Werewolf CXII - Dueling Wizards III - The Living Thread

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Now that could happen if the rules allowed signing a wolf and make her to kill the very same Night, but I somehow doubt that - Kuru?

This would not be possible. The Evil Wizard couldn't create and then kill that wolf in the same NIGHT. If the Evil Wizard tried something like this the victim would go to the Dead Thread as an Ordo.

That wouldn't preclude killing that wolf on a subsequent NIGHT, but it wouldn't work to do it on the same NIGHT.

Besides just my personal doubt (feeling) there is the actual stated rule that the EW can only make a solo Night-kill after she has created at least one wolf - which kind of suggests the interpretation that the EW needs a wolf to start killing people off.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Da Rules

The Evil Wizard may make kills solo once they have created a wolf (in a scenario where the Evil Wizard has lost all their wolves). This rule applies even if the Evil Wizard has wolf picks in reserve that have not been used yet but is for some reason on his/her own.

EDIT: So I guess, theoretically, and I didn't fully appreciate it until this moment, the Evil Wizard could turn this into the most diabolical solo were-bear role ever!

Not that I'm suggesting anything to anyone.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

This would not be possible. The Evil Wizard couldn't create and then kill that wolf in the same NIGHT. If the Evil Wizard tried something like this the victim would go to the Dead Thread as an Ordo.

That wouldn't preclude killing that wolf on a subsequent NIGHT, but it wouldn't work to do it on the same NIGHT.

I wasn't actually talking about the EW killing her wolf the very same Night the wolf was created. Sorry if I phrased it badly.

My concern was, whether the "evil side" could have killed Morsul last Night if there was no wolf turned already on the pre-game Night (whether there was not a wolf among us on D1)?

Aka. if the EW didn't turn anyone into a wolf before D1 started, could she have turned someone into a wolf last Night and then have Morsul killed the very same Night she turned her first wolf into being?

Looking at it from the other POV. If there would be no wolf now, then no-one would have died last Night because there a) is no wolf to do the killing, and b) the EW has not turned anyone a wolf aka. (by rules) can't kill anyone solo either?

So it concerns the speculation about whehter there was a wolf among us yesterDay, not whether the EW killed her puppy just to send her into the Dead-thread (which would be quite insane - or phantomish)...

[Loslote]

As far as the Dead Thread communication goes, I think it is better to have a consistent plan than it is to try to wing it. Sure, something may go wrong, but that can be addressed by putting in a failsafe - say, empower the first or last people alphabetically if something has gone terribly wrong, and we can work out a new plan to draw out what, exactly, has gone wrong the next Day. If we don't have a plan at all, getting any information from the Dead Thread becomes much more difficult, and the possibility of confusion increases drastically. I am honestly side-eying Nog for, as far as I can tell, dismissing the idea of *having a plan at all*. Sure, it can get messy, but if we don't have a solid plan, communication would be almost impossible. I'm less wary of Mith, who doesn't like the plan but is suggesting alternatives rather than effectively saying "communicating with the Dead Thread is hard, we shouldn't even try". All but one of us is in the living thread *right now*, now is the time to hash this out, when everyone can make sure they're comfortable with the plan in the case that they are the ones who end up in the Dead Thread.

As far as Morsul goes, I wonder if the EW killed him in part as a way to shield the rest of the last minute voters from scrutiny. Morsul was one of the earlier and more bold voters, and by focusing attention on his vote, maybe the EW was hoping to draw our attention away from a vote like Zil's for Nerwen, or the votes for me, or even the votes for Boro meant to tie it up. At any rate, I think we, as a village, haven't spent much time looking at those, and I do want to take a closer look.

[Mithalwen]

The important thing as I recall was to limit the questions so that the dead had a multiple choice of votes to allow for their special knowledge. We don't want to mess up lynching a wolf to know x in the dead thread was an ordo.
And a get out clause if the living don't know what they are asking for. Working out all possible permutations seems a bit unnecessary at this point. I would have to look back but I think it did work most of the time apart from the day 3 or four people posted their preferred options very late.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Loslote

If we don't have a plan at all, getting any information from the Dead Thread becomes much more difficult, and the possibility of confusion increases drastically.

Maybe I'm just thick, but is the Dead activity really going to give the Living much useful info, other than the knowledge that the Dead gave someone an extra vote (for, to the Living, unknown motives)?

Originally Posted by Loslote

As far as Morsul goes, I wonder if the EW killed him in part as a way to shield the rest of the last minute voters from scrutiny. Morsul was one of the earlier and more bold voters, and by focusing attention on his vote, maybe the EW was hoping to draw our attention away from a vote like Zil's for Nerwen, or the votes for me, or even the votes for Boro meant to tie it up.

I think that's a stretch, but worthy of thought, I guess.

x/d with Mith

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Maybe I'm just thick, but is the Dead activity really going to give the Living much useful info, other than the knowledge that the Dead gave someone an extra vote (for, to the Living, unknown motives)?

If we have a clear plan, the empowerment won't be based on unknown motives. There will be three clear options - empower someone from one group of people if person x was innocent, from a second group if evil, and from a third, failsafe group if something is wrong. That way, the Dead have options for who they want to empower in order to convey the information, and we can avoid the situation where the Dead don't want to vote for the person we selected as the "person x was innocent" message.

This assumes the Dead reveal the roles in order of arrival, but I think that's reasonable, and if they have to depart from the plan, they can use the failsafe and wait for a Visitor to deliver the more complicated message.

[Boromir88]

I was intending to break a tie. But I'll take the rest to the grave with me.

I'm here for the rest of the day. Reading, catching up and I guess I'll go from there and see if today brings any changes.

Good to see everyone here and some healthy participation.

[Boromir88]

In theory, maybe the EW didn't create a wolf N1. So, D1 there was no wolf and the EW was just trying to get a lynch/small chance to expose the GW/gifted. What would be the advantage to create a wolf N1, other than create a small chance of possibly losing the wolf in a lucky D1 lynch? If by creating a wolf N2, the EW then gets to make a kill on N2, I'd definitely wait until N2 until creating a wolf. If I were the EW, just to get the joy of seeing a completely fruitless D1 lynch, because there would be no wolf to lynch.