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

[Kath]

Originally Posted by Kath

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.

Okey pokes, here is the post which caused me such issues. I have bolded the sentence that threw me when I was thinking about the implications. I read it back to myself as 'Inzil said this in response to Cop' rather than 'he said the above after Cop posted this'.

And in looking back I noticed something else. Holby still has not explained her list, despite requests and even a bizarre interpretation by Echo. I am getting a little fed up of having two players who seem totally uninclined to actually respond to anyone else.

[Kath]

Oh and unless anyone comes out to refute it I am willing to accept McCaber's claim of being lover. Assuming this means he is now on the side of the village entirely then please McCaber vote toDay so we have no modfire of an innocent!

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Shasta

So you*aren't*going to attempt to fry the lone fish in your fourth (and most suspicious) category? You're not really helping me think you innocent,Greenie.

I have formed some kind of an opinion on Cop - or, at least, I have a pretty shrewd idea of what she's said and done. I can't claim the same of many others. I was talking about how I'll try to use my time, not who I'll attempt to fry. I may fry her still toDay, but concentrating on one person only has rarely ended well in my experience so I'll try to look at other people too. Does that make sense to you?

That said, I'm off to try to be a man of my word and do some rereading. Back soon!


EDIT: x-ed with Kath and Lommy

[A Little Green]

Oh, and I forgot to say that I believe McCaber; if he's a wolf he's insane.

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Lommy

So you were writing a post overNight? I always consider that a little suspicious, although I know by now that innocents do it too.

Actually writing a post overNight wouldn't explain that since Legate was a lynch and not a Night kill.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Don't forget the option that the lovers are some other people entirely, in which case it would actually be a rather clever wolf ploy to claim to be the lover of the innocent Day1 lynch (or Night2 kill for that matter).

What? I'm confused about lover rules in general, but I don't get this point. If the lovers are some different people entirely, then surely even if they haven't found each other yet they'll be able to do the math and realize that both McCaber and Legate can't be lovers if they are, too, so they'd know McCaber was lying. Which would make it a pretty risky lie to tell, I think.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Anyway, I'm currently entertaining thoughts of a*Coppermirror-Echo-Nerwen*pack, but it makes little sense as Coppermirror would hardly have told a packmate on the thread to go invisible as she could have very well said it during the Night phase. But*Coppermirror*and*Echo*could be packmates based on what*Cop*speculated about packmates giving advice to*Echo*last Night. So I don't really know.

That doesn't really work, because the theory of packmates giving advice to Echo last Night was based on there having been no Night phase in the beginning of the game, and if there was no Night phase, Copper actually couldn't have said anything to packmates before the game began. So that means that this obstacle to your theory actually doesn't exist! So yes, theoretically Cop and Echo could be packmates.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

What? I'm confused about lover rules in general, but I don't get this point. If the lovers are some different people entirely, then surely even if they haven't found each other yet they'll be able to do the math and realize that both McCaber and Legate can't be lovers if they are, too, so they'd know McCaber was lying. Which would make it a pretty risky lie to tell, I think.

True, but I doubt the lovers would want to reveal themselves by pointing fingers at McCaber. But I still agree it's much more likely McC is telling the truth, also based on meta reasoning.

Originally Posted by Greenie

That doesn't really work, because the theory of packmates giving advice to Echo last Night was based on there having been no Night phase in the beginning of the game, and if there was no Night phase, Copper actually couldn't have said anything to packmates before the game began. So that means that this obstacle to your theory actually doesn't exist! So yes, theoretically Cop and Echo could be packmates.

What? No! Cop's point was that Echo's more "reasoned" behaviour toDay could be because of packmate briefing last Night and that the briefing couldn't have taken place before Day1 because the game started with a Day phase. My point then was that Cop sounds almost like she's telling what actually happened last Night in the wolf PM discussion ergo she and Echo are wolves.


edit: xed with Copper

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Actually writing a post overNight wouldn't explain that since Legate was a lynch and not a Night kill.

True... so he started writing it yesterDay before DL but didn' post it??? Confusion.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

True... so he started writing it yesterDay before DL but didn' post it??? Confusion.

No no. I wrote that post toDay and posted it when it was done - I just asked that question of Legate early on and forgot to go back and change it.

[Kath]

Well I am going to have a look at everyone now and then probably vote.

Nerwen:
Well my suspicion yesterDay really was fairly tenuous as I said. ToDay I think she did a fair analysis of Inzil and while I do not think it would be so easy to decide he might be the Seer the things she found were fair indicators if you were looking extremely hard. She has suspicions of Lottie and Cop - largely centred around the way they responded to Inzil's death. Has ended up voting Cop with rather tallies with the way her suspicions have developed. I see nothing concerning in her posting toDay.

Cop:
Well now. I quite like that she's arguing back. I do like a good debate.

A pity about Legate. I can see how that happened now and I really should have known better.
I requested clarification.
Legate looked okay to me aside from the one point that looked really bad, which meant that there was a risk of him being a confused innocent who had just failed to explain himself. In retrospect it would have been better to give him the benefit of the doubt for the Day. All the same, I don't regret placing that vote, because Legate was still the person I suspected the most at the end of that Day.
It really is generally pretty suspicious to be a large part of someone's death and then basically say 'oops shouldn't have done that'. If you suspected him most at the end of the Day then you could not have known better at the time. It's just weird.

Then of course there is my mistaken attribution of that post. Now that I have rediscovered that it was Cop then obviously my suspicion surrounding this comment moves to her.

To respond to Cop's question about why I found her previous comment about invisibility suspicious but am happy to ignore her direct comment to Nerwen, it is because her previous comment appeared to be directed towards the wolves. Saying directly to Nerwen that she is visible is a very different kettle of fish (to steal a metaphor from Greenie).

I call Boro's statement all but throw-away because it was put in rather at the last minute. Oh, that one thing she said in that one post is also weird but I'll come back to it with more time. He's hardly spent hours over it.

Lottie:
So Lottie said that Greenie and Legate would not be a wolf on wolf argument but rather an innocent on innocent one. If we have a wolf pack that includes Lottie this would suggest to me that Greenie is a packmate.

Her 'Seer hint' about Inzil is weakly reasoned. I feel she could have done better if she was really looking for hints. Nerwen found a few better examples. So perhaps a wolf who knew this was not the reason they had killed him.

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.

Also she just feels to be slipping past without me noticing her. Everything I read gives me this feeling of vague suspicion. I don't really have time to look into it now but I will come back to it toMorrow.

Lommy:
Feels innocent to me toDay.

Shasta:
Currently I feel is innocent, largely due to his forgetfulness around Legate!

McCaber:
Counting him as a known innocent now.

Boro:
Given that he has gone for the Day I am willing to give him a pass for now. I would like more time to converse with him. Plus his big post had some good reasoning in it that made him sound much more like the usual thoughtful Boro.

Echo:
Has begun to at least respond to what he has asked. If he does later come back and give an explanation for that comment about Greenie then I will be much happier about him. If not, well.

Holby:
I am very unhappy about. If a complete newbie is now posting more sense than someone who has been around for a few years? It is very worrying.

Eonwe:
Am still fairly happy with him for breaking the tie yesterDay.

My current feeling is some kind of Lottie/Copper/Greenie wolf pack. Not sure about the Greenie part because she is flying under my radar and I will want to take a much closer look at her toMorrow.

I am going to post then vote.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Kath

My current feeling is some kind of Lottie/Copper/Greenie wolf pack.

I don't know whether this post should make me feel more confident or wary, because this is exactly the pack I'm thinking of.

edit: though Cop's most recent post is making me doubt it a little.

[Thinlómien]

Likely packmates
- Copper and Echo (what I said about Cop speculating about Nightly talk)
- Copper/Holby/Eönwë and Kath (any of the three could've been trying to save Kath yesterDay)
- Lottie and Echo/Holby (she's giving them free passes a tad too happily)

Unlikely packmates
- Echo and Kath (the witch-hunt and the latter's frustration with the former - I feel that is Kath was Echo's packmate, she'd rather try to encourage/tutor them than just straightaway give up on them)
- Boro/Lottie and Kath (both clearly put her in the risk of being lynched yesterDay)
- Copper and Nerwen (the invisibility thing would make no sense)
- Echo and Holby (or then I'm not giving Echo enough credit, but their jump on Holby toDay is quite aggressive to be wolf-on-wolf)


edit: xd with Greenie's last

[Echo]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Likely packmates
- Copper and Echo (what I said about Cop speculating about Nightly talk)

hmmm interesting,..but sorry doll.
and the part about me and holby,...that was cute,..i laughed

[McCaber]

Man, it seems being out for the first Day and a half really did a number on my investigation skills. Holby is looking suspicious, Lommie's looking innocent, and I'm looking out of time to make a choice.

I'll probably vote Holby unless something happens in the next half an hour. But knowing how ends of days work, something probably will.

[Coppermirror]

Originally Posted by Kath

Oh and unless anyone comes out to refute it I am willing to accept McCaber's claim of being lover. Assuming this means he is now on the side of the village entirely then please McCaber vote toDay so we have no modfire of an innocent!

But, if one of the Lovers is killed before they find each other, they remain an innocent ordo in things like narration and to the seer. Do we really gain something by voting for him now?

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

You people are thinking in weird ways, this scenario for example would never have occurred to me.

If you're innocent and you weren't thinking about that scenario and associated points, you're worrying me, Lommy. If you're a sorcerer, then that was a canny comment to make, to cast suspicion on people who are trying to work out what the sorcerers' plans are likely to be.

I may make a post towards the end of toDay explaining a bit more about what I think you're overlooking, if I don't have to leave earlier than that, because there are some things you really ought to have in mind toDay.

Edit: crossed with Lommy since #166.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

If you're innocent and you weren't thinking about that scenario and associated points, you're worrying me, Lommy.

What?! Why?

[Coppermirror]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

What?! Why?

No need to panic, I'll explain before the end of the Day if I have time, even if I get lynched. There are reasons why it should be then. If I don't have time and I get killed, it's my devout hope that somebody else will be able to explain the point instead the next Day, since I think it's a point that people should at least be aware of.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

No need to panic, I'll explain before the end of the Day if I have time, even if I get lynched. There are reasons why it should be then. If I don't have time and I get killed, it's my devout hope that somebody else will be able to explain the point instead the next Day, since I think it's a point that people should at least be aware of.

Now this is very mysterious, and I hate to say more in an innocent than in a guilty way. And I was almost convinced I was going to vote Cop toDay! Will have to think.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Coppermirror

No need to panic, I'll explain before the end of the Day if I have time, even if I get lynched. There are reasons why it should be then. If I don't have time and I get killed, it's my devout hope that somebody else will be able to explain the point instead the next Day, since I think it's a point that people should at least be aware of.

So... when are you planning on doing this?

[Coppermirror]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

So... when are you planning on doing this?

Now would be okay.

My point that Lommy didn't seem to have realised is one of the biggest advantages the village has in this game, IMO, which is that it started with a Day phase. This means that although the sorcerers probably knew who the others were, they had no time to talk to each other and make plans. After Night #1, they are likely to have made contact and plans. They have a potential weakness in the switch between those times. This is something that innocents should be watching out for.

That's it, it wasn't a big thing, but it was something Lommy missed. I think it may have been covered by someone else in the meantime.

[Loslote]

Okay. Well. At the moment, Nerwen and I both have one vote, while Cop has three. I'm going to

++Holby

Because I find her somewhat suspicious where I definitely don't find either Cop or Nerwen suspicious, and I want to put up another candidate who has a chance against Cop. I'm off to a nice dinner with the boy. Have a good Night, everyone.

[A Little Green]

LOTTIE
(Not including Serverman banter or other irrelevant stuff)

The first actual impressions on people, early on Day 1, are that she feels "pretty good" about Cop, is shaky on me but leaning innocent, and thinks my Rule of Three squabble with Legate looks innocent-on-innocent. Lommy strikes her as "a little less innocent, but nothing that shoves her into 'terrifying sorcerer' territory just yet". Has no read on Zil, Kath or Nerwen.

Then, speaking about Kath accusing her of refusing to make a statement:

Seriously, though, this post just made me rather uneasy about her. A lot of the reasoning seems forced, almost like she's trying to suspect people even though she knows they can't be sorcerers. It could just be Day-1 lack of proper suspicions and trying to get traction, but it doesn't sit well with me.

Finds Cop's reaction to the whole "my tone looked off to me too" -discussion "wonderfully innocent" and is fairly certain Cop is innocent. Is also "leaning innocentish" on Legate, though with some reservations.

Then moving on to her famous vote post:

So we have a triple tie between*Cop,*Kath, and*Legate, with no clarifying rules on tie-breakers? Well then.

++Kath*

I find her far more suspicious than either*Cop*or*Legate.

I get Boro's (and was it Shasta's?) point about this looking as if she was relieved about the choice being limited. However, in light of what she said prior to this, the vote makes perfect sense. Kath was the only one she suspected anyway, whereas Cop and Legate were ones she had specifically mentioned looked innocentish to her.

Moving on to toDay, she suggests that a quote from Inzil might have been taken for a Seer hint or else that he was a no-trace kill. I don't really buy the Seer hint theory but it doesn't really tell me much about her innocence or guilt.

She thinks Echo comes off as a nervous newbie (though "frustratingly and purposefully vague") and is willing to extend his newbie pass. Holby alarms her, but she "gets the impression that's just her style". These reactions look to be following the same trend of being noncommittal and diplomatic that Kath accused her of yesterDay.

She then argues slightly with Kath and revises her opinion of Holby, saying she isn't sure anymore. She ends the post with

YesterDay,*Kath*was my strongest suspicion, and I suppose she still is, but only by default. I'm mostly on the fence with her, leaning just a bit towards eeeeevil, but I'll probably spend more time looking over her posts later on to maybe see if I can work out where that feeling is coming from and whether or not it's justified.

Which is pretty much what I was thinking, too: where is this Kath suspicion coming from? Apart from the one post on Day 1, she doesn't really give reasons for her consistent suspicion of Kath. I hope she returns to elaborate!

And in her latest post to date, she comments on McCaber coming out:

I...don't think this is a move a sorcerer would make, especially not on Day 2 - it seems too risky. Can we be confident enough in that to write him off as a known innocent?

Which is more careful than most others, but seems sensible for both innocent and wolf.

Conclusions? On the whole, I think Lottie looks pretty innocent. She is at times over-diplomatic and her Kath-suspicion is a bit odd, but her general behaviour especially yesterDay seems logical and sensible. She's down to the Relatively Small Fish -category with Steve, I'd say.


EDIT: x-ed since Lommy's 172

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Which is pretty much what I was thinking, too: where is this Kath suspicion coming from? Apart from the one post on Day 1, she doesn't really give reasons for her consistent suspicion of Kath. I hope she returns to elaborate!

Mainly gut-feeling - a couple of her posts have nudged me the wrong way. I mentioned Day 1 that some of her reasoning felt forced. Nothing concrete, but enough to keep me wary.

List time:

Likely Innocent
McCobbler
Nerwen
Greenie

More Innocent Than Not
Cop
Echo
Boro

No Read
Steve
Lommy
Shasta
Holbytlass

Could Be Evil, Maybe
Kath

I might vote for Kath, but not if it'll be a throw-away. Otherwise, I'd prefer my no-reads over the ones I feel better about.