Tol-in-Guarhoth CIX - Ten Year Anniversary Game: Dead Thread

[Aganzir]

Yeah, I'm not going to empower either unless they vote for somebody super suspicious. If we're going to give the village false information though, it had better be about somebody being innocent even if we haven't checked them - especially if a lover will come round shortly to clear it up.

Let's hope if they give us an option for not communicating information.

I'm not sure what to think of Firefoot's suggestion in the first place. Could be she's an innocent who hasn't thought through the fact that we may be suspicious of the people we are supposed to vote for, or it could be a wolfish ploy to empower votes against a non-fellow. That would require a lot of planning though, especially if she took the names pretty much in the same order as they're on the player list.

[the phantom]

Don't have time to more than skim at the moment. Has anyone living or dead pointed out yet that (as I mentioned much earlier) Sally dropped a Lover hint in her very first post of the game and directed it at Nilp?

How likely do you think it is that she put down a false hint on purpose hoping she could get the packs to attack the wrong person? But of course it wouldn't take them long to figure that out, particularly if one of the packs includes Nilp.

Anyway, rather busy at the moment...

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Don't have time to more than skim at the moment. Has anyone living or dead pointed out yet that (as I mentioned much earlier) Sally dropped a Lover hint in her very first post of the game and directed it at Nilp?

Not sure. It could be a hint, but it could also be just sally and Nilp's mutual history. I doubt she'd leave an actual hint when she knew the rules and knew they'd have to keep quiet if they were to fill their role.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

Not sure. It could be a hint, but it could also be just sally and Nilp's mutual history. I doubt she'd leave an actual hint when she knew the rules and knew they'd have to keep quiet if they were to fill their role.

Do they have any mutual history?

...in-game, I mean. Given that Nilp hasn't been playing for ages and sally was one of the "newer" generation of players (she joined after me, and I joined ages after Nilp had already disappeared from most games - he played a couple of times since then, though, in some bigger ones, I guess).

Anyway, I think the idea of going with Firefoot's list might not be that bad. Of course unless the person in question votes somebody totally off and we don't want to empower that kind of behavior.

[Aganzir]

Well, given that sally and I started werewolfing around the same time, I've played with Nilp more than once, and sally has played in more games than me, I'm quite sure they have a mutual history.

In any case, let's see what Nerwen says and who Nilp and Shasta vote for before doing anything. And sadly as we don't know your role, Legate, we can't have absolute trust in your honest intentions regarding this vote.

Conclusion: you should just listen to Greenie and me.

[Rikae]

Empowering Shasta or Nilp doesn't mean we trust Shasta or Nilp.

I hope the living abide by the plan of getting their voting out of the way early, so we know how/whether we're influencing the lynch, but unless someone up there decides to change the signals, I will vote for either Nilp or Shasta.

Barring some scenario where, oh, doing so would lynch the seer.

After all, it's not like we have much more information than the living do, at this point. Giving our vote to someone simply because we trust them, and thereby giving false information, when we don't know when/whether anyone is going to visit and straighten things out? No, I won't condone that.

So, Nilp or Shasta it is - and which, for me, depends on how they vote.

I'd actually suggest that those who leave early split their votes between the two, so that the USA can heroically vote at DL having seen Nilp's and Shasta's votes first, but of course that requires ya'all to trust us Americans when we could, after all, all be wolves. It's up to you.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Okay, I have to go and it's possible I won't be able to get back online later, so I guess I can't sit on this any longer. I said I had a particular reason for wanting to hear everyone's opinion's of everyone else, and here it is:

I received a pm telling me that the Seer had dreamed two wolves, Macalaure and Lottie.

It was *not* explained to me why I was being sent this interesting communication, nor can I find anything about it in the rules. Maybe this is a once-off thing (on the Seer's death?), or maybe a different person has been sent dreams each Night. Maybe the Dead are involved, or the mystery role. I honestly have no idea.

I realise I have no way of backing any of this up, and am asking you all to take my word for it, but I do think there's decent circumstantial evidence against both Lottie and Mac.

Wooooooow what's this

[Macalaure]

I thought Firefoot just made up her assignments as an example.

It's way too early. It has to be done near the end, when at least almost all the votes are cast. What if Shasta and Nilp decide to vote for the same person?

[Nogrod]

Only catching up - and I can see things are happening - but just can't resist poking at this one more time...

Originally Posted by Aganzir

Let's hope if they give us an option for not communicating information.

*Ahem* Without this grandiose plan someone suggested and many supported there wouldn't be this problem. We could have just said: nonsense plan, let's forget it - and had it much easier now.

On the contrary I got lynched on D1 for saying that aloud and we're in this mess with how the village will interpret anything we do.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

*Ahem* Without this grandiose plan someone suggested and many supported there wouldn't be this problem. We could have just said: nonsense plan, let's forget it - and had it much easier now.

And had absolutely no way to communicate to the living that Greenie was innocent, which could be crucial information (look at how people there are assuming she was a wolf and Legate - who may well be a wolf - was the seer!)

And what do we lose now? Most likely the living will overwhelmingly vote for Lottie. Our empowered vote won't have any impact on that, nor do we have any special knowledge about the living to convey. At least this way, we can accomplish something.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Rikae

And had absolutely no way to communicate to the living that Greenie was innocent, which could be crucial information (look at how people there are assuming she was a wolf and Legate - who may well be a wolf - was the seer!)

Yeah, I hope they will drop it - that's why I just mentioned Mith, because she seemed to notice some things that don't make sense if I was the Seer. But I think it's fine, because at least they do not seem to base their votes on my lists. (Maybe good I didn't list anyone except Greenie in the red zone.)

And what do we lose now? Most likely the living will overwhelmingly vote for Lottie. Our empowered vote won't have any impact on that, nor do we have any special knowledge about the living to convey. At least this way, we can accomplish something.

Totally. One thing we should keep in mind: however much fun we are having here, and even if we discover the roles of everyone, it is the Living that matters. Once there are, say, 3 wolves and 3 villagers left, even if we know the roles of everybody on this thread, it's not worth anything to the village. So there. (And as for voting Lottie, that seems just like what they are doing... so far.)

[the phantom]

Not able to keep up with things this afternoon. Has anyone other than Firefoot attempted to update/refine her Dead communication post earlier? (The one that had us giving our vote to Nilp or Shasta to signal Green innocent.)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Not able to keep up with things this afternoon. Has anyone other than Firefoot attempted to update/refine her Dead communication post earlier? (The one that had us giving our vote to Nilp or Shasta to signal Green innocent.)

I think not.