Tol-in-Gaurhoth XXVI - Úcenite Valto

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Ang

I notice Nogrod is no longer entirely saintly in the phantom's view. Care to tell, o phantom, why you were previously so sure that you warned Mith off him?

I'm not sure if he went down in my eyes- I just sort of reshuffled my list a bit and made it more difficult to break into my top top category. But like I said before, every time I reread I want to nudge everyone slightly one way or the other from where I had them before.

Later today I promise I'll try to go over at least two or three people's posts and firmly categorize them. Nogrod will be one of them, just for you.

Originally Posted by Ang

We have a great advantage in numbers as it stands, and even if we bag another wolf today that will not, I understand, free us from the Dark Deary's sport. So I'm tempted to relax and revert to a bit of grudge-fulfillment. I can't really be bothered to wolf-hunt when it leads not to victory, Silmarils and luthien, but to a Beckettian anti-climax.

I'm not sure what to think. If Fea will indeed allow this village to continue forever, then all I'm going to do is just lynch everyone in order of my suspicions until only myself and Ang remain.

And SPM- you've been continuing on today with your "wolf-guns-for-wolf" idea. It's really getting distracting to me. Yesterday you said this-

My dear Elempi, your theory is perfectly plausible. Except for one thing. If the phantom and I were both Wolves, and had identified each other as such, then there is no way that either one of us would wish to see the other outlast him, bragging rights or no bragging rights.

Don't assume things like that. Maybe you would be a disloyal go-it-alone WW, but I would not be. Not ever.

Under normal game format (WWs know each other, Seer, Ranger, etc) the only time I sacrifice a WW is if the Seer appears to have spotted him/her.

In this format, where you can't expect anyone to know anything and the WWs don't know each other, I would never at any point feel that I had to try and kill my fellow WW.

For a WW in this village the scenarios from best to worst are-
1) WW win, both WWs survive
2) WW win, only survives himself
3) WW win, only partner survives
4) Villager win, both WWs killed

Why would I want to take my #1 and #3 options out of play purposefully? That's silly.

If you truly honestly believe that WWs should gun for each other or that you would gun for your brother/sister WW if you were one, then you just have much less of a team attitude than me.

This is why I'm a little more suspicious of you today, SPM. Frankly, I can't grasp how anyone could ever think that a WW would kill its partner purposefully when that would decrease the chances of winning by 50%. That's stupid. I'm wondering if you in fact don't agree with me but you are trying your best to enforce this silly notion on us in order to mislead us.

Please explain yourself.