WW LXXIX: Fall From Olympus

[Rikae]

Foley, Day 1 can be very useful. That doesn't mean it has to be deadly serious at all times. Even joking can sometimes be useful; or, at least, anything that gets people talking - the more talk, the better, I say.

Originally Posted by ModGod

If the name I pick out is of an innocent (or Cobbler) that person will come back to life ALONG WITH Poseidon. If a Wolf or the False Seer is chosen, no one comes back.

Hm - this means that when Poseidon comes back, another role will be revealed. One way of finding the false seer/a wolf, then.

So, why exactly are we debating over/voting on what the winning conditions for a surviving lover are? Isn't that for Glirdan to say?

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Rikae

So, why exactly are we debating over/voting on what the winning conditions for a surviving lover are? Isn't that for Glirdan to say?

Because it will almost certainly affect their gameplay. An innocent lover will try to defend xyr wolf lover, and therefore will be helping the wolf side. A lover win is a wolf win as well, at least as far as the village is concerned.

Of course, this means that there'll be lots of innocents who'll look like they might be wolves trying to save their packmates, which means that the least complex downside for the village (Or rather, settlement on Olympus) will be that some of them could be mistaken for wolves. It could also distract us from the actual wolves, and even worse could mean that the wolves (I'm thinking Ares or any wolf with a dead lover) could make it seem as if they were Lovers (and obviously, Lovers can't reveal).

So basically, I think we should treat anyone who defends/otherwise tries to save a wolf from lynching with as much suspicion as usual, because while xe could be a now-on-our side harmless ordo, xe could also be a wolf.


edit: x-ed with 2 Nogs and 2 phantoms

[Rikae]

Eönwë, be that as it may, it's still for the mod, not us, to say. It is a bit confusing, since an innocent whose wolf-lover is killed gets special abilities and so, presumably, has some goal toward which to use them, but we don't know what that goal is. I think we need modly clarification. on that.
We can speculate all we want about what they would do in that situation, but it doesn't mean much.

[Rikae]

Glirdan

has answered on the admin thread. Lovers can win with the WWs, and after a WW-lover dies the remaining lover sides with the village.

Which means there's really no point in debating over it.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Nog

And maybe s/he can figure it out already her/himself early in the game and come open about it?

A good thought, but I'm not so certain that we want the false Seer to reveal, as that would help the baddies narrow down who they should night-kill.

Plus, don't forget that the Wolves can dream too! Hera and Hephaestus both can dream if their lover is killed under the right circumstances, and what if they dream of the Seer, eh? If the false Seer has already revealed, they'll know that's the real one. But if the false Seer hasn't revealed, they may use their dream on him.

And of course they'll probably kill the Seer anyway, not knowing for certain if it's the real one, but still- at least we forced them to flush their dream on the false Seer, right? I see no reason to help the WWs make accurate night choices.

Originally Posted by Rikae

it's still for the mod, not us, to say

Glirdan has answered on the admin thread. Lovers can win with the WWs, and after a WW-lover dies the remaining lover sides with the village.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by the phantom

A good thought, but I'm not so certain that we want the false Seer to reveal, as that would help the baddies narrow down who they should night-kill.

What's worse: the baddies being able to eliminate one person from the potential-seer list, or the village being led astray by a false seer?

If the false seer is killed, the role won't be revealed in the narration, right? So even if the wolves kill the false seer after dreaming of xem, the village may be left following false hints.

[the phantom]

I can see what you are saying, Rikae, but in my point answering Nog we were working with the assumption that the false Seer knew he was false, and thus I trust he would not leave us following false hints, but rather would somehow leave behind an indication of the fact that he cannot be trusted.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by the phantom

I can see what you are saying, Rikae, but in my point answering Nog we were working with the assumption that the false Seer knew he was false, and thus I trust he would not leave us following false hints, but rather would somehow leave behind an indication of the fact that he cannot be trusted.

I'm sure it would take the false seer a while to discover this, though, and in the meantime, any sensible seer would leave a trail.

[Rikae]

As for lovers trying to save wolves, and wolves using the possibility as cover, sure; among any of a number of other reasons someone might try to save a wolf: a false seer who has dreamed them as innocent, for instance; the wolf is a cursed who was dreamed of as innocent by the real seer; an (effective) ordo thinks they've spotted a sure sign of innocence in the wolf; whatever. Even in an ordinary game, there are multiple reasons this might happen, and in this game, even more.
Plus, I was asking about the Romeo & Juliet business above concerning lovers after the death of their partner - which is moot, even more so than I realized, and it seems the same person who was debating over it knew it was moot all along - and which has nothing to do with what you just brought up. Where did this come from?

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Rikae

Plus, I was asking about the Romeo & Juliet business above concerning lovers after the death of their partner - which is moot, even more so than I realized, and it seems the same person who was debating over it knew it was moot all along - and which has nothing to do with what you just brought up. Where did this come from?

My R&J thing was in answer to Nerwen, and she made her comments (and I gave my answers) before there was Mod clarification. You may say there was no point in anyone but the Mod answering, but what if the Mod had left alignment to be a choice to surviving lovers? Given that possibility I thought that it was in our best interest to attempt to establish a "proper" way of behaving that would benefit the village (i.e. to establish that lovers should help the village after losing their mates).

So no, the point was not known to be moot. It had the possibility of being important. But once the point was made crystal clear by the Mod the discussion was over.

Originally Posted by Rikae

I'm sure it would take the false seer a while to discover this, though, and in the meantime, any sensible seer would leave a trail.

Do you really think a village would be stupid enough to start at the beginning of the Seer trail and follow it to a lynch without first checking the end of the trail for signs that the Seer knew he was false?

Again- Nog and I were discussing a Seer who knew he was false. That fact completely negates (or should anyway) the idea of following their words to disaster.

[Rikae]

I didn't check when Glirdan answered on the admin thread, I admit. As for trying to establish a proper way of the lovers for behaving, that's what I thought you were doing, and didn't believe in it. But there's no point in getting into that now. Clearly you have a stronger belief in your powers of persuasion than I do.

Originally Posted by Phantom

Do you really think a village would be stupid enough to start at the beginning of the Seer trail and follow it to a lynch without first checking the end of the trail for signs that the Seer knew he was false?

Well, I consider it entirely possible that I might miss or misinterpret a false seer's attempt to hint at being false amid hints at xyr dreams. Most seer hints I've seen were far from explicit and clear. Perhaps that's because I'm stupid, though. I cheerfully admit it: I'm a blithering idiot.

EDIT: X'd with Mac.

[Folwren]

Just I a hunch I got - my guess right now is that Kath and Nogrod, at least, are not among the pairs of lovers. If either of them are a lover, they are one of the wolves...but I can't say I think that much yet. I just think they're not one of the 'innocent' lovers, so to speak.

My reasoning? It's vague, but here it is, as best as I can express it in words. Kath brought up the question of innocent lovers, and Nogrod kept it up with more questioning of his own. I kind of figure (and I could be wrong), that someone who was a lover would know his or her role quite well, and if they didn't, would PM the mod about it instead of discussing it here. Others have spoken more firmly about what the lovers' roles are (Eonwe, for instance, the Phantom, etc.) Still others who are really lovers may have remained silent altogether.

Who has left to say anything toDay?

I will have to vote early every day. I don't know how early or anything, but it will be early, as deadline is about 1 a.m., I think...?

And all this seer stuff is way confusing. I didn't know seers revealed themsevles. I guess things 'ave changed since I last played.

Edit: Cross posted with Phantom and 2 Rikae's.

[Macalaure]

I had to study the roles again before I could post. So many baddies and gifteds - the good thing is that each players special abilities are less important compared to the total number of special abilities. I mean, the shirrifs, for example, are almost the same as ordos in this game. With all these roles, the problem which arises is that everybody has something to hide. Usually, the majority of players are ordos, and if somebody looks like they're hiding something, you can focus on them and try to figure out whether they're gifted or a wolf. In this setting, the wolves are able to hide extremely well. I'm tempted to go for passive ones on Day1.

There's too much talk about the lovers. They have to be loyal to their wolves (once they know them), then they're back on the village's side once the wolf is dead. While the innocent lovers can be useful, they can also be problematic, so lynching them isn't that bad. However, children, with all the lover talk, don't forget that lynching a wolf is still much, much better!
That's all there is to say, so let's move on.

There's also too much talk about the false seer. The seers have to figure out for themselves which is the real one. Once the false one knows who he is, he can still be helpful by trying to find the real one, otherwise he can consider himself to be an ordo. He might reveal himself so the real seer knows he's real, especially since his life isn't worth very much anymore. As for revealing seers who are real (or think so), it will be difficult to tell the false seer from a bluffing baddie, but otherwise it's the same as always: Seers have to kept alive at all cost. Better risk being accidentally misled by a false than lightly risking the real seer.


Wilwa's remark on Boro's "almighty Zeus" is a good one. It doesn't make sense, but it's definitely deliberate and not a slip. My bet would be a lover leaving a hint for their mate, except that that doesn't really make sense either.

You could make a similar case for Nerwen's "what the Hades is going on". If I were Persephone, I'd know who to pick first now.

Originally Posted by Folwren

I suggest that we NOT lynch Phantom, as he has not said anything remarkably ridiculous this game.

Yet, Yet! Let's try to preempt it this time.

Originally Posted by Folwren

I didn't know seers revealed themsevles.

Seers in serious danger of getting lynched often do, hoping the ranger will protect them one Night and they can be sure to have one more dream. Sometime seers that think they have enough knowledge do, too, so they don't have to fear being Night-killed and losing their knowledge to the village.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Wilwa's remark on Boro's "almighty Zeus" is a good one. It doesn't make sense, but it's definitely deliberate and not a slip. My bet would be a lover leaving a hint for their mate, except that that doesn't really make sense either.

Looking back on it, I see what you mean. He mentions "great Zeus" and then "almighty Zeus", so there probably is some hidden meaning.

I think Dionysus may have poisoned me (I feel quite sick), so I'm probably only going to be back near the end of the Day.

[Nienna]

Hello, children. I'm here and will probably need to vote a bit early so I don't fall asleep at work tomorrow. Some thoughts that I've had so far:

I often find that ignoring the phantom helps my sanity.

Thanks Wilwa! You're fabulous.

I agree with Nog that the False Seer should want to help us just as much as the real seer. After all they think they could be the real seer. Generally the only time a Seer reveals is after they have dreamed of a wolf or if they are going to be lynched and I think this is important to stick with. We don't want lots of random seer claims going on (and just think if a wolf false-reveals! ) to just add chaos to this already potentially chaotic situation.

That's all I've got for now. I'll pop in with any other thoughts I have.

Edit: x-ed with Rikae and Phantom