Game Thread: WW LXXXVI - The Halls of Mandos

[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.)

[the phantom]

Okay, so, the approach-

Would everyone agree that our chances of victory are extremely high if we simply-
1) Own the Dead-Thread.
2) Keep Lovers & Glorfy alive early on.

If so, then everything we do should be based upon aiding one or both of those points.

Originally Posted by Fea

So yeah, I don't know if I should go all Nilp on y'all and find out what all the Dead Thread's good for, or if I should actually try to stay alive.

Ha ha, I actually thought of Nilp earlier, and how this situation was perfect for him to claim the right to blaze the trail into the Dead-Thread.

Oh, and I am going to blame that earlier error on the fact that I was actually eating a roll at the time. Too funny.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Fea

Problem. The wolves could just act cobbler-ish.

Yes, well, I sort of wondered if it would be worth it to let them go ahead and do it, and if part way through the game we appear to have six Cobblers in the Living thread we just off them all.

But of course a Gifted could use that as cover too, naturally. In the end it would depend upon the Seer nabbing one of the Wolves and using affiliations and such from the known Wolf to point to the others (particularly if they are Cobbler-acting), seeing as Cobbler-Wolf links are going to be rather difficult to forge (or at least we hope so).

Meh... but that's a lot of supposing and might-happen nonsense... Perhaps there is no correct answer on the Cobblers (dead or alive)? Just sit back and hope that they are Night-killed rather than lynched, and do whatever possible to contribute to that.

[the phantom]

Voting-

Lommy ++ Manwe
Legate ++ Nessa
Green ++ Lommy
Shasta ++ Nog

[Nogrod]

Good to see Glirdan back again. Not voting him now.

From the last list of mine I could vote

for pure annoyance of not playing:
Mänwe

for evading any commitment to any view:
Sally
Elron

for the above + overdoing the banter:
Lottie

But the problem is they are more or less all the "usual suspects" and as such they are shots in the dark.

I'd like to vote for Shasta as he gives me bad vibes right now, but I'd hate to vote from grounds that are at least in part arising from feeling of receiving an evil intended vote.

[Nogrod]

Okay.

++ Shasta

He didn't for a moment consider what I (and tp) were saying, but decided that it was a way to stage a suspicion: two people having similar opinions and wishing people to listen to them. Also I think he very cleverly decided to vote me because I wouldn't be here to talk back near the DL unlike tp.

What's more, I'm speaking for the good of the village in mind - and everyone reading back what I've said and thinking about it sees it is true. But if Shasta is a wolf, he knows I'm speaking against their interest. And if tp is an innocent too (a view I'm slightly leaning over right now even if I can't be totally positive about it), then any trust forming between the innocents would be bad for the wolves. So those people should be done away with asap.


EDIT: X'd with tp & Agan & Ang & Fea...

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Meh... but that's a lot of supposing and might-happen nonsense... Perhaps there is no correct answer on the Cobblers (dead or alive)? Just sit back and hope that they are Night-killed rather than lynched, and do whatever possible to contribute to that.

Exactly.

So basically, this plan is bunk. I'm tempted to go with you on the seer-death-with-a-plan idea. The biggest problem is, here's how I would address it as a wolf:

Day time WolFea: I'm the seer!
Night time WolFea: Hey other wolves, if you Night kill me, the village won't find out I'm not actually the Seer, because they won't be told my role!

Dead Threaders vote for people WolFea tells them to.

At some point the real seer counter-reveals but has absolutely no way to prove themselves.

I mean, there's no good reason for the good guys to believe anybody who says they're the seer, so setting up a plan where we trust somebody who says they're the seer? Is full of danger.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Green

the paragraph about being paranoid with all the cobblers looks - well - cobblerish to me

I noticed this section during a quick skim, but in fact I came away from it thinking non-Cobbler, as she seemed to praise the Cobblers a bit much. If you read the way she says it, doesn't it make you ask who would set a standard like that for themselves?

What it made me wonder- is she possibly a Wolf and wishing for us to think too much about Cobblers, particularly if she planned at any point to gain innocence by throwing a suspected Cobbler under the bus, knowing full and well that the Cobbler would serve her purposes just as well in the Dead-Thread, in which case her high opinion of what the Cobblers are capable of could be read as, "You guys better be coming up some good stuff to help us!!" At least that's the gut-reaction reading I took from her post.

So, while my reasoning is entirely different, I am at this point okay with lynching Lommy today. In fact the idea enters my mind of Greenie wolf-on-wolf voting Lommy today under the premise "She's a Cobbler!" and if it's proven that Lommy is in fact guilty, but of Wolvery instead, Greenie may look doubly good (willing to lynch baddie but wrong about Wolvery, since surely a Wolf would have the sense to accuse a fellow Wolf based upon Wolvery to buy herself some credit, if you follow me).

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

some people seem to think Thinlomien is more than usualy, almost suspiciously, incompetent

Ahahaha!

(What did we learn from this? Say something nasty about Lommy and Agan laughs.)

Okie dokie going now.

[Anguirel]

we learn from this that poor old Uncle Anguirel is too tired to spell "usually" properly.

...but I intend to try and camp out till the deadline yet...

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Well, I thought I wasn't going to be here, but rehearsal is going slow and I have my laptop, so why not.

And what do I come back to find?

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Okay.

++ Shasta

He didn't for a moment consider what I (and tp) were saying, but decided that it was a way to stage a suspicion: two people having similar opinions and wishing people to listen to them. Also I think he very cleverly decided to vote me because I wouldn't be here to talk back near the DL unlike tp.

I am quite literally shocked. Every single point in this paragraph - and yes, I do very literally mean every single one - is assumption/blatant generalization/"this is the way it is, and no, I don't have to back it up, just go with it, and here, let me add in some analysis of Shasta as a person just for emphasis", and not only that, strikes me as just plain mean. I don't know what I did to expect such treatment from Nogrod of all people, but really, I'm incredibly annoyed right now.

I didn't for a moment consider? Absolute bullcrap. I obviously considered what you were saying - otherwise I WOULDN'T HAVE SAID ANYTHING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

I "decided" that, did I? And I suppose you're in my head, that you can make such firm and flawless notions of what I did and did not do?

And the last point is the worst - that I voted you because you wouldn't be back to defend yourself. First off it's hurtful that you'd even think I'd stoop so low. Secondly, what? I wasn't planning to be back myself - that's why I voted as early as I did.



It's far too early in the game to be as overly malicious as that post was, and if I'm overreacting then I apologize, but...

[the phantom]

I have to leave very soon, but I'll be back and posting during the final hour. Based purely upon gut- I'm not completely happy with lynching Shasta or Nog, I know nothing at all about Nessa and Manwe, and Lommy is a decent choice based upon my previous post. That's all I have time for now.

[elronds_daughter]

Originally Posted by Nog

But the problem is they are more or less all the "usual suspects" and as such they are shots in the dark.

D'awwww, thanks, Nog. I'm one of the usual suspects! I'm flattered.

I hate that I'm still in my usual initial "Well, these people are acting kind of oddly, but there's more oddness than usual this game, and anybody could be anybody at this point" phase. I really hope that starts passing more quickly...

Right. I shall probably have to go soon (though I'm still going to put off voting for a little while longer), so I'm going to go re-read.

[Aganzir]

Sorry about being quiet, I've been IMing with a beautiful lady I'm possibly going to paint.

Originally Posted by 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.

Hmm. That depends on your point of view. The cobblers are going to cause trouble - both here and in Mandos. But it's going to be a serious problem only if they mess up some information delivery plan. So yes to lynching cobblers, no to plans they can easily affect.

Originally Posted by 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.

Not recently - people have been quite happy about lynching players who post little substance, I think. (But I admit I haven't been very active lately.)

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

Leijonien kanssa.

That's as good an excuse for not posting as Greenie had.

I can't believe that my first post agrees with Noggin...

Bunny fangs!

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

The fact that you defend phantom so stoutly here, combined with that you were already one I was suspicious of (for much the same reason)... given the game setup, I wouldn't put it past baddies to feel safer about linking themselves.

I agree with Shasta about Nog being suspicious but I don't see anything particularly bad about his defense of phantom. I think they just think alike on certain things regardless of their roles... And phantom looks almost alright now (although the sooner he's dead the happier I am).

Originally Posted by Nogrod

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.

No.
The louder players leave more trails. They are also more likely to contribute more in Mandos which is good, especially if they're innocent. I strongly object to deaths that don't reveal us anything (in the sense that you can't find connections even later when we possibly have information from Mandos or the seer). The longer someone lives, the more she posts.
I know Nog likes lynching quiet players. So do I. But in this game I think it's different.

++NOGROD

Bedtime!