Game Thread: WW LXXXVI - The Halls of Mandos

[Glirdan]

Originally Posted by phantom

I don't follow your point. The Wolves knew Shasta wasn't a Wolf, and that's all they can know. What I'm saying is that they'd have no reason whatsoever to assume he was the Seer that spotted an evil Nog, because given this game set up do you think for a minute that he would've behaved so had that been the case? They killed him for some other reason. Now, you might perhaps say that it might've entered into their minds, "Ooo, maybe the village will go for Nog as a side-effect", but I doubt that they'd be that deluded.

Okay, I now understand what you're saying as well and agree that he was killed for some other reason and I tend to agree with you about the Wolves being deluded for the Nog set up. I wasn't following at first, and now I'm on the same train.

EDIT: Bed time folks, be back some time later in the Day.

[the phantom]

No one else around, I guess.

I've waited long enough. Bed.

[Loslote]

As we don't have as much hard facts here, I'm going to sort this list by "gut feelings" with some explainations following.

White as Snow:
Lottie

Ivory like a Walrus Tooth:
Glirdy (I can usually tell when he's a wolf, and he doesn't seem evil this game.)
Mith (I haven't played with her before, I don't think, but she doesn't ring alarming bells...)
Agan (I seriously considered putting her in Grey, but decided at the last moment that she fits here as well as anywhere. Again, based on tone of post alone.)
Greenie (She seems like normal Greenie. For now, I'll leave her be.)
Nerwen (She makes good points, and while I know she's a wicked wolfie, I'm inclinded to keep a wary eye on her but focus more on others.)
Fea (What I've seen of her looks all clever and helpful)

Grey like Winnie-the-Pooh Impersonating a Storm Cloud (Confusing):
Nog (I can seriously never read him.)
tp (He's tp; he sort of goes in the "no clue" category by default.)
Ang (Never played with him, and I'll wait a bit more to get a better grasp on his playing style before trying to gather impressions.)
Legate (Didn't really attract my attention much one way or another.)

Silent as a Hobbit Who's Had A Bit Too Much Ale And Has Passed Out (Subby):
BeiGei (Has she even posted?)
Wilwa (Not around enough yet.)
Nessa (Short, scarse posts = no read)
Elronhubbard (Not enough posts to form an opinion.)
Sally (Did she have just the one post? I can't remember any others.)

Dark as a Certain Pair of Black High Heels:
Lommy (Her early vote on Manwe confuses me, and her tone strikes me as off...not entirely sure why, and hardly convinced of anything, but not comfortable with her, either.)
Boro (Sets off alarms in a no-real-substance sort of way.)

So, yeah, I'd like to see more out of my Grey, Silent, and Dark people, and the Ivory people I'm (temporarily) okay with and not going to vote for.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by the phantom

You don't have to vote the way I want you to. I don't care- go your own way. That's fine. But when we're in the final minutes and you're not telling me who you won't vote for and who you might vote for I sort of assume that you're hoping for a crash.

Right llets get a few things straight. Your vote is your own responsibility. Mine is mine. I didn't notice in all the blessed rules you have felt the need to create for yourself that votes had to be notified to some self appointed vote monitor.

I didn't say because you know what I hadn't decided. I had hoped to vote earlier but you know what Day one, desperately unclear, no one obliging enough to confess to lycanthropy. So I thought I'd try to stay up a bit but I fell asleep. So lynch me for being tired. Then I had very little time.

So I had wanted to vote Legate - well because he was saying things that basically were not true on empirical evidence about me and that and the lists made me very suspicious. But he had one and then 2 votes with slim reason and there was a danger of a 3 way lynch if I went ahead. I think I posted to that effect but I haven't been back yet to check. So since I had a vague memory of you behaving in this dictatorial manner another time when you were innocent so I took a quick look at Lommie to see if there was anything that justified it. The only thing that seemed really odd was the fact she had made so few posts but she had notified that this was likely. So benefit of the doubt. By that point MAnwe was out in front and I thought it ok to go with my own choice. Frankly I can't think of anything more wolvish than to vote for someone because you have been told to.

Whatever... I am so remembering why I haven't played for so long.

[Aganzir]

So Glirdan what did you think to achieve when comparing Shasta's behaviour to his seer self?

Originally Posted by phantom

She seems to be extremely locked in, and yet it didn't seem to me that she was invested in the game.

I see what you mean but I think it might be because I've never been alone while playing - yesterday I had people over (and now I'm posting while my friends are sleeping) so half my mind is always somewhere else.

I don't particularly like the Mänwagon. There weren't very good points against him - stressing the significance of his "trying to escalate Shasta & Nog's fight" was rather making a mountain out of a molehill, I think. At least Lommy and Nog had been suspected (of cobblery), so I think it'd make more sense for a wolf/cobbler not to vote for them, just to be on the safe side - unless Mänwe was a wolf.

At the moment I'm inclined to say one of Lommy and Greenie is a baddie. Lommy was looking cobblerish, but it was actually only after Greenie pointed it out that peoples started suspecting her. The problem with Greenie is, she's being too nice to me. She questioned me a bit but dropped it quickly and said she's okay with me. Usually when we're both innocent this bickering continues for a few days after which we basically trust each other. But now she seems different - you know, accusing me just for the sake of doing it and stopping it before I retaliate.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

First Dobbin and now– my priceless treasure! Why?

Don't forget your Lúthien. I think these baddies are trying to frame Nerwen...

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

You know, we do have this little custom of explaining why we vote someone, Boro.

Thought I made that more clear, but I didn't bold Legate in that post, so it might have been harder to notice.

I was suspicious of Glirdan and Legate for the same reasons. I thought they were taking what I said and trying to make it a mountain out of a molehill, by using aggressive language. Even if Glirdan admitted "attack" was too strong, he still made it look like I was vigorously trying to get Nog lynched, which I wasn't at all. Nog was my biggest suspect, but it was early and all I had was the pessimism and instructions to the gifted was minorly annoying. Legate then I believe called it a "crusade against pessimism."

I think it's important to keep the voting close, in a game like this, that way the DL voters have to make choices and (hopefully) state their choices. A 4th vote for Nog would have really separated him from the rest, Glirdan didn't have a vote, Legate had 1, chose Legate. And now we can see what the DL voters thought about Nog, Manwe, and Legate. I don't know how helpful it really is, not knowing anyone's role, but maybe it'll give me something.

I believe the color-coded Alert system is out-dated and needs to disappear. Everyone needs to change the system to...

Koala
Shark-infested waters
Swarm of killer bees
Komodo dragon
Godzilla

A bit later, after my full read through, I'll delegate all players into the new danger alert system.

Edit: correcting typo of "killer beers" to "killer bees"

[Glirdan]

Originally Posted by Agan

So Glirdan what did you think to achieve when comparing Shasta's behaviour to his seer self?

Sorry, what?? It's 7am here, I literally just woke up and will need a little more then that.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Hmmn. We know even less about Manwe's role and yet you're quite ready to call him an "easy bandwaggon lynch". Do you see the contradiction?

I am ready to do so. Like Agan, I believe that the "fight" between Shasta and Nog that he was "trying to escalate" was an all to easy reason to put the blame on an easy target, who already had two (again, very poorly reasoned) votes, that a Wolf wanted to see gone, and I would not be surprised if one of the later voters out of the five was a Wolf. However, this does not put the two early voters against him in the clear either.

I'm particularaly interested in phantom's vote actually. He voted last and for Manwe who was already set to die. He could have just as easily voted Legate or Nog to bring it to a double lynch, but instead voted for Manwe. Now, he could be an innocent who didn't want to see Nog or Legate go (I recall him saying he rather wanted to keep them around), or a very clever Cobbler or Wolf masking his vote in that way to keep suspicion off of himself. What really gets me about him was that he was adamant on voting for Lommy and then turned around and voted Manwe. Granted, he said he wouldn't have minded seeing Manwe lynched, but I would still like and explanation from him.

[Anguirel]

Mith and phantom, you're locked in what looks to me like a "tone of voice" hang up. phantom, you didn't pick up she was actually annoyed and so you had to poke the lair of Draugluin a bit more. You used quite strong words yourself, said you were annoyed at having to stay up and look out for Mith's unpredictability, and you weren't that annoyed, really, were you? Just mildly surprised at not having absolute power and desirous of going to bed? I mean, that's how I feel all the time, basically, and especially at 4 o'clock in the morning. You really have to give us Britaynes some allowances near the deadline. We aren't exactly thinking and writing with Ciceronian exactitude. We're more like crack fiends.

I feel the squabble is basically avoidable. Mith, you shouldn't take what the phantom says in lordly mode as any form of real personal attack. I really don't think he can help it. I've never seen him play humble - even as a tactic.

I haven't cleared either of you, by the way, but I must say you both sound completely typical. It is, though, an attribute of the phantom to sound reasonable and of Mith to sound innocent.

***

I really wish I was dead. I mean, I have a hangover, but I'm talking in werewolf terms. It is so frustrating looking at that gleaming untouched thread and knowing it has some answers in it. I mean, I expect more than the on-the-face content lurks in the world of the dead. I was reared in the Werewolf academy of Fea and Diamond. When I die, I expect there to a Crazy Twist. Something like:

"You are actually a Son of Feanor and have the combined special powers of the entire Tol-in-Gaurhoth Grimoire. On the other hand, there are actually ten werewolves."

Even that apart, the existence of Mandos is tantalisingly enigmatic. I'm not a person given to overly metaphysical situation. I worship the pagan gods and doubt they'll grant me an afterlife in a hurry. Suddenly I know what it means to be a religious thinker, a philosopher, whatever. Obsessed by the question of what happens when you die...

Okay. Manwe. I suppose I cast the vote that was instrumental in killing him, and by that token saved Nogrod and Lommy. I was aware of casting a highly, almost suspiciously significant vote when I did it. But I'd stayed up late and I really wanted to do something that would matter, with that usual unfortunate qualifier, 'for good or ill'. Certainly I voted him not because I suspected him strongly, but I suspected the others less. He was probably the most uncontroversial candidate for hanging on offer.

I regard Shasta as more likely to be an Innocent than a Cobbler. But I should reread to check if that's more than gut.

[Anguirel]

I see two recent uses of a phrase I hate, "making a mountain out of molehill." I fear it'll be used again. We are on Ard-Galen, a very flat area, and moles are presumably in more plentiful supply than mountains.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I think it's important to keep the voting close, in a game like this, that way the DL voters have to make choices and (hopefully) state their choices.

And that way the whole six baddies we have can easily steer the lynch?

Swarm of killer beers

Are you sure you didn't mistype this?

Originally Posted by Glirdan

Sorry, what??

You said you once suspected Shasta for behaving the same way as yesterday and he was the seer. Now he's dead.
I kind of doubt Glirdy is a wolf, it would have been rather bold to say that (and risk a ranger intervention) and then kill Shasta, but cobbler isn't out of the question. I'm not particularly suspecting him at the moment (his tone feels genuine and I'd have to go through his posts first) though.

Hmm I might go through the voting now just to see people's reasons. edit: No I won't, almost everybody is awake now so I'm going to have breakfast!

[Glirdan]

Originally Posted by Agan

So Glirdan what did you think to achieve when comparing Shasta's behaviour to his seer self?

Originally Posted by Agan

You said you once suspected Shasta for behaving the same way as yesterday and he was the seer. Now he's dead.

Okay, that makes more sense now, thanks. Now what did I think to acheive?? Nothing more then say I think he's innocent., which the Wolves confirmed.....or, at least confirmed he wasn't a Wolf as there is still the chance that he was a Cobbler, but the tone of his posts yesterDay did not seem Cobblerish to me.

[Anguirel]

Agan, our names, shortened, are too similar. One of us must die.

[Glirdan]

Originally Posted by Ang

Agan, our names, shortened, are too similar. One of us must die.

I know, I'll start calling you Topins. Just because I want to call someone Topins.

[Anguirel]

-+GLIRDAN

Just you try and it'll be two crosses...

[Glirdan]

Somebody woke up on the wrong side of his funny bone. Anyways, I must depart for work shortly and after that I have rehearsal. You won't hear anything from me until roughly two hours before DL and when I come back, it will be a very, VERY fast read through and vote.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

Now what did I think to acheive?? Nothing more then say I think he's innocent., which the Wolves confirmed.....

If someone reminds you of a gifted, you just don't usually say it...

Originally Posted by Topins

Agan, our names, shortened, are too similar. One of us must die.

Well it was you who brought it up, so...

By the way Rikae do we have retractable votes? (Sorry if I've missed it.)

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

I am ready to do so. Like Agan, I believe that the "fight" between Shasta and Nog that he was "trying to escalate" was an all to easy reason to put the blame on an easy target, who already had two (again, very poorly reasoned) votes, that a Wolf wanted to see gone, and I would not be surprised if one of the later voters out of the five was a Wolf.

Well, speaking for myself I was only interested in breaking the tie with Nog– out of the two of them I thought Manwe looked worse. And I don't see why the wolves would have been interested in getting rid of Manwe in particular, anyway.

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Even that apart, the existence of Mandos is tantalisingly enigmatic. I'm not a person given to overly metaphysical situation. I worship the pagan gods and doubt they'll grant me an afterlife in a hurry. Suddenly I know what it means to be a religious thinker, a philosopher, whatever. Obsessed by the question of what happens when you die...

You talk a lot with your fellow-dead, apparently– there's eighteen replies on the Mandos thread now. It seems Manwe and Shasta have had much to discuss. (Duelling, perhaps?)

EDIT:X'd with Agan.

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

And that way the whole six baddies we have can easily steer the lynch?

You assume that all wolf-packs and their cobbler allies are as masterfully co-ordinated as your pack in the Haunting of Bree. So, unless you're a wolf most packs throw caution to the wind with voting, aside from sticking to general guidelines, as to appear less co-ordinated and not in the pack-like mentality.

Are you sure you didn't mistype this?

Hahaha, corrected.

[Rikae]

There are no retractable votes.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

You assume that all wolf-packs and their cobbler allies are as masterfully co-ordinated as your pack in the Haunting of Bree.

No I don't. But even though the six of them can't communicate, it doesn't change the fact that there are awfully many of them and if we keep the voting even on purpose, it's much easier for them to lynch the one they want (ie. the most innocent-looking, or the player who's the most dangerous to the wolves, etc.). I'm definitely not saying we should just bandwagon, but I don't like the suggestion that one person shouldn't have many more votes than the others.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

And I don't see why the wolves would have been interested in getting rid of Manwe in particular, anyway.

Not interested in getting rid of Mänwe so much as saving a potential cobbler or two.

Originally Posted by Rikae

There are no retractable votes.

Okay thanks.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

All right, a few notes straightaway:

Originally Posted by elronds_daughter

Oh dear, oh dear. Poor Shasta.

This brought me to think of a few things. First, this sounds false (we know this stuff). But also second, it just occured to me that reactions of people towards deaths and such might be a lot more important in this game than normally. I mean (and now of course I am not speaking anymore about the above quote, since it is about a Nightly death - I am speaking about a thing which occured to me when thinking about it, related to lynches), we don't have the knowledge of what is somebody's role when somebody was lynched, but we can see also people's reactions to it. And, say, from a reaction of a person whose role is revealed later, we can discover his/her relation to some other deceased ones in this way. It's sort of random, but I still think good to note.

Otherwise... as for Mänwe's lynch: I am pretty much convinced that he was innocent. Reasons: WWs would prevent a lynch of a Wolf on Day 1, most likely, unless everybody else going for lynch were Wolves too. In general, it is just more likely that Mänwe was innocent. Secondly, this happens to him all the time. Again. He is just an easy victim and I know it - I have lynched him myself in my very first game. Intentionally, mind you. So honestly, now I think he is innocent too - because he's really just one of the easiest victims. Whoever voted for Mänwe gets my immediate suspicion. Honestly. That'd be Lommy, Lottie, Ang, Nerwen and TP himself (the latter with a bit of questionmark, as it was sort of "past". But it is also telling that among those there are people who are somewhat questionable or who have been behaving a bit suspiciously yesterDay, like namely Lommy or Lottie. Ang surprises me there a bit, as he seemed like behaving reasonably yesterDay, same goes for Nerwen. In any case: I am surprised if there is not one, or even more WWs among the bandwagon. Might be rather silly start for them, but I am pretty sure now at least one is there.

Aside from that, I am still suspicious about Nog from yesterDay, and have to look at him more.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I was suspicious of Glirdan and Legate for the same reasons. I thought they were taking what I said and trying to make it a mountain out of a molehill, by using aggressive language. Even if Glirdan admitted "attack" was too strong, he still made it look like I was vigorously trying to get Nog lynched, which I wasn't at all. Nog was my biggest suspect, but it was early and all I had was the pessimism and instructions to the gifted was minorly annoying. Legate then I believe called it a "crusade against pessimism."

I am not sure what seems "aggressive" to you, but I was simply stating the fact. You behaved like a crusader against pessimism, and I agree, it was only very little you had and such. That's of course normal, it was only first Day. No problem with that. But in that little you had, you behaved like crusader against pessimism. I'm saying it from the same perspective as you say you had only pessimism. "All you had was pessimism and instructions to the gifted," and all I had was your objections against pessimism. Simple as that.

Glirdy seems posting and active, fine. Ang looks like self-appointed settler of conflict, but yea, I approve at least of the general part - whether it might serve him good also for other reasons is another thing, but that surely can be checked better in his behavior in the future. So far, giving good vibes. Lottie, aside from what I have said before, looks incredibly false and her list as well. Especially these merry names smell of Cobbler. Or worse (?)

Who seems a bit worse to me now than yesterDay is actually also Mr. P Himself. I don't have anything against his self-centered behavior, that is something we all should be used to by now, but I don't like his subtle defense of Nogrod. Also, I am interested in where do his spinnings spin forwards to - I mean now the sort of starting suspicions or questions (about Agan, Boro...?), it's just that I am curious what will become of them, like for instance, what he bases the suspicion of Agan on. Well, simply - watching.

EDIT: x-ed with Agan

[Boromir88]

Koalas

Greenie - She's the honorable werewolf sort, who sticks to her principles no matter her alignment. Feeling quite good about her, and it's good to have a principled person around. I'm not even getting that "I like Greenie, but I'd really like to hear more from her to be sure" feeling that I normally get.

Nerwen - Not going to trust her as far as her suspects right now, but she looks on top-Nerwen form right now. Not letting anything slip by unnoticed and stirring the conversation.

sally - Someone I would like to see more from, but the one post looks good. Some banter, but some good comments about Lottie's behavior up to that point.

Agan - I would like to see more, she doesn't seem as controversial as usual, as

Fea - I considered sticking her in shark-infested waters because that would just amuse me, but she's definitely being a koala up to this point.

Shark infested waters

Wilwa - If she posted, she'd probably be a koala. However no posts as of yet, you go to the sharks.

Blind - What I said about wilwa applies to BG.

Nessa - I found the reasons for voting Legate odd. But think it can also be an ordo in an unfamiliar situation trying and thinking about how to best use her vote and how it applies to the Dead thread. If that makes any sense, basically...Nessa seems impressionable, but the good sort.

El - her few posts so far, the tone looks good. She offers honest opinions, even in disagreements. Only thing is, don't worry about it being your third game now. It looks like you're trying to appear like you have not gotten the hang of things, when really you've got a good grasp. So, somebody I'm watching now, but the posts don't look fake.

Anguirel - makes me a little nervous for how long it's been since we last played. Also, he is putting himself right into the thick of the action, which means he's up to something. Although, like me, Ang is always up to something, question is for good or evil? For the time being, out of those in the middle of the action, I'm feeling most comfortable with Ang. Particularly after his moderating between phantom and Mith (although for myself, I'm suspecting both much more because of that, which I will get to in a moment).

Lommy - She's always unsure of herself, but so far she's not looking "unsure" it's getting to the looking paranoid point. Bring back the other Lommy please, who was unsure, yet at the same time grounded and gave me stability. I've attributed the only thing that she had been sure of, the bororadar, has gone brokey recently. But until I see more, I'm not going to write that off as the cause.

Swarm of killer bees

Lottie - I'm seeing what sally was saying about the Lottie causing chaos of the not-good variety. The phangirl (yup had to go there) obediance thing is getting old too.

phantom and Mith - Combined because I'm beginning to see one person up to no good between to the two. Phantom looks slightly worse as the provoker, and he would know how to get Mith flustered. And Mith looks very tense, and high strung, this has historically been a sign of wolvery or honest annoyance at the perception of being attacked. I've been so far removed from Mith lately, I can't wager a tell. But it wouldn't surprise me if one of them was a wolf.

Legate - I'm waiting to see a response from. I didn't like his choice of crusade in reference to my suspicions on Nogrod. Could just be a personal disagreement I have with using that word more than Legate trying to be evil. But again, will wait for a resonse

Komodo Dragon
Nog
Glirdan

These two fall along similar to the phantom and Mith combo. Although, I'm almost to the point where I'd stake my reputation on at least one of these two is evil. Where phantom and Mith aren't looking cobblery, Nog or Glirdan to me seem like they can either be wolves or cobblers.

Nog didn't address me about my suspicions of him. Notice what he did is say "well if you have a twitter impression, I've got a fb one" (paraphrase). Whatever that means I have no idea. And again instead of addressing me on my suspicions he tries to appeal to the rest of the village that I'm looking bad but he's not willing to get the noose around me yet. Waiting to see if there would be enough support?

Nerwen has asked Glirdan a fair question about what he meant by the Manwe-bandwagon. I'm interested in Glirdan's response, but also, earlier I was not vehemently going after Nog. The above is what it looks like when I go into attack mode. Do you see the difference now Glirdy?

Godzilla

None for the time being.

Edit: crossed since my last post.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

I feel the squabble is basically avoidable. Mith, you shouldn't take what the phantom says in lordly mode as any form of real personal attack. I really don't think he can help it. I've never seen him play humble - even as a tactic.

.

Just in full "I will have no man rule over me" mode. I will how ever defer toteh eldest of my order *curtseys*. Rather like the idea of being like a crack fiend... makes a change to being a text book candidate for gall stones...

Well I have been invited out tomorrow which means I shall have to get my act together and not wait til grumpy o'clock. But I still hold with the idea that it is better to lead by example with voting rather than snap around as a cyber sheepdog grumbling that others aren't posting.

Now must have a look and see if the sole known makes any difference at all...

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

I am not sure what seems "aggressive" to you, but I was simply stating the fact. You behaved like a crusader against pessimism, and I agree, it was only very little you had and such. That's of course normal, it was only first Day. No problem with that. But in that little you had, you behaved like crusader against pessimism. I'm saying it from the same perspective as you say you had only pessimism. "All you had was pessimism and instructions to the gifted," and all I had was your objections against pessimism. Simple as that.

To me, crusade/other word forms, carry negative baggage. Don't worry in the fact that I did not take it in anyway personally, but it's a word that can bring up many emotions. I didn't think I was reacting so strongly, and irrationally driven to the destruction of pessimism, which is what I thought of when you used crusader. For me it's a very strong word, and I was wondering what you were attempting to get at by using it, particularly since I didn't think I was being crusaderly at all.

I didn't get the doom and gloom attitude or the "this is going to be a bloody mess" business. For one those are just like bantering-comments. Adds nothing to the convo, and unlike banter (which can at least be amusing to read) are entirely depressing. Add on top of that, the instructions, that really weren't instructions (which Nog naturally had to make a point on that), of what we need to do. The entire attitude looked like "well we're in trouble, because we'll only know 1 and 2 and therefor unless we do this, this is going to be a bloody mess. Oh, but you really don't have to do this of course not, no...just suggestions"

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Agan - I would like to see more, she doesn't seem as controversial as usual, as

And there's another typo/mistake/error. I was going to say more, but forgot to and now I can't remember what I was going to say after reading Legate's post.

I think it was along the lines of why did she admit I had good points about the situation and after saying Nog said exactly what she was thinking, and then she went and voted for him?

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Originally Posted by elronds_daughter

Manwe's been killed, for reasons beyond me.

Here's my thoughts on this set of Day One votes. Noggles, cover your ears; you know we never agree on this stuff. There are obviously the two camps: Day One is important and we need to pay really close attention to it; and Day One is important, but only in retrospect because while it's happening, all the good guys are totally clueless, so their votes are about as reliable as those of the wolves.

In this game, where you don't feel so bad about killing anybody because they still get to play in the Afterlife, votes become even more insignificant. You can kill anybody without worrying that you've totally screwed up everything, because even if you kill the seer, whatever, they can still do stuff.

Here's why I think people (including me) voted for people they didn't really think were wolves: odds were already against us actually nabbing a bad guy on the first day. Particularly since we don't find out if we got one or not, it's a matter of luck to kill anybody naughty. Since we have no way of knowing who we're going after, or what they are, or if they're on our side, the rationale comes down to, "Eh, we might as well just kill whoever, since it's not like they're gone forever anyway."

My vote for Nerwen (yes, Ang was dead on accurate with exhaustion coloring my decisions, as opposed to wolf-slaying) was because I figured if I had bad odds of getting a bad guy, I wasn't going to find out anyway, and I'd rather have a bit of faith of the people making decisions on the Dead Thread. Besides that, there has never been a single time that I've accurately determined her role before it was told to me, so I figured if I killed her when I found her ambiguous, there was a logical (to my mind) chance I was killing a sneaky wolf anyway.

The point in general is that Day One votes meant even less in this game, because there was no reason to feel bad about who we killed, because if we got a good guy, oops but they can still play and do good things, and if we got a bad guy, woo hoo. A lot of shrugging was involved in my decision making. As in, "Eh. Not like it matters."

That being said, now that Day One is over and we have a bit to go on, I don't think anybody (including myself) should make votes with apathy (and curiosity... I mean, I'm curious about the nature of the Dead Thread).

This brings me to:

Originally Posted by Eddy

That whole Shasta vs. Nog thing was troublesome, and probably why Shasta got dead. Makes me worry about Nog.

I agree on the first two. Not so much on the last. Shasta is the only one (or one of the only; too lazy to check my stats) that showed a pronounced attack on anybody. And that person was Nog. So my general idea is either Nog is a wolf and the team thought maybe Shasticle was the Seer, since he was actually showing some initiative and some specific ire... or (and this is the one I lean toward), the wolf team noticed that Shasta was showing pronounced opinions, and that if they killed him, the village would think they killed him because they thought he was the seer.

This translates to, either way, Shasta made himself look most seerish out of anybody else in the village, whether he was one or not. I think the wolves took advantage of his behavior to make us doubt Nog (as if we'd trust him anyway ) and to make us think we lost our seer early.

I don't know if our seer's alive or not, but I know that Shasta's crankiness made it look like he was seeing the world through informed eyes, one way or another. So basically, I'm not saying the seer (if xe's still alive) should go around declaring ximself or, conversely, hiding all of his information. Just... act rationally.

Originally Posted by Glirdy

I'm not sure if I entirely agree with you on this. After all, we have no role revealment to prove to us that Shasta was a Gifted, Cobbler or Ordo and thus have no idea in knowing where his loyalties were lying when they got into the debacle. For that, I think we should still keep Nog on our radars.

I'm with Glirdums. I think that Shasta's death says nothing about Nog, but says quite a lot about The Wolves. Not that those are mutually exclusive, but the point is that Nog as an independent entity is irrelevant to the conversation.

Originally Posted by Glirdy

I'm particularaly interested in phantom's vote actually. He voted last and for Manwe who was already set to die. He could have just as easily voted Legate or Nog to bring it to a double lynch, but instead voted for Manwe. Now, he could be an innocent who didn't want to see Nog or Legate go (I recall him saying he rather wanted to keep them around), or a very clever Cobbler or Wolf masking his vote in that way to keep suspicion off of himself. What really gets me about him was that he was adamant on voting for Lommy and then turned around and voted Manwe.

Uh, just pointing out, phanty doesn't like double lynches unless he's orchestrated them in a dramatic fashion. He *could* have created a double lynch, but if he was a good guy, why would he do that?

Originally Posted by Ang

"You are actually a Son of Feanor and have the combined special powers of the entire Tol-in-Gaurhoth Grimoire. On the other hand, there are actually ten werewolves."

I've never done that! Though I see your point. However, as a mod, I try very hard to list the existence of my plot twists on the sign up thread. Anyway, irrelevant...

Shower, clothes, coffee, etcetera... I might be a little inactive today since I have to finish my semester plan and get it and a bunch of other work turned in, not to mention revise a story so I can get back to work on sketches... Not that any of you should have to care, but that's just my explanation for why my participation will be irregular toDay.

[Aganzir]

I started this ages ago and have been distracted every now and then, but I'm going to post it nonetheless in case its of any use.

Lommy ++ Manwe:
He's been around and apparently able to talk but all he's said this far is banter. That does not look good in my books, no precious, not at all.
Earlier she said "Only banter this far. Cobbler?" She didn't vote for Nerwen (who was Wolf?) or Lottie (whom she didn't like).
The vote seems quite random and easy in a "I don't want any responsibility for the lynch" kind of way. Lommy has played with Mänwe before and should know bantering doesn't necessarily make him evil.

Legate ++ Nessa:
Of all the submarines, except for Mith (who now started posting), the one whose post was giving odd vibes to me.
Said Lottie looked cobblerish but he'd rather vote for someone who looked like a wolf. Lommy looked odd but he'd like to see more. Nessa only gave him a ??? feeling.
He could of course have voted for someone he was actually suspicious of, but he said he'll probably go for a submarine. His vote doesn't ring any alarms.

Green ++ Lommy:
since she's the best lead I have. Usually I never suspect her and she's never evil. This time, on the other hand, she seems quite off to me. Nervous, playing easily, and over-emphasizing stuff (the cobbler paranoia, for example).
She went consistently after Lommy since her first post. I find the vote somewhat fishy though. Granted, I see what she means about Lommy but she seems to explain her vote in more length than necessary - no one expects day 1 votes to be fully reasoned.

Shasta ++ Nog:
I thought about voting Phantom, but his defense seemed reasonable enough - whereas Nogrod just seemed to latch on and say "Yeah, what he said!"
Nog was giving advice to the baddies and defending phantom's (suspicious) actions.
I disagree with his reasons for voting Nog but given how suspicious Nog was, I'm good with his vote.

Agan ++ Nog (2):
(insert a lot of disagreeing with Nog over the day)

Shasta ++ Shasta
phantom... What is this? Ahh it's Nog ++ 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.
Earlier he made a list of (quiet) people he'd like to vote for and said he could vote Shasta who was giving him evil vibes but he doesn't want to base his vote on retaliation. Nog always gets more paranoid/aggressive when it's late, but I really think he was trying to put words in Shasta's mouth. I'm not too fond of his vote.

Manwe ++ Green:
A Little Green- three posts before voting, general, casts a number of doubts. backing, moderate or poor.
I'm not sure I would've gone so far as to vote for Greenie based on that (you could basically say it about anybody) but I understand why he might have found her suspicious.

Daughter ++ Nog (3):
Partly because Shasta's overreaction makes him seem innocent. And if Nog's not guilty, then he'll be a helpful ghost.
So either Nog or Shasta had to be a baddie? I have nothing against someone voting for Nog, but this is a very easy vote.

Nessa ++ Legate:
Because he voted me. And he's useful/won't muddy the waters in the dead thread.
Dear heavens, someone shoot me. I just made the worst vote ever, didn't I?
So you voted for him because you thought he was innocent?

Fea ++ Nerwen:
Active enough to be useful in the next life, not so active I'll miss her desperately in this one.
You think she's going to be useful even though you don't know if she's good or bad?

Lottie ++ Manwe (2):
for his rather worrisome post...
To me it doesn't look like he was trying to make Nog & Shasta's fight worse and Lottie seems to be making way too much of a single comment.

Boro ++ Legate (2):
Those two seem to be making too much out of my suspicions.
That's an alright reason even if I don't agree with him on Legate.

Glirdan ++ Lommy (2):
To do a quick recap: don't like here wishy-washy feeling, don't like her vote. Most of her posts have been banterish, time for that was long gone when she voted.
Understandable.

Ang ++ Manwe (3):
In contrast Manwe adopted a silent assassin position throughout much of today, then ended up joining the fray in a tone of preemptive snapping that reminded me of lupine false confidence I've seen before. He's much more likely to be wrong than right, but he feels the best I have to go on and less inevitably innocent than Nogrod.
Ang tied Mänwe with Nog which led to Mänwe's death. If Nog is a baddie, it makes Ang look bad.

Nerwen ++ Manwe (4):
So, it's Manwe and Nog tied at 3 votes each? Okay, then, that simplifies things–
She didn't really speak of Nog while she agreed Lottie brought up a point against Mänwe.

Mith ++ Legate (3):
Lommy did say she had a busy day and I don't like his trumped up "case" against me. Nothing better to go with for today.
It was a throw away in the sense that it was highly unlikely Legate would've been lynched, but that's okay if she didn't suspect any of the main candidates.

Phantom ++ Manwe (5)
I still want to kill Lommy if we have the votes to do it.
At least he made sure there would be no double lynch...

[wilwarin538]

Okee, I'm going to try to be here at least a little bit today. Right now I'm going to catch up. (6 pages!!! might take a while)

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I think it was along the lines of why did she admit I had good points about the situation and after saying Nog said exactly what she was thinking, and then she went and voted for him?

Hmm did I say you had good points? I can't remember. Seriously though, I have no idea what that whole sentence is supposed to mean.
And even though Nog's first post was good, it went worse and worse after it.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

I'm particularaly interested in phantom's vote actually. He voted last and for Manwe who was already set to die.

That's easy. I wanted to kill Lommy, but at that point it was impossible, so I had to vote for someone else. I wanted to rule out a multi-lynch, so I just boosted the lead of Manwe who was already guaranteed to die. Why put Legate or Nog under threat with my vote when I suspected neither of them? The death of one person you haven't particularly suspected is much better than the double-lynching of two people you don't suspect.

Originally Posted by Legate

I don't have anything against his self-centered behavior, that is something we all should be used to by now, but I don't like his subtle defense of Nogrod.

I didn't realize it was "subtle". It was meant to be bash-over-the-head obvious. Shasta and Nog were the two I felt the best about by the end of yesterday. Seeing one of them die during the night was bad enough, and I'm sure as heck not going to allow the other to be taken down at the same time. If the Wolves intended it to be the case then it means that they are counting on us not thinking things through clearly (I've already explained why the set-up doesn't make sense logically).

Basically I'm taking the kill somewhat personally. Why Shasta? He didn't look more like Glorfy or a Lover than anyone else (which is the most logical reason to kill him), so why him? And if not for that reason, the only other reason was to encourage a Nog lynch- a frame-up attempt so juvenile that I feel rather as if my intelligence is being insulted.

Anyway, off to class now. Talk to everyone later.

[wilwarin538]

Ok, my favourite post from Day 1:

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I'm completely lost on this entire voting for people to be good to control the dead thread. Umm, am I mistaken in believing we win by lynching wolves in the living thread? I'm sorry I'm just not understanding this logic of filling the dead thread with people we actually think are innocent...? Why are we even planning this?

1) We win by killing wolves in this life, not by filling the dead place with innocents. Am I foolish in thinking those two things contradict?

2) Simple numbers work out that innocents will control the dead thread. It serves the wolves little good to get lynched, or they lose. Maybe one wolf would start going to work if lynched, but that's not something we should concern ourselves with. And even if Cobblers seek to get themselves killed to work beyond the grave, they don't know who the wolves are.

3) What's so special about the dead thread it MUST UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES be in the control of the innocents or we're doomed? Someone from the living thread gets 2 votes...that's all yes? It's not like the dead are choosing an unstoppable force each day in the living thread, one person gets one extra vote.

So, let's end this silly "we should think about keeping the control of the dead thread in the hands of the innocents" when the real problem should be, handling the business of this thread...lynch wolves.

Because while reading the posts from yesterDay, this is precisely what I would have said had I been around. Just so everyone has an idea of what my contribution would have been. I also think I would perhaps have voted for Legate, because as I was reading I was getting bad vibes, and vibes are usually the basis of my Day 1 votes (that doesn't mean I necessarily suspect him, I just know that my Day 1 votes are usually lame and based on flimsy reasoning, and he is probably who I would have gone for).

Alrighty. So not much can be taken from Manwe's lynch, because we have no idea what he is. We can still suspect/trust people based on their votes (all votes, not just those for Manwe), but not in the usual way. Usually we can say "X voted for Y, who we now know is innocent, so...", but now it's more based on why they voted for people, so if they gave good reasoning, or if it seemed random, and so on. It's an interesting situation, cause now someone can look bad to us because of how they voted, but for all we know they actually voted a wolf (which would make them look awesome), but we don't have that knowledge. It's all just so crazy.

Shasta's death is interesting. I think it makes Glirdy look not like a wolf, because of that whole "Shasta's acting the way he did last time he was a seer". I greatly dislike this comment, and would be suspecting Glirdy fervently right now, if it wasn't for the fact that Shasta is now dead. It would be a super awful idea for a Glirdywolf to kill a person who he openly suspected to be a Seer. However, I think he could be a Cobbler, who was trying to hint to the wolves. Or Shasta's death is totally unrelated to Glirdy's comment, and more related to the fact that people seemed to like him a lot (though this doesn't exclude the possibility of Glirdy being a Cobbler, he could still have meant to hint at the Wolves but the Wolves just killed Shasta for a totally different reason).

And I need to go order some pizza. I should be back in a bit, perhaps with a list. Then I need to go to work, but will be on for about the last 3 hours of the Day.

[Nogrod]

Just finished reading. A few comments now, more later in the evening.

I do agree with Legate that Mänwe was probably an innocent. Basically because there was no last minute rescue-operation going on. In this kind of a game the wolves would save their mate on D1 with no problems.

Which brings to me to the next issue: we should actually look more carefully to any saving-attempts in this game. Now people save others form lynching also because they think that one is less suspicious (or downright trustworthy - or anything in between), but especially if we find out a pattern it might be significant.


About Shasta then. I don't see why Fea thinks he looked seerish. To me he looked first bantering only, then calculatively evil - and then he overreacted his agitation in a grand scale. Back then he felt like a caught-up wolf to me. Later (today) I started thinking he could have been one of the lovers or the ranger... That might explain his suddenly strong reaction (and seeing Shasta dead points to the wolves thinking along the same lines to me).

But the problem is, even that doesn't make sense. Had there been a general "let's lynch Shasta" -wagon developing with every other player saying how he is suspicious (like there clearly was a let's lynch Nog -wagon back then), it would have been a bit more understandable. But there wasn't any Shasta wagon.

And I do doubt that somone with Shasta's experience would just go crazy about that kind of one suspicion on him (mine, that is), especially if he was a gifted as that woud be like calling the wolves to meet him during the Night - just to take the most promising choice.



Boro: I'm a bit at loss as to what is your question to me. I have two guesses though.

Firstly, being an optimist or a pessimist isn't a wolf-trait or an inocence-trait - and being optimist or pessimist wasn't the point of my first post. Saying we have "a bloody mess" was just my general feeling of the situation (I don't know how that sounds in your ears, but in my ears as a non-native speaker it sounds more like a bit funny way of expressing the exceptionally challenging nature of our situation). So I'm failing to see what is suspicious in it - and find someone trying tob make that look suspicious himself (there's the fb-impression of you: unlike you on me, I had a good reason to suspect you).

"Giving instructions" to the gifteds then... If I find important facets of the game-mechanics which the gifteds & the goodies should be aware of and see no one has brought them up, I think it is my duty to bring them up. Of course I can't tell the seer (or anyone) what to do, but I can ask them to consider. Especially in this case as the suggestion (which I still think is a valuable one) calls for the seer to consider self-sacrifice at some phase of the game - and not on the very last Days - which surely sounds counterintuitive and odd for a normal WW-game. But this is not a normal game.

Add here talking about what the wolves will or may do and why. Like I said already yesterDay, bringing that kind of stuff out in the open sometimes nullifies the possible try-out of that plot (because now we know it), makes it easier for other innocents to spot it (had they not thoguht of it) if wolves decide to go that way, or you can try to divert them into thinking about a ploy which in the last instance is not in their objective interest but actually serves us etc. etc. There are many reasons incents should to do those.


I have to leave now for a while but wil be back with some other issues.


EDIT: x'd with Wilwa

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by the phantom

the only other reason was to encourage a Nog lynch- a frame-up attempt so juvenile that I feel rather as if my intelligence is being insulted.

In last game, we let Nessa Wolfrunya live even though two or three kills pointed at her, thinking the wolves were just trying to frame her.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I do agree with Legate that Mänwe was probably an innocent. Basically because there was no last minute rescue-operation going on. In this kind of a game the wolves would save their mate on D1 with no problems.

No. Nog I don't know if I should laugh or cry. Are we really so different, or are you intentionally trying to mislead us?
There were quite few people around at deadline and it's possible none of them was a wolf (although wolves tend to like to stay online till the end if possible), but even if they all were wolves, Mänwe might still have been a cobbler. You're making things sound far simpler than they are.

and then he overreacted his agitation in a grand scale.

I think you were actually being quite rude to him.

I want to hear more from Nog... I'm still feeling bad about him.

[Thinlómien]

Okay I'm here. I'm currently on a summer cottage with a bunch of friends and we are playing an RPG most of the time. Unfortunately, I happen to be the game master so I don't have much time when I'm not needed, so my time is very limited. I'm going to comment on stuff from yesterDay and toDay, then say if there's something more, then vote and go. I know that's pretty awful for contribution, but I'll be around more on Day3, whichever thread I'll be posting on.

First off, still a few words - I was quite surprised to come here and find Mänwë dead. I know my vote was a bit of a throwaway and I hadn't had much time or evidence to make a better choice. So, it definitely made me raise my eyebrows to find out so many people followed my vote. I have hard time thinking everybody else (including those who voted some six hours later than me) were just as clueless as me and that it's normal they would join such a random bandwagon. Mänwë was suspicious enough to merit one vote, but definitely not a bandwagon. I know this sounds a bit hypocritical coming from me, but I for one would not have given Mänwë a second or third vote on those grounds.

Shasta then. I would need to check his posts to see if he seemed seerish or glorfy or lovery. It's interesting to think about the first option: I think recently people have been ignoring clear aiming-at-the-seer kills and missed valuable information. Nog could be a wolf - I think wolves can be just as ruthless in this game as they want because no one quite knows what to expect of them. On the other hand, it could very well be he was taken for some other reason, or that the wolves are trying to frame Nog. (Which leads to the question: who would want to do this? Is there anyone special? Or would the wolves just generally enjoy the attantion ona loudmouth innocent?) I also think one rather believable explanation for Shasta's death is that he was continuing the eternal lovey-dovey jokes with Nerwen. Now, the lovers might want to be careful this time, but could Shasta and Nerwen resist the temptation, or even consider it a threat given they flirt all the time anyway? And in any case wolves who do not know them too well could have attacked them for that anyway. (This would point at ... Ed? Ang? Mith...?)

Anyway, while you think about that, I'm off to make the huge-y post.


edit: xed with Aggs who is either on the right track or falling victim to a grand wolvish scheme... knowing her it could be either

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Nog

I do agree with Legate that Mänwe was probably an innocent. Basically because there was no last minute rescue-operation going on.

I don't know about that. Wilwa and Sally were both gone completely it seems (though we didn't know it at the time), and the Manwe votes came fairly late in the order, so really the only people who could've launched a rescue were Mith and I, and honestly even that was out once Nerwen's vote was in. A rescue attempt was extremely likely to end in nothing except a double-lynch. So I'd say all that proves is that Mith, Manwe, and I aren't all packmates, as we would've been sure to send down an innocent with our pal.

And just to see if I'm on your page, Nog, would you agree with me when I say you've been purposefully manipulative this game, in particular attempting to plant a certain idea into the minds of the village that isn't quite truthful but could very well yield a positive result? Because at this time much of my trust of you is based upon what I thought you were trying to do Day 1. Of course it may be foolishness to expect you to deny it given what it gains you, but I do at least hope for honesty.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Ang

Mith and phantom, you're locked in what looks to me like a "tone of voice" hang up. phantom, you didn't pick up she was actually annoyed and so you had to poke the lair of Draugluin a bit more. You used quite strong words yourself, said you were annoyed at having to stay up and look out for Mith's unpredictability, and you weren't that annoyed, really, were you?

Yes, I was annoyed. Not angry at all, nothing strong- just annoyed. It wasn't that I was being held from bed in RL, but in fact I was trying to start on another pressing project and I was getting tired of waiting, and I was also annoyed that there wasn't anyone else around (I was greatly fearing Wilwa running in last minute and casting an unpredictable vote), and annoyed that I didn't know what the one person that was around was going to do. Basically I felt like it was all on me to prevent an impending catastrophe when I really should've been working on something else. (But you're right in your assumption that I wasn't meaning to "poke the sleeping dragon", but just stating my opinion.)

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Ang

I really wish I was dead. I mean, I have a hangover, but I'm talking in werewolf terms. It is so frustrating looking at that gleaming untouched thread and knowing it has some answers in it.

Gah, don't say that! It just makes me paranoid. Seriously, I have this gnawing fear that we'll be debating something one day and everyone is sharing opinions that seem oddly formed and I'll just know that I'm the only person who isn't reading the Dead Thread!

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

No. Nog I don't know if I should laugh or cry. Are we really so different, or are you intentionally trying to mislead us?
There were quite few people around at deadline and it's possible none of them was a wolf (although wolves tend to like to stay online till the end if possible), but even if they all were wolves, Mänwe might still have been a cobbler. You're making things sound far simpler than they are.

It is perfectly possible no wolf was there at the DL, but as you said there were quite many people (and what you say about wolves' general willingness to make it for the DL) so it seems very probable there were wolves around.

As I very well know my innocence and now feel like Mänwe was an innocent as well, it would mean the top two contenders for lynching in the end of yesterDay were innocents and the wolves were in no panic to make any strong moves. There is a chance that some of the last votes were made to make a double-lynch possible, and a slight chance there could have been a faint attempt to help Mänwe (I think the latter a bit far-fetched, but possible, surely, otherwise I'd say I have strong and explicit reasons to firmly allege that Mänwe was/is innocent ).

Mänwe is a cobbler? Surely. Perfectly possible. If he thought both me and Shasta were innocents that "fueling the flames" -comment that probably got him lynched would look like a cobblery one.

I said innocent, not ordo, or ordinary innocent. Meaning he's not a wolf (whom the others tried to save). I'm a bit puzzled of the way you try to make me look suspicious... Are you trying to make me suspect you? Well, no deal done.

Originally Posted by Agan

I think you were actually being quite rude to him.

I do think it is a perfectly valid and normal way of playing werewolf that you speculate on the motives behind what someone says looking how a wolf-X would have thought and which would have been her/his motives - or how what X said could be said by a wolf-X.

I said he picked me from me and tp because it was the easier pick as I would not be there to defend myself. A perfectly valid point I think as I could see no real difference in the input of what I and the phantom had been talking. And of course we had been the voice of reason there, so him suspecting us from being seriously helpful and making sense felt really wolvish to me. (I must say I was actually quite puzzled as to how tp seemed to think about the same things and in generally the same way - but more of the phantom later as I have now changed my mind on him a bit).

Let's look at your own post Aganzir: you say

are you intentionally trying to mislead us?

I don't know if it's a generational, linguistical or whateverical difference that is involved, but to me what I quoted from your post means openly entertaining a possibility that I am intentionally trying to mislead people and thus have bad intentions - which is exactly what my post on Shasta did: it openly entertained a possibility that he made certain convenient choices for a wolf.

I can't see you being able to deny that what you wanted to express by that quoted part was asking others to think that I am intentionlly trying to mislead - and thus think that I'm having bad intentions aka. being a baddie of some sort.

The fact that you used a questionmark doesn't change the substance or the willed effect of the intended message.

Still, I'm not calling you rude or get crazy.

[the phantom]

As far as the "pessimism vs optimism" thing, I frankly didn't see a great deal of the former from Nog at all, but rather he lays things out as they exist with possibilities of success and failure. Boro on the other hand I dislike because his positivity seems like sand-bagging, you know? Making it look as if the deck is stacked against his side in order to make himself feel better no matter what the outcome. Or perhaps he legitimately believes it and is in a round about way complaining. I know from experience that as a baddie it's easy to spot all the ways in which things could go horrifically wrong and it does make one feel rather optimistic on behalf of the village.

[Thinlómien]

Okay I'm splitting this novel to make it more readable...

Originally Posted by Agan

Actually I disagree. If they manage to kill both Glorfindel and a lover before the seer, there's no one to bring back a word from Mandos.

Yes, but it still doesn't change the fact that the seer can reveal while still living, as usual. Now, there will undoubtedly be a counter-reveal given the amount of cobblers in this game (unless they all happen to die before the seer decides to come out, which is possible), but the seer reveal is still a threat to the wolves because although we cannot know if we are doing the right thing or not, we have a 50% chance of lynching a wolf if we lynch somebody whom a seer has named as a wolf. That's why I think the wolves want to kill the seer asap. Also, aiming for Glorfy or lovers is kind of gambling for them: they don't know if they succeeded or not, and they still don't have the seer and there's two of them (1. lovers and 2. glorfy). If they aim for the message birds, with bad luck they leave at least half of them alive and boom! when they finally hit the seer on Night5 or something like that and there's still say glorfy remaining, he can return with info about much more living people than if he returned with the info of a seer who died on Night2 or 3. I wouldn't also be surprised if wolves tried avoiding killing lovers and glorfy for the whole game and thus rendering them rather useless by leaving them for devoruing in the end-game.

Originally Posted by Agan

It's not the best role for people with an ego... but it's possible.

Tell me about it. *remembers a certain video about self as cobbler*

Originally Posted by Legate

Anyway, I think there is actually something rather awkward about Lommy, her comments don't seem like that of her usual self. She had once called me "a hog on laughing gas" (when I was innocent), so I think it's not unfair if I call her in return "running like a headless chicken", because that's exactly what it seems like.

Thanks darling.

Originally Posted by Greenie

To tell you the truth, Lommy is creeping me out at the moment. Wanting to kill phantom and Lottie strikes me as awfully easy - also partly because I'm quite fine with both of them right now. Also, her idea of a Bobbler is pretty far-fetched, but I don't know if it's meant as fully serious or not. And regardless of the very last sentence, the paragraph about being paranoid with all the cobblers looks - well - cobblerish to me.

1. Tp and Lottie might not seem extra suspicious but they kind of annoy(ed) me. 2. I know it was far-fetched, but worth pointing out. I wouldn't discredit the idea of cobblers trying to pass on information to the wolves via hints. 3. I feel so much like saying: in all seriousness, I'm not a cobbler, but I think that wouldn't help my case.

Originally Posted by Greenie

Wait.. The perspective of that last sentence is strange, considering that the topic I believe was innocents uniting in Mandos.

Good catch!

Originally Posted by Greenie

Usually I never suspect her and she's never evil.

Okay now that was too much! You always suspect me, at least on Day1. Are you intentionally trying to mislead people about this??

Originally Posted by phanty

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.

If the Wolves want to screw things up in Dead-Land, make them flush a kill on a Cobbler.

The obvious drawback is if we adopt this plan and all three Cobblers act Cobblerish and stay alive and, IF we fail to lynch Wolves early on, the Baddies can clinch victory a couple days before they normally could. But really that would assume that every little thing went wrong, yes?

So.... long live the Cobblers?

I think you're kind of overestimating the power of cobblers. In a way you're right, we should not make cobblers our prime target. Still, we shouldn't ignore them either. The worst havoc they can do on the dead thread is a false reveal or giving a wolf one extra vote. And false reveals can be just as bad here. So I wouldn't worry too much.

Originally Posted by Fea

Leijonien kanssa.

Trying to buddy her up, eh?

I don't get why tp is so obsessed about the dead thread. Pardon me for bringing the cobblers up again, but that strikes me as something a phabbler would do: smoothly and subtly try to concentrate the discussion on something rather irrelevant, but not too relevant to raise too many eyebrows.


edit: xed with everyone