Ten Year Anniversary Game: Living Thread

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by phantom

When someone is lynched they are then dead for the following night, meaning the Dead can check the lynch victim immediately and give us results (via the bonus vote) the following day.

Let's say we lynch Lottie and ask for the Dead to check her. The next day the leading vote receivers partway through are clearly McCaber and Legate, with Rikae, Morm, and Boro casting votes for Legate, and Nerwen, Green, and Eomer casting votes for McCaber. We can then tell the Dead thread, "If Lottie was evil give your bonus vote to Rikae or Nerwen, if she was innocent give it to Morm or Green, if you didn't check her give your bonus vote to someone else.

That way the Dead can impact the voting in any way they wish (push the lynch toward either of the two leaders) and simultaneously give us the information they gained about Lottie's role. If they give the bonus to Rikae then Lottie was evil and they wanted to lynch Legate over McCaber. If they give the bonus to Nerwen then Lottie is evil and McCaber is who they want to lynch. If they didn't check Lottie at all but want to help lynch McCaber then they give their bonus to Eomer. If they didn't check Lottie and don't want to lynch either candidate they give their bonus to someone else hinting that maybe that person's suspicions matched their own. Etc.

O esteemed Mod, a clarification about the Dead Thread extra vote?

Originally Posted by Rules

After there are THREE residents of the Dead Thread, every DAY the dead get to vote on giving one of the living an extra vote. The dead are subject to the same deadline (heh heh) as the living. The living will not know who among them will get an extra vote until it is revealed in the closing narration of the DAY.

So do the dead vote for a living player or double that player's vote? I interpreted it as the former (the Dead Thread vote being simply a ++person-of-their-choice) but the way I understood phantom's theory above, he seems to have interpreted it as the latter (the person chosen by the Dead gets to vote twice). The wording of the rules could mean either.

And while we are on the subject of rules -

Originally Posted by phantom

All this Dead bonus vote stuff aside, I mainly just don't want the Seer or Ranger to die early. The double-dream and double-protect is amazing!

The Ranger only gets their double protect after they're returned from the dead, right? So it won't last long since the Ranger's identity becomes pretty obvious once they're resurrected. And I assume they can't resurrect twice?

...wow, I'm being positive today.


EDIT: x-ed with Nilp and Mac

[A Little Green]

Re: the voting schemes. Tying the vote on purpose might have merit later on if we have reason to believe the Dead can make a more informed decision than we can. As for today, however - I don't know. Accidentally hitting a Gifted is a risk, but a relatively small one (though after I've said this I'm sure that's exactly what I'll end up doing ). On the whole, I agree with Mac; while the wolf packs will undoubtedly attempt to eliminate each other, we can't really afford to leave all wolf hunting to the Night kills and not use our vote. At the same time, I have no idea where to start on forming an even half-informed opinion of anyone.

Sorry, coughing my head off atm and thus not as coherent as I'd like.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Green

The Ranger only gets their double protect after they're returned from the dead, right? So it won't last long since the Ranger's identity becomes pretty obvious once they're resurrected. And I assume they can't resurrect twice?

Ahhh, right you are. Never mind then- the Ranger isn't such a powerhouse then, at least not now. I suppose that means more than ever the Seer is the only viable target at this time.

Originally Posted by Green

So do the dead vote for a living player or double that player's vote? I interpreted it as the former (the Dead Thread vote being simply a ++person-of-their-choice) but the way I understood phantom's theory above, he seems to have interpreted it as the latter (the person chosen by the Dead gets to vote twice). The wording of the rules could mean either.

I see what you mean. Well, we could still pass info even if it's interpreted the other way, right? It would just require some tweaking. (I was interpreting it the one way because that's how it worked in the other village where we did this, wasn't it?)

Originally Posted by Mac

All this trying to arrange an information flow with the dead... elaborate stuff like that never works.

Well yeah, it definitely won't work if we assume it won't and don't try it.

Originally Posted by Mac

you always have some people who vote right at the deadline or didn't get a chance to read everything and vote uninformed

That's their problem. If people play poorly and screw up well-intentioned plans then we should lynch them (because they might be WWs messing up on purpose). If it turns out to be innocents that are messing things up for us, then at least they'll know it was their fault we lost.

I mean really- we're not going to attempt something useful because we're afraid our own side will suck too much to pull it off? No, no, I'm not okay with that.

Originally Posted by Mac

This I don't get, or maybe I'm missing something. The dead can only find out roles among themselves, and do not see gifteds. They won't know who the real seer is, at least not for certain.

If the person doesn't appear as Predator then we trust the reveal, right?

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Well, there is an obvious split in the camp. Not between heroes and villains (that split is hidden) but between those who love complicated rules and those who are already lost.

I'm sure everything will become easier after a few days; until then, I'm not sure we can challenge the chaos. But am especially keen to observe those who doubt the village's ability to communicate effectively with the Dead.

For anyone interested in omens, mind you, the song I heard today which reminded me to check out this thread - 'The Dead Hate The Living'

[Boromir88]

All this trying to arrange an information flow with the dead... elaborate stuff like that never works. Unless a choice is obvious, you always have some people who vote right at the deadline or didn't get a chance to read everything and vote uninformed. Things get messed up, even without revealed or unrevealed baddies in both threads trying to mess with it intentionally. - Mac

Bottom line: We need some way to get reliable information from the Dead. Now, my understanding is we will know who receives the extra vote from the Dead, and if I'm understanding the phantom correctly, he wants to use the extra vote as a means to relay the predator/prey info revealed to the Dead. Roles who can be resurrected will help, but it would also help to get information some other way. Otherwise, every lynch will just be random and with no idea what's going on and every lynch just becomes a stab in the dark.

It's not a life changing discovery to know the Dead wolves will be working to mess up the Dead thread to cause confusion for the living...but at the same time, with the rival packs they will do what they feel they must to protect their own pack. If that means getting rid of wolves from the rival pack, Dead wolves may be willing to work with the innocents to get rid of their rivals.

I agree with whoever said we can't be lazy and rely on the packs killing each other. Since we CAN'T rely on that, we have to rely on some method to find out about whether are lynches have hit wolves or not. And call me impatient, but I'm not going to wait for the death of a resurrected role to get information from the Dead thread.

Of course it would take the cooperation of the Dead and any method should have a clear and simple understanding. If I know how this works...during the NIGHT phase the Dead vote on who amongst them gets revealed as Predator/Prey. And during the DAY who amongst the living gets the bonus vote? It might be quite complicated, but this is involving some of the brightest and most intelligent minds in the world. I'm sure we can figure it out. (seriously I'm never going to under-estimate the resolve of the 'Downers in getting this place back up and everyone together again)

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Of course it would take the cooperation of the Dead and any method should have a clear and simple understanding.
...
It might be quite complicated, but this is involving some of the brightest and most intelligent minds in the world. I'm sure we can figure it out.

I might see just that as a problem... even if I fully agree it would be nice we had a method of communication with the goodies of the Dead side with a lot of knowledge. The Dead will probably understand a lot things the Living will not, but the baddies on the Dead thread will wish to twist any "message" they give the living - and in the Living Thread some may understand things but others will not - and the baddies will do their best trying to make people not understanding things...

Well, we'll see - for it truly seems a complicated game (I haven't had time yet to really walk myself through the rules and the possibilities they might offer all the sides). But therefore I'd suggest we at least start by trying to lynch a wolf and notb try to enforce a double-lynch on D1 (it most probably will not work anyway).

Contrary to some people's opinion, I think D1 is a good day to hunt for wolves - and I think the stats might even prove me right in this (although I'm not sure of it). So let's see what we can do toDay - I'm coming back later to try and do something for it.

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by the phantom

I mean really- we're not going to attempt something useful because we're afraid our own side will suck too much to pull it off? No, no, I'm not okay with that.

Day1 is always sketchy in terms of usefulness, but later on? We will do the usual and analyze, as well as we can in this setting, and poke around to see how people are acting. Just because it's not fancy doesn't make it not useful.

Originally Posted by the phantom

If the person doesn't appear as Predator then we trust the reveal, right?

Ah, ok.
I think.
Maybe.
I guess we'll see when we get there.

Originally Posted by Green

so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness as it usually is.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I'm just a bit confused about the last sentence, the conclusion

Actually, that's a good catch. Wouldn't the conclusion be: "so a good-looking case is not as strong a sign of innocence as it usually is"?

Originally Posted by the phantom

But that was totally different, because the Dead couldn't confirm roles. If they had been able to do so they would've tested Seer-Nog as soon as you went to the Dead thread and suddenly things would've been different.

Maybe it's my memory now, but I think they were. Didn't they just chose not to check Nogrod, because he was so obviously a cobbler.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

and I think the stats might even prove me right in this

A long time ago I actually compiled stats for it. It's somewhere in the grimoire thread. Day1 had the worst odds to catch a wolf. Not saying we shouldn't try, of course.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Will the narrations state which unfortunate soul got killed by which wolf pack? Or was this stated somewhere and I overlooked it? If it is not clear to the village, then the wolves would have extra knowledge and be more adept at killing the other pack than we are. An uncomfortable thought.

No the killing pack will not be stated. From an RP standpoint the Party does not know that there are two wolf packs. The split of the baddies is completely obscure to the Party.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

So do the dead vote for a living player or double that player's vote? I interpreted it as the former (the Dead Thread vote being simply a ++person-of-their-choice) but the way I understood phantom's theory above, he seems to have interpreted it as the latter (the person chosen by the Dead gets to vote twice). The wording of the rules could mean either.

The individual empowered by the Dead gets two votes. And has also been alluded to in subsequent conversation, this will be noted in the narration and the individual so empowered will be mentioned explicitly by name.

As has also been noted, but I will state again for clarity's sake, the Ranger has only one protection per NIGHT to use in their first life. Should this individual die and resurrect, then that individual has two protections. Right now as of this moment, the Ranger only has one.

For Morm (and anybody else who doesn't know), the way to highlight is to put the word "highlight" in the brackets, like so -> [highlight] and then do the usual closing of the tags to end it.

[mormegil]

For old times sake I must state emphatically that Firefoot did it and should be lynched. (Please reference the first game ever to understand the humor...though please don't read anything into this...I know some of you are already thinking way too much about that comment)

Next we should lynch the phantom...old tummy is making this thread obscenely long.

Finally, how does one get the votes red, that is a standard after my time.

I will post a bit more when I have caught all the way up on the thread. However I'm not sure I fully understand the logic on the intentionally tying the vote and having the dead break the tie. I don't think the dead will know the guilty or innocent, will they? It seems like a clever ploy to disguise your voting patterns by having everyone vote in a fairly prescribed way.

[the phantom]

Okay- if we're going to try and lynch someone today is there any intelligent guideline we can set forth? For instance, perhaps we should only be willing to lynch someone who will be around to shout "Ah! No!" just in case we hit worst case scenario (i.e. Gifted).

Granted a WW might fake reveal to save his hide, but then the other WW team will be gunning for him so he's toast eventually anyway.

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Seriously?! Okay, if that's true, then that game was even funnier than I remember.

Wait, I remember. The dead could only distinguish wolf or not-wolf, so they couldn't gain any info on "cobbler"-Nogrod. Same rule as now, as far as I can see, but it had more consequence due to having cobblers.

Originally Posted by Kuru

No the killing pack will not be stated.

Well, that sucks now.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I may as well state now that I didn't come back to Werewolf to merely be a pawn in anyone's masterplan

This.

[Boromir88]

Well, we'll see - for it truly seems a complicated game (I haven't had time yet to really walk myself through the rules and the possibilities they might offer all the sides). But therefore I'd suggest we at least start by trying to lynch a wolf and notb try to enforce a double-lynch on D1 (it most probably will not work anyway).

I'm coming at it from thinking doing whatever it takes to ensure the Seer at least gets passed today. That way, the Seer has 4 dreams and even if one of the packs makes a lucky pick at night, the Seer is in the Dead thread with 4 known roles. Those 2-dreams a night while living is probably our biggest advantage we need to keep as long as possible. I think now more than any other game, we have to ensure the Seer survives DAY 1

Granted our chances of randomly lynching 1 wolf is far better than randomly lynching the Seer, but it wouldn't be the first time we accidentally lynch the Seer DAY 1, despite the smaller odds.

Either way (tying a vote for no-lynch or getting a lynch today) it's too early to tell whether one is option is better than the other. Let's see how the DAY shakes out with votes and suspicions and go from there.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Mac

Maybe it's my memory now, but I think they were. Didn't they just chose not to check Nogrod, because he was so obviously a cobbler.

Seriously?! Okay, if that's true, then that game was even funnier than I remember.

Originally Posted by morm

old tummy is making this thread obscenely long

Psh. I remember days with considerably more posting than this. Put on your big boy pants and play.

Originally Posted by morm

However I'm not sure I fully understand the logic on the intentionally tying the vote and having the dead break the tie. I don't think the dead will know the guilty or innocent, will they?

Yes, they will. Only the Dead will know evil/good for certain. They will always know more.

Basically we try and lynch the folks we feel are guilty, and toward the end of the day we make sure our top two or three candidates are tied so that the dead can swing the vote. Of course that would require us to be on the ball and try and finish up an hour before deadline.

And if the Dead go against what my gut tells me I'll probably decide the plan sucks, but logically it's not a bad idea.

Anyway, I'm not committed to that idea, but I think it's worth considering. The only thing I'm truly committed to is giving the Dead the option of passing info to the Living. It would be silly not to take advantage of our only consistent connection to real information.

[mormegil]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Yes, they will. Only the Dead will know evil/good for certain. They will always know more.

I re-read the rules and once there is 3 in dead they will be able to vote to reveal if one of them is good or evil. They will know more than us so the plan has more merit than I originally thought, however my reservation still remains that a prescribed voting pattern takes away one of the clearest evidences we have.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Mith

I may as well state now that I didn't come back to Werewolf to merely be a pawn in anyone's masterplan and I certainly don't want to play if it is a case of "Do what Phantom tells you or it is all your fault". So to be clear, I will vote as I see fit, not as I am told, dead or alive. It is a game, it is meant to be fun. I am not here to be a minion, bullied or bored to sobs.

I fully expect you to vote as you see fit. When we vote we simply cast the vote that is the most beneficial to our side. Thus if you can use your Dead vote to reveal an important clue to the Living why not do so?

Basically I don't think the whole passing information plan infringes on your voting rights. When we vote we are always considering outcomes. Sometimes we don't vote for our best candidate but rather our second best because we know our first choice won't get lynched that day, etc.

Or looking at it a different way- if someone tells me, "Phantom, try and vote for a Werewolf!" there is no need for me to object- "I don't have to vote for a Werewolf. I'm free to vote for anyone I want!" Obviously, yes, I can do anything I please with my vote, but in the end I will of course vote in such a way that benefits my cause. I expect people to vote logically and attempt to win. Nothing more.

(You'll note that I built options into my plan to allow the Dead maximum vote flexibility while simultaneously passing information. I did this specifically because I knew certain folks would complain if they were asked to participate in anything resembling a plan.)

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Nog

That said, I'm somewhat optimistic with our chances as a village: there are so many factors involved, not the least the rivalry between the two competing Wolfgangs *sic*.

Nog you're killing me!

Originally Posted by Nog

Oh one question on what Greenie said and most people seemed to strongly agree on (maybe I'm just in rust for not playing WW for a long time):

I'm just a bit confused about the last sentence, the conclusion, or the POV of it, that is.

Originally Posted by Mac

Actually, that's a good catch. Wouldn't the conclusion be: "so a good-looking case is not as strong a sign of innocence as it usually is"?

Either way. What I was getting at was trying to figure out how to spot wolves with these dynamics. One of my most common reasons for suspecting anyone is that a case they make seems fabricated, ie. they know the person they're accusing is not actually guilty. I was referring to not being able to base speculations about a player's wolfishness on this since the wolves, too, are essentially hunting wolves they don't know the identities of. Did that help?

Originally Posted by Lottie

It doesn't make sense to tie before the Dead thread starts up, since we have a better chance at killing wolves and avoiding Gifteds if we lynch than if we leave it to the Night kills (see my above post).

Word.

Originally Posted by Lottie

I am also dubious about giving the Dead thread the power to choose who dies in the lynch - I agree that it would be good to set up a system wherein the Dead can let us know who they checked and what the result was, but I would prefer for that system to not give the Dead the ultimate choice. After all, if all we the voters can do is comply with the voting scheme already set out, we do not get nearly as much information on the voters. Even if we don't know the result of the vote, looking at people's votes with an eye to what they appear to be trying to do, who they want lynched, and who they don't gives us a lot of information that we wouldn't get if we gave that power to the Dead.

This is also a very good point. I would suggest trying to leave the deciding vote for the Dead only if we have good reason to believe they have crucial information we don't.

Originally Posted by Nog

Well, we'll see - for it truly seems a complicated game (I haven't had time yet to really walk myself through the rules and the possibilities they might offer all the sides). But therefore I'd suggest we at least start by trying to lynch a wolf and notb try to enforce a double-lynch on D1 (it most probably will not work anyway).

Sidenote - don't worry, Nog, no double-lynches in this game! A tie will result in no lynch.

Also, thanks Kuru for the clarification! I was confused.


EDIT: x-ed with morm, phantom, Agan and Lommy. Also, can I just say how happy it makes me to type that? I mean, cross-posting with morm and phantom, for the first time in God knows how many years! <3