the remainder of the week, as I'm needed to moderate for this academic/jeopardy-like tournament area schools are competing in.

So, with my apologies of apalling inactivity and to to the Master Mod. I may be on late may not...

++Lommy



This logic just seems all too suspicious, and rather clever. Lommy's in fact pointing attention to the strange Nerwen votes, which she herself was a part of. It looks like an attempt to be fair and reasonable by drawing suspicion on something she did, in an attempt to exonerate herself from voting Nerwen.

I don't really follow the line of reasoning here. I thought Lommy was just saying in general that she thought analysing the Day 1 votes would have limited value because most were so ill-reasoned as to seem nearly random. I didn't pick up anything furry there.

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Should we just accept that we have to hunt wolves or should we perhaps think about lynching our Hunter today? It guarantees that the Heir becomes another Hunter, and it takes a shot at killing someone else at the same time. Could be a wolf, could not; but it's the same chance as getting a wolf as our lynching would be, and it gets us the Heir as guaranteed.

I might support this, at this point. In addition to giving the chance of hitting a wolf and putting the Heir on the innocent side, there's something else I hadn't considered before: it would also be the only way we'd have of knowing for certain whether a revealed Gifted was legitimate or not, since obviously only the real Hunter will be able to take someone with him. The Heir replacing any other role leaves a lot of room for doubt as to the alignment of the one killed, unless the wolves Night-kill our first Gifted. If that happened, the most we'd know is that the deceased was innocent.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I might support this, at this point. In addition to giving the chance of hitting a wolf and putting the Heir on the innocent side, there's something else I hadn't considered before: it would also be the only way we'd have of knowing for certain whether a revealed Gifted was legitimate or not, since obviously only the real Hunter will be able to take someone with him. The Heir replacing any other role leaves a lot of room for doubt as to the alignment of the one killed, unless the wolves Night-kill our first Gifted. If that happened, the most we'd know is that the deceased was innocent.

You may be potentially evil, but that's actually a good point.

[Nogrod]

I have only managed to read the rest of yesterDay thus far but I'm going to go back into the thread in a moment. But before that I think I wish to raise a general point about our best interests and some quite suspicious behaviour related to it.

I don't understand why some of you wish to lynch the hunter. If the hunter is lynched s/he will take anyone with her/him. So early on there is a very imminent possibility lynching the hunter will mean losing two goodies with one lynch. If the wolves kill the hunter during the night s/he will not kill an innocent in retaliation but can take a wolf (and we'd gain a new hunter).

So let's hope the wolves get the hunter and not us.

If we need to consider lynching a gifted - which is an option we might face soon enough - I do suggest we go for the ranger (if the ranger is willing to sacrifice her/himself) because s/he is immediately re-installed and the new one can continue in the role.

Obviously the importance of the heir grows every lynching/killing-chance going by. Basically, the later it gets for the heir to jump in, the more decisive that event is.

I'm not sure if we'd need to try that already toDay (needs to do some counting and thinking), but if no wolf or gifted is dead by toMorrow I think we have no choice.

Okay, back to read.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Nah, I reckon Lommy called it. Good kill from the wolves. Nothing progresses.

[Nogrod]

This is plain crazy.

The wolves don't wish to kill the gifteds and we probably should hesitate lynching the wolves... especially if the game goes on for a Day or two. On the contrary, we need to consider lynching a gifted and the wolves probably hope at least in a half-hearted way that we'd get one of them before any gifted is dead...

This makes no sense.


In a way getting over and done with the heir would be most happy thing and we could start a real game. This just frustrates me. I mean really: I don't know whether lynching a wolf toDay is a good thing, I don't know if sacrifying a gifted is a good idea, I don't know how many ordinaries we can afford losing before the game turns into one where the balance of the whole game hangs on a thread of just good/bad luck with one decision either side makes...

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I don't understand why some of you wish to lynch the hunter. If the hunter is lynched s/he will take anyone with her/him. So early on there is a very imminent possibility lynching the hunter will mean losing two goodies with one lynch. If the wolves kill the hunter during the night s/he will not kill an innocent in retaliation but can take a wolf (and we'd gain a new hunter).

So let's hope the wolves get the hunter and not us.

Yes, but it guarantees there will be no additional wolf. It gives us a chance of taking down a wolf today (which is exactly the same as a normal lynch would give). All it really does differently is speed up the process of dead goodies, but with one certain benefit as compensation.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Yes, but it guarantees there will be no additional wolf. It gives us a chance of taking down a wolf today (which is exactly the same as a normal lynch would give). All it really does differently is speed up the process of dead goodies, but with one certain benefit as compensation.

Lynching the ranger does the "compensation" (that we get the heir: the role of the gifted we lynch stays in the game) as well without the risk of losing two innocents.