Tol-in-Gaurhoth CIII: Big Magic in Middle Earth Arcane Encampment (Game Thread)

[Loslote]

Time to get down to business.

I feel pretty good about Cop just now. I'm a bit shaky on Greenie, but thus far leaning innocent. Her 'honest answer' specifically feels innocentish. Plus, her Rule-o'-Three squabble with Legate definitely seems like something two innocents would do rather than an innocent and a wolf. Maybe two wolves, but that'd be bold. I'm inclined to think them both innocent just now, with maybe a hesitant question mark tacked onto the end of that statement. Lommy strikes me as a little less innocent, but nothing that shoves her into 'terrifying sorcerer' territory just yet.

I have no read whatsoever on Zil, Kath or Nerwen. That's where I'll be focusing my attention now, but I do have lab work to get done (and a lab class to go to) so depending on how dense Galileo turns out to be, I might be a bit quiet toDay.

[Holbytlass]

how 'bout voting for these confusing debaters of the "rule of three"-too bad we cant "lynch of three"


highly suspect
Shasta
Nerwen
Green
Boro
Steve

very suspect
Kath
Dun
Cop

much suspect
Lottie
Echo
Legate
Lommy

innocent
McCobbler


it should be plainly obvious my reasonings!!

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Legate

What? No! I was saying actually the exact opposite. I was saying that it is not a rule, of of course (look at the very first sentence I said!), and cannot be treated as such (I mean, who would be so stupid to think that? Obviously, if all the Wolves are living in some faraway timezone and are still sleeping or something, then of course they won't be posting!). But I was mostly explaining and then using my experience to point out that actually WWs might very often post among the first people, and giving reasons why they might do it if they are around. Probability, that's all. And I said even nothing about first three, I was speaking about "first posters" in general (indefinite number). Simply, that it is likely there have been at least some Wolves posting up to now, and that I think (emphasis on that I only think) that Wolves tend to post early, if they are around (if they are "being sporty" and feeling the moral obligation to speak). That's all.

But still you're advocating it all the time.

Originally Posted by Kath

Legate does not say that, but says that sometimes a bold wolf may be an early poster. Therefore one of the first three posters may be a wolf but it does not necessarily hold that they are a wolf. At least that's how I read what he is saying.

Well that's quite a useless thing to say, it' the same as saying one of the ones who haven't posted this far might be a wolf because there's a possibility a quiet wolf might not post early.

This far: Copper and Legate seem a little fishy and Nerwen a little off, while Zil and Greenie give me fairly good vibes, but I don't really have a strong opinion on anyone.

[Kath]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Well that's quite a useless thing to say, it' the same as saying one of the ones who haven't posted this far might be a wolf because there's a possibility a quiet wolf might not post early.

Well that's rather my point. It was a nothingy statement, so why has it dragged up all this suspicion?

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Kath

Well that's rather my point. It was a nothingy statement, so why has it dragged up all this suspicion?

Because it doesn't make any sense to say it! It's the same as if I posted "bananas are yellow". Why would I do that? Except to maybe appear like I was saying something while I wasn't?

[Kath]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Because it doesn't make any sense to say it! It's the same as if I posted "bananas are yellow". Why would I do that? Except to maybe appear like I was saying something while I wasn't?

Because it's Day 1? And no one has anything really worthwhile to say. If you were Nilp you'd leap on and self-vote, if you were Fea you'd appear and claim you were the wolf/cobbler/lover/Saruman. Legate often posts a flipping book so is it any wonder that sometimes parts of it are somewhat nothingy?

I just thought a mountain had been made out of a molehill. And it was a very small molehill to start with.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Kath

Because it's Day 1? And no one has anything really worthwhile to say. If you were Nilp you'd leap on and self-vote, if you were Fea you'd appear and claim you were the wolf/cobbler/lover/Saruman. Legate often posts a flipping book so is it any wonder that sometimes parts of it are somewhat nothingy?

That's true, but the fact that he always does that doesn't make it any less silly or fishy.

[Kath]

Alright, away from arguing with Lommy (however fun it is!). Onto some of these here other players.

Dun:
Here is an interesting sentence: And all must remember to use them in this case. Let us hope all come to their senses.

This in response to Cop saying: I am sure we have various spells and potions available to turn us invisible. Of course, we must bear in mind that the traitors in our midst have these means available to them as well...

So is Inzil hinting to his fellows that someone needs to get out of bed? Could perhaps be that there is a player he fears may not be around when they should be!

I guess he may also look to suspect anyone who votes for Legate, Lommy or myself as he wondered whether the 'rule of three' debate would lead to votes based around that. They wouldn't exactly be using the rule as a reason but it would have led through.

Nerwen:
Says we are likely to have four bad guys, then only lists three 'suspects'. Yes, yes I know it is all under this 'rule of three' silliness but hey, perhaps she knew full well there would only be three but hoped, as someone else mentioned, that seeming unsure of the number of wolves would suggest she was innocent.

Cop:
Not totally sure about this seeming in-game banter: We must attempt to locate the one who is possessed and those whose minds have been taken by Saruman, but what will we do to them when we catch them, and how many of them are in our midst? ...No, this is not the time. <-- It just seems a bit forced.

I do think she is overzealous in assuming there must already be a wolf in the first 8 posters given how many people there were still left to post. Even if more had posted than hadn't it doesn't mean a wolf MUST have posted yet.

Just read the epic post. I think this is pretty fair actually. I only wish there was some kind of summing up at the end so we knew more decisively who she holds to be potential wolves. While there is less ummming and aaahing in the post than many who make these lists posts obviously there are sections without much of a clear decision.

Lottie:
Plus, her Rule-o'-Three squabble with Legate definitely seems like something two innocents would do rather than an innocent and a wolf. Maybe two wolves, but that'd be bold. I'm inclined to think them both innocent just now, with maybe a hesitant question mark tacked onto the end of that statement.
Refusal to make a statement alert! But actually I more wanted to point this out to show that Lottie said she thought any squabble here would not be wolf on wolf - just so we remember it in later Days.

Will focus attention on Zil, me and Nerwen.

Greenie:
I already said I don't think Legate did flip flop within his post but that obviously is in the back of my mind about Greenie.

Little from her so far but then we have been hogging the laptops.

Legate:
Enough said here I think. I didn't think anything of the 'rule of three' discussion that has taken up most of my thought about him. I did check to make sure that in the intervening crossfire he had actually answered Cop's original question about what 'message' he had seen.

Nothing struck me weird on Lottie, if so, then rather about Cop. The flip-floppy chitter-chatter, especially if any of the other ones is also a Wolf (namely, Zil), because it doesn't sound like totally useless banter, but sounds like it might have a purpose (to seem like it's banter, while talking about Wolves, or even if there were two of them, then to seem like banter while talking about packmates).
Lommy. <-- The statement in question. Bolding mine because this is his answer to Cop asking 'what message?'.

Nope, I said nothing about wolf-to-wolf messages.

Which I would say is not entirely true, given the bit in bold.


Obviously we haven't yet seen anything from Shasta (bar turning up!), Eonwe, Boro, McCaber so ignoring them.

Echo is a pass for me toDay unless he pops up and shouts: I am a wolf!
(Just noticed his post - should I amend this to: or votes for me! )

Holby IS a pass, but a reluctant one. I want her to explain that list.


Now I am going to post this, look at what I have written, then draw my ideas down and vote.

[Kath]

Argh and I have somehow Lommy, which is ridiculous given how much we have spoken all Day! In all our debating I have not felt that she is particularly guilty, nor that she has any major vendetta against Legate.

So:

Ignoring:
Shasta
Eonwe
Boro
McCaber
Echo
Holby

Largely innocent:
Cop
Lottie
Lommy

Perhaps guilty:
Inzil ~ but more in a 'look out for him on future Days' way. I'm not sure there is anything that suspicious yet but I would want to check back with how he follows on from toDay.
Legate ~ well I would like to see his reply to what I mentioned in the other post.
Nerwen ~ it is pretty tenuous but it's something.
Greenie ~ largely from the debate we had earlier.

Vote in the next post, I want to check for any cross posting first.

[Eönwë]

Ok, I'm here now.

With all the talk on the admin thread, I did not expect the game to start so soon, so today has been a bit difficult time-wise, and I only managed to get a few glimpses at the thread until now. Will post thoughts in a bit.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Legate

I am not advocating it and never was. Read my posts! And "all the time" is certainly overdoing it, because I mentioned it like once and then once answered to you, that's all (where I spoke about it only because you did). So I don't know what you are calling "all the time".

Both times you mentioned it, you basically said the theory has some credit to it. And like I said in my previous post, it's a really useless thing to start talking about in the first place.

PS. Holby and Echo, I made an explanatory post about the nicknames on the admin thread, check it out here if you're confused.

[Coppermirror]

Overall Impressions (ranked)

Not worried about
n/a

Feeling neutral about
Inzil
Kath

Slightly suspicious of
Lottie
Lommy
Greenie
Nerwen
Holby ("confused about" might be more apt)

Middlingly suspicious of
Legate
Echo - I'm worried about the reasoning for their vote.

Red hot worry
McCaber
Boro
Eonwe
Shasta

Originally Posted by Inziladun

If the Lovers are capable of winning independently of either the village or the baddies, they are a risk to both sides potentially.

I can't see anything in the admin post which suggests winning conditions for them, only that the day after they reunite there'll be no sorcerer kill. So the effect's like a perfect one-time ranger. It's a minus for the sorcerers and a plus for the village, so perhaps they're aligned to the village. I suppose there's no real way of knowing right now.

Edit: crossed since Lommy at #51

[Coppermirror]

Am I correct in assuming that there are three hours until the deadline? I'm really not confident when it comes to time zones.

Edit: cross-posted with Boro

[Coppermirror]

Vote tally so far

Kath -> Nerwen
Echo-> Kath
Lommy -> Legate

[Echo]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Because it doesn't make any sense to say it! It's the same as if I posted "bananas are yellow". Why would I do that? Except to maybe appear like I was saying something while I wasn't?

This is quite a good point, kath is suspicious with all the nonsense chatter and trying to point out that she's "innocent
". She doesn't sit right with me.
++ KATH

[A Little Green]

Echo, you should bold your vote for it to be valid!

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Echo

This is quite a good point, kath is suspicious with all the nonsense chatter and trying to point out that she's "innocent
". She doesn't sit right with me.
++ KATH

...? I was talking about Legate in that quote, not Kath!

[Kath]

Holby, I mean this in the politest way, but - what the heck?

A list post is useful in terms of seeing where your loyalties lie in future Days but with zero additional information it is really fairly unhelpful right now! You said you want to lynch people discussing 'the rule of three' but that isn't so many people and not all of them can be evil anyway, so having everyone down as suspicious with no explanation isn't great.

it should be plainly obvious my reasonings!!
Then share them!

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Good question, maybe that is something the Mod could answer as well. Because otherwise the fact that there is a Saruman is not really of much relevance to us, or, as in, we can't do anything about it. Well, if we learned about that, we'd simply lynch him anyway, but just for the sake of knowing... But let's not get tangled into this.

I'm also curious as to whether it will be clear when/if he does meet his demise, that Saruman is gone.

Originally Posted by Holbytlass

how 'bout voting for these confusing debaters of the "rule of three"-too bad we cant "lynch of three"


highly suspect
Shasta
Nerwen
Green
Boro
Steve

very suspect
Kath
Dun
Cop

much suspect
Lottie
Echo
Legate
Lommy

innocent
McCobbler


it should be plainly obvious my reasonings!!

Not to me, though, not to belabor the point, I've never played with you before and have no idea of the "way you roll".

x/d with Lommy and Kath

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Kath

Greenie though, I don't think that Legate is being problematic with his explanation of the Rule of Three. That 'rule' suggests that one of the first three posters must be a wolf. Legate does not say that, but says that sometimes a bold wolf may be an early poster. Therefore one of the first three posters may be a wolf but it does not necessarily hold that they are a wolf. At least that's how I read what he is saying.

Yes, practically that is what I was saying.

Originally Posted by Loslote

Time to get down to business.

I feel pretty good about Cop just now. I'm a bit shaky on Greenie, but thus far leaning innocent. Her 'honest answer' specifically feels innocentish. Plus, her Rule-o'-Three squabble with Legate definitely seems like something two innocents would do rather than an innocent and a wolf. Maybe two wolves, but that'd be bold. I'm inclined to think them both innocent just now, with maybe a hesitant question mark tacked onto the end of that statement. Lommy strikes me as a little less innocent, but nothing that shoves her into 'terrifying sorcerer' territory just yet.

I have no read whatsoever on Zil, Kath or Nerwen. That's where I'll be focusing my attention now, but I do have lab work to get done (and a lab class to go to) so depending on how dense Galileo turns out to be, I might be a bit quiet toDay.

Hmm... for some reason, this made me a bit uncertain about Lottie, since she is practically avoiding going after those who are "in the heat" and focusing on other people, not that there is anything wrong with that per se, but I assume a Wolf might be happy to suspect people who are not in the center of attention, so that if later e.g. an innocent is lynched, the Wolf can be like "I didn't take part in this...".

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

But still you're advocating it all the time.

I am not advocating it and never was. Read my posts! And "all the time" is certainly overdoing it, because I mentioned it like once and then once answered to you, that's all (where I spoke about it only because you did). So I don't know what you are calling "all the time".

Originally Posted by Kath

Then share them!

Seconded...

By the way: Kath is being almost suspiciously nice (see the first quote I used in my post, she is "moderating" the misunderstanding between me and Lommy) and asking very logical questions. Not that I have anything against it, mind you, far from it, but it just makes me incredibly paranoid when somebody is behaving in obviously too goodie and useful way without any conflict (especially if it's related to me, that makes me go incredibly paranoid).

I'll see if I am crossposting with anyone, then I'll still possibly appear (especially if I did crosspost).

EDIT: x-posted with Kath and Lommy

[Echo]

Holbytlass;685687]how 'bout voting for these confusing debaters of the "rule of three"-too bad we cant "lynch of three"


highly suspect
Shasta
Nerwen
Green <--------- double vowels
Boro
Steve

very suspect
Kath
Dun <--------one syllable
Cop

much suspect
Lottie
Echo <--------double syllables
Legate
Lommy

innocent
McCobbler <-----dosent fit in any of the above.

it was supost to be a joke,.... but shes posting vague things just so she cant seem suspicious or slip up.

[Echo]

perhaps you might think my last post gives her justice that shes innocent? but i was observant enough to figure out her list. though dose not explain why she wouldnt just tell us about the list or perhaps i am wrong?....