Game Thread: WW LXXXVI - The Halls of Mandos

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Well, now Mith actually starts talking, so... I wonder. Anyway, I should go to sleep soon - out of the quieter ones, apart from Mith I might possibly go for Nessa, but not sure...

Originally Posted by A Little Green

her idea of a Bobbler

Cuute!!!

Originally Posted by LG

I'm not sure I approve of Nog and phantom advising the Gifted - or the said two (and Ang) also giving advice to the wolves..

Indeed, not sure if I approve of that either... but well, nothing more than that for now and I am simply looking forward to reading more from them in the future that will determine better decipher their intentions...

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Innocents: do not make false revelations!

Sometimes innocents can make false revelations to try to protect someone they think is a gifted - or to some other ends - but in this game that would be foolish. If we could count on no innocents making a false-reveal we could at least narrow down the possibilities with all the influxing revelations that those doing it are either gifteds (and the ones they say they are), cobblers or wolves.

Well, I second the fact that we have enough of confusion possible, but if we look at it purely rationally, apart from what you say, the situation you prefer works also so that people can determine that if somebody is not claiming to be a Gifted, then they are either Ordos, Cobblers or Wolves. Basically it only rules out one possible mistake, and it is, in fact, the most beneficial for the Wolves. This way, the WWs don't have to fear false reveals or such, and it is probably the last piece of puzzle they need (okay, they also need the Cobblers, but it is one more piece of puzzle). But if you make it a rule, then you basically clarify it for the Wolves by drawing a line: here are the Gifteds (and Cobblers) and here are the normal people (and Cobblers). No, I think it should not be a "rule" - but people should simply act reasonably.

Anyway, going to vote and sleep.

EDIT: x-ed with Agan, Greenie and Mith

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Well, now Mith actually starts talking, so... I wonder. Anyway, I should go to sleep soon - out of the quieter ones, apart from Mith I might possibly go for Nessa, but not sure...

Wonder what? That I would somehow anticipate that you would find me suspicious and "start talking" and hour or so before you would claim that I was being quiet? Ludicrous. I have been around because I now have a computer and no job as opposed to a job and no computer. There has just been more going on later as a quick glance at distribition of posts over time would show. This says a lot more about you than me.

[Nessa Telrunya]

I'm positively stumped about who to vote. Everyone seems so ambiguous!

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Alright, after a quick read, the two I find most off are...

Phantom (surprise surprise) and Nogrod. Both seem, to me, to be trying to tell the wolves/cobblers what to do - in Phantom's case, it looks more like a Cobbler talking to the wolves and trusting to his reputation to not get him lynched.

That's what I've got. I'll do a more in-depth readthrough now.

[elronds_daughter]

Hrmmmphh. Seems I've missed a lot so far toDay, though none of it terribly conclusive. Lots of lengthy posts, though...

(As an aside, I probably should have informed everyone that when Days fall on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, I won't be around at all until a few hours from DL...methinks I am trying to cram too much into my last semester of school...)

Anyhow. Most unhappy with not having a very good read on anybody yet.

Legate, Nog, and Agan are of course posting their usual tomes. Lommy seems a little more...confused...than usual. (Though who am I to talk about "usual", this being only my third game ever...) phantom is on my good side at the moment. Despite the incessant chatter (joke), he seems to be thinking things through in a more, erm, down-to-earth fashion than other tome-writers (sorry, Legate and Co.).

Right. Well. Those are my limited observations for the moment. I'll be back in a while to vote. This is going to be a very interesting game....

EDIT: x'ed with Shasta (how did I forget about him???) and Nessa.

[Aganzir]

I approve of Nog and phantom advising the gifteds - at least in the sense that it's typical of them. Yeah the gifteds are usually capable of thinking things through themselves, but saying something just to be on the safe side shouldn't hurt anyone.

At the moment some people seem to be (considering) voting for a quiet player. Is that a good idea? I'd actually rather leave the quieter players alive this time... The more they post, the more trails we have.

Originally Posted by the phantom

if you have an inkling of who the Seer might possibly be and that person dies, you should go ahead and point out your theory (especially if you can discover some sort of coded message or whatnot, I'm not the only person who does that sort of thing, am I?) and then treat future Dead-votes as a vindication of someone, assuming that the Seer is able to properly convince the Dead upon arrival.

That sounds reasonable, I guess (and hehe no you aren't )... But even a few baddies can screw up the voting in Mandos, so we really have no way of being sure. That's the problem with just about every plan. We can of course risk it and agree on a plan of sorts, especially if the lovers and/or Glorfindel is still alive, but I'm skeptical.

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

Excuse me?!

Sorry, still reading, but that caught my eye and now I'm going to have to challenge Manwe to a duel.

I was looking forward to seeing your reaction.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Hey! You of all people don't get to call me nit-picky!

Yes I do. You always find me unclear and ask for a clarification.

[the phantom]

Okay, so, I believe I've heard multiple people talk about baddies messing things up in Dead-Thread. Is it a good idea then to avoid lynching suspected Cobblers? Because really Cobblers are the only Baddies that can do damage over time in Dead-Thread, because identities of Wolves can be checked by the dead. If we do our best to keep Cobblers alive, Goodies will own Dead-Land with total authority.

If the Wolves want to screw things up in Dead-Land, make them flush a kill on a Cobbler.

The obvious drawback is if we adopt this plan and all three Cobblers act Cobblerish and stay alive and, IF we fail to lynch Wolves early on, the Baddies can clinch victory a couple days before they normally could. But really that would assume that every little thing went wrong, yes?

So.... long live the Cobblers?

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Agan

I approve of Nog and phantom advising the gifteds - at least in the sense that it's typical of them.

Heh heh, yes, I sort of like to determine early on in my mind and in the minds of everyone else the way the game should be played and then try and play based upon the assumption that people are playing "correctly". Nothing puts me off my game quicker than a free for all. Ordos- do this. Gifteds- do this. Baddies- do this. Now play. Not that I'm foolish enough to assume that every little thing will go my way, but I do at least like to see the roles and strategies discussed to the point that there seems to be a good amount of agreement on enough things that I am able to have a foundation upon which I can build my guesswork.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Heh heh, yes, I sort of like to determine early on in my mind and in the minds of everyone else the way the game should be played and then try and play based upon the assumption that people are playing "correctly". Nothing puts me off my game quicker than a free for all. Ordos- do this. Gifteds- do this. Baddies- do this. Now play. Not that I'm foolish enough to assume that every little thing will go my way, but I do at least like to see the roles and strategies discussed to the point that there seems to be a good amount of agreement on enough things that I am able to have a foundation upon which I can build my guesswork.

I seem to recalling you mentioning multiple times in different situations that people should take care not to bring ideas to the baddies' attention... and now you're doing precisely that. I call shenanigans.

[the phantom]

Shasta- that only applies to difficult to spot strategies, or ploys that cease to function once voiced. Plans that require the adoption of the village (like my Seer dream pass-along) must be voiced to serve any purpose.

You'll recall that in the past I have quite openly declared certain ploys, and pointed out that doing so would actually make them more effective (for instance, when I was attempting to bait the Wolves into killing me, and went so far as to say so).

(EDIT: Usually when I've been irritated in the past with people talking about strategies, it's specifically because I'm doing something that won't work with too much attention and people are pointing to it for no clear reason.)

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin to tp

I seem to recalling you mentioning multiple times in different situations that people should take care not to bring ideas to the baddies' attention... and now you're doing precisely that. I call shenanigans.

What phantom said. There are different ways of talking about any plans or ways of action. Some actually cancel a bad possibility, some may lure the baddies to adopt it to their own demise, some possibilities the goodies should be generally aware of to their own good...

So should I call your call here shenanigans - or something else?

[Nogrod]

Shasta - first overabundant banter, then being totally wrong... he's a clever man so he can't be just erring here?
Glirdan - only a few early banters...
A Little Green - not too much participation but has posted on substance unlike some others on this list.
elronds_daughter - one post, puzzlingly non-commitant looking at the fact that she actually said something.
Mänwe - one post, one sentence, saying nothing.
Loslote - overdoing the banter...
Nessa - Not so bad Mith let's us understand, if she meant that the wolves don't know whether they killed a gifted, an ordo or a cobbler, but quite minimal contributions to say it minimalistically.
Sally - posted when there was actually discussion going on but only bantered (except suspecting Lottie for bantering with Shasta - why not the other way around?).
Fea one post now, neutralish.

No posts so far, no vote from me on D1
Blind Guardian
Wilwa


In a game where we need to read everything from what others say without a chance to check afterwards for sure, I do think lynching the quieter ones - those not giving up anything - is a better choice. Later on when we have some real feelings / arguments of those who meddle with the game a lot more, or have a chance there will be some info coming from Mandos, then we should start lynching the more in the middle of the things -players.


So my vote is going to someone on the list above.

A cigarette to think about it and then to sleep.


EDIT X'd with a few... heh seemingly also Shasta's vote...

[Mithalwen]

As for the quiet players... there is often a reluctance to lynch the quiet players in the first instance they often get the benefit of the doubt which a wolf might take advantage of. A gifted player might not to want to draw attention to themselves either but they of course wouldn't want to be so inconspicuous that they made themselves a night target for the wolves (a death that would provide no clues to the village). Of course the fact that death isn't quite the end changes the dynamic.

[Nogrod]

I don't want to bring in any old discussions and debates, but I must say Mith looks more like an innocent, because of her response to Legate.

A short list of my feelings before the voting (short on explanations as I don't have time to write any longer analysis).

Innocent:
Aganzir - Good posting, innocent vibes, feels like she's trying to find the answers that are for the benefit of the village.

Innocentish:
the phantom - Generally makes good points a wolf might not wish to make, it's just that a few of them do not let me pick him into category above.
Anguirel - Seems getting the idea of our good and makes posts a wolf-Ang probably wouldn't.
Mith - For her comment on Legate (and for that familiar annoyance against anything I say... if she were a wolf she would be nicer to me ).

Could go either way:
Legate - Seems too happy to jump on some things I do disagree, but on the other hand hasn't said or done anything really suspicious.
Lommy - Basically seems to have the hang of it but has the air of avoiding things or, well, what some others have said, over-stating things. Smething says I should not trust her but on the other hand I find nothing clear-cut wrong.
Nerwen - Like someone said before: both clearly up to the situation but still mainly just bantering (was online only relatively early on the Day so that might be understandable).

Slightly worried:
Boro - the way he jumps on someone (yes, me) trying to turn the discussion on a more fruitful ground by saying it's "spinning things for my purposes" (so you should read they are bad) and after being questioned about that by some others, changing his point into me being a pessimist (which wasn't the point of my message) and thus suspicious? Odd, from him.


Of others I have not much to say. But will probably vote for one of them others.

Everyone from the classes I've done here will probably be readable in a way or another.

In a few minutes something. Then vote. Then to bed.


EDIT: X'd from Mith onwards.