WW LII -- Clue (SOCIALITES WIN)

[Crim]

Oh, and

VOTE NO LYNCH

[Chief Rum]

No, my objection has been that THERE IS NO REASON FOR US TO TRUST THAT ANYBODY, VILLAGER OR WOLF, IS PUTTING FORWARD GOOD INFORMATION. Now you are trying to engage me in the reasons why, which as I have said are myriad.

Well, if someone is caught in a lie, st.cronin, that is up to them to defend themselves. You know what happens in this game if you lie without good reason. If someone says what they know and lies, they will need to say why they lied, and prove they aren't wolves putting out disinformation. If someone doesn't say their information at all, there is a reasonable suspicion they are being wolfish and shouldn't complain if people look at them askance for keeping their clues hidden.

No reason? Come on, st.cronin, you know that's not true. There is still plenty of reason to trust that information if the player offering it turns out to be a villager. Sure, there is wiggle room, but by and large, people aren't going to flat out lie about that if they're a villager for the exact reason I state above: no one wants to be lynched when they are a villager for lying unnecessarily.

[Chief Rum]

Having said that, I do think there is value in everyone sharing thier non-room clues. As CR points out, this info will likely become more valuable in the future, as we're able to start constructing a COT.

I'm curious, though, does anyone have an opinion of whether someone who is attacked but protected by Col. Mustard gets any info? Will they even be notified that they were attacked? If not, it's going to be hard to corroborate any bodyguard reveal.

Also, will we know if Mr. Green (or Prof Plum) scans us? I've prolly only read through about five WW games, and generally the scannee gets some sort of info, yes?

That goes from game to game, in both cases. My game before this one didn't have any information to those being guarded or scanned. But I know plenty do.

Usually the GM doesn't put that information out there to start, so we may have to wait for a deadline before we can know this.

[SnDvls]

nameless socialite checking in

finally caught up

I have 2 clues a room and a person, but for now I'll hold that info so see if someone tries to claim it as theirs.

[Crim]

nameless socialite checking in

finally caught up

I have 2 clues a room and a person, but for now I'll hold that info so see if someone tries to claim it as theirs.

Thanks for not being the murderer, SnDvls. Now, how do you feel about full moons? Silver bullets? Hmm?

[Crim]

Welp, I'm off to bed. Doesn't look like a lynching's likely tomorrow, which is fine by me. I'll prolly not be back on until around 8 or 9pm Eastern Wednesday.

[path12]

Also, will we know if Mr. Green (or Prof Plum) scans us? I've prolly only read through about five WW games, and generally the scannee gets some sort of info, yes?

I think there have been more games where you don't know you were scanned than ones where you do.

[Barkeep49]

Let's clear up the Mustard confusion. This from the rules:

You are Col. Mustard, a military officer recently returned from the Far East. Your military training allows you to protect one person each night from any kind of attack. No identities will be revealed from this action, but you will be notified if your services end up being required. You may not protect the same person on two consecutive nights.

So you don't learn who attacked you but you do learn that you prevented a kill. Seems straight forward enough for me.

[ntndeacon]

you do realize we are playing Werewolf, where a duck is never. ever. just a duck.:eek: :D

Does that mean it is a were duck? eek!

I thikn I will go hide from the wolves and the Ducks

[ntndeacon]

Incorrect. You can still get weapon or person info. If you get room info that is already out there, it is less useful, but it does corroborate the previous person's claim. It's a trust building mechanism in that sense.



The only questionable part about this statement, is didnt Pass say that the info you get is not neccesarily random. if it is not random we might all get the same info in each room. I know that makes such info more to be trusted, but it is something to think on that we might get the same info on different nights.

[Chief Rum]

The only questionable part about this statement, is didnt Pass say that the info you get is not neccesarily random. if it is not random we might all get the same info in each room. I know that makes such info more to be trusted, but it is something to think on that we might get the same info on different nights.

Well, I actually asked him that question and I don't think he responded. I'll dig it up and ask it again.

[Chief Rum]

Each night, you name a person, room, and weapon. By the next morning, if available, you will learn evidence that one of those three things was not involved in the crime.

Okay, the above is in response to my question here:

Do the same people learn the same things from the a stay in the same room on different nights? So if I stay in the Lounge one night and find a clue, and st. cronin stays in the Lounge the next night, will he also find the same clue?

And can item and murderer identity information only be gained from the room where the murder occurred, or can it be found in any other room?

Okay, well, Pass's response was to point out that the framework of my question wasn't correct (it was more than just naming a room to hang in). So he sorta dodged the point I was trying to get about whether we get the same results if different people ask the same question.

So I guess I'll rephrase it.

PASSACAGLIA: If two people turn in the same room, person and weapon, do they get the same response? Is there a set of rules governing how this information is determined, or is there a random element to it? Thanks.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Off to work and I won't be back before the deadline.

VOTE NO LYNCH

[Passacaglia]

PASSACAGLIA: If two people turn in the same room, person and weapon, do they get the same response?

It's possible.


Is there a set of rules governing how this information is determined, or is there a random element to it?

Both.

Thanks.

You're welcome!

[Swaggs]

I won't be back to work until after the deadline, but I should be able to play quite a bit more the next few days.

Vote No Lynch

[ntndeacon]

It's possible.




Both.



You're welcome!

You know. I wonder if the randomness of it comes from going from person to person in some random ordeuntil you hit one of the cards they have.

For example
if in my guess I put down Sndvls frying pan and hall and the next random person after me was Crim then I would see that SnDvls was not in the murder.

Hopefully this example makes sense. Unfortunately I doubt I will be around to discuss the possibility til after the deadline. (Unless I get REALLLL Lucky at work.)

So since Ineed to vote, I might as well follow the crowd today.

Vote No Lynch

[DaddyTorgo]

Do we think that this whole "room" thing works like it worked in the JtR game? Where we will be able to see who else was in the room with us? I havn't read since last night so I dunno if that's been discussed...but if so...it would seem to make sense to make a "schedule" as it were

[st.cronin]

Do we think that this whole "room" thing works like it worked in the JtR game? Where we will be able to see who else was in the room with us? I havn't read since last night so I dunno if that's been discussed...but if so...it would seem to make sense to make a "schedule" as it were

That would be a terrible idea, it would allow the wolves to pick us off at their whim!

[DaddyTorgo]

That would be a terrible idea, it would allow the wolves to pick us off at their whim!

but if we knew who else was supposed to be in the room...ie...if our night actions tell us who else is there...it will make it easy to track them down.

[DaddyTorgo]

dola

like i said...only makes sense IF as the night actions look like "You were in the study. You saw person x, y, z in there and discovered that the murder didn't happen via m."

[Telle]

The following people have made no mention of their clues: Swaggs, LoneStarGirl, ntndeacon, Schmidty

The following people have stated that they do not wish to reveal some or all of their clues: Lathum, st.cronin, Jonathan Ezarik, path12, SnDvls, saldana, Crim

[oliegirl]

Has anyone taken the time to make a chart of some sort to compare the clues that everyone has revealed? I'm at work and pretty busy right now, but I might be able to get it done later depending on how the day goes. It seems like that might be a good place to start to see if there is any contradicting information and start to try to figure out who might be a wolf or the murderer.

[Alan T]

Do we think that this whole "room" thing works like it worked in the JtR game? Where we will be able to see who else was in the room with us? I havn't read since last night so I dunno if that's been discussed...but if so...it would seem to make sense to make a "schedule" as it were

I really don't like the idea of a schedule. It seems from the rules that our best chance at protection this game is trying to be where the wolves don't think we are. They still have to find us according to this in the rules:

Wolves know the identity of the murderer, and the murderer knows the identity of the wolves. However, they will not have PM privileges.
Each wolf submits a kill by naming the socialite he or she wants to kill, and a room to look for that person in. The kill is successful if the target is found in that room, or a room adjoining that room. Here is a map

So I think placing a "schedule" out does nothing but tells the wolves where to hunt. However the flip side of that is for us to reach one of our victory goals, we need to try to narrow down some clues, and that happens alot quicker with sharing than without sharing.

I understand people's concerns about revealing rooms from our initial clues, but I guess the way that I see it.. if we don't get those clues we end up wasting time in those rooms anyways and don't work towards completing our goal and eventually we'll share enough of those events to narrow it down more just a few days later.

I personally wouldn't mind narrowing down the room choice a bit more because then it gives more power to our side.. Sure the wolves will have a narrowed down area to possibly look in, but we don't necessarily have to go there that turn. If we are worried for our own safety we can try to pull a fast one and go somewhere they won't be looking.

I think right now we have what? 1 murderer and how many wolves? 2? That leaves 16 villagers so each of us have a 1/16 chance of being the night kill target now. While we have more people and less chance of being hit, we should try to figure out our clues NOW instead of later.

If we wait 2-3 days before trying to get down into it more, we'll have what? 3 - 5 less villagers and likely the wolves will have a better idea of who to target as well by then from reveals, interaction or who knows what. So that makes it a higher chance of then being killed and gives us less flexibility to try to hunt for clues.

For instance right now we have people who have stated that the following rooms were not the murder scene:

Lounge
Kitchen
Study
Bathroom
Living Room
Billiard Room

So now instead of me having to just blindly guess, I can at least make an educated decision if I want to try to avoid a wolf or try to find clues tonight. I guess I just don't see where sharing necessarily means we help the wolves pick us off. We still have individual choices of where to go, or if we want to double check someone's information or whatnot.

[Telle]

Has anyone taken the time to make a chart of some sort to compare the clues that everyone has revealed? I'm at work and pretty busy right now, but I might be able to get it done later depending on how the day goes. It seems like that might be a good place to start to see if there is any contradicting information and start to try to figure out who might be a wolf or the murderer.

Rooms:
Kitchen - Telle
Study - Telle
Billiard Room - Telle
Living Room - Chief Rum
Bathroom - RendeR
Lounge - DaddyTorgo

Weapons:
revolver - Alan T
knife - DaddyTorgo
candlestick - oliegirl
frying pan - Crim

Suspects:
Daddytorgo - Alan T
Telle - Chief Rum
Schmidty - RendeR
Lathum - Barkeep49
saldana - Barkeep49
Jonathan Ezarik - oliegirl
LoneStarGirl - Neon_Chaos
oliegirl - Neon_Chaos
SnDvls - Crim

[Alan T]

Has anyone taken the time to make a chart of some sort to compare the clues that everyone has revealed? I'm at work and pretty busy right now, but I might be able to get it done later depending on how the day goes. It seems like that might be a good place to start to see if there is any contradicting information and start to try to figure out who might be a wolf or the murderer.


Yeah, I've been keeping track of it. So far no contradictions. Since the wolves get clues too, I highly doubt that someone will be foolish enough to slip up on something that was handed them to start though.

[Lathum]

I have 2 more rooms that the murder didn't happen in.

[Lathum]

with my 2 rooms that would cut the rooms in half.

The reason I am reluctant to reveal is I don't want to give the wolves to much info to narrow things down.

[DaddyTorgo]

or they can pick you off and we'll never learn though lathum.

don't you see. as has been said earlier, with all that's going on this game COULD (if we get no blocks/are unlucky) be a 5 day game.

we need to get the information out there to maximize our chances. and just because someone clears a room doesn't mean that nobody can go there. people are of course free to go to rooms that are already "cleared" to try to learn other tidbits of the murder. but having all the information out there means that people will know which 8 rooms need to be checked at some point. if we get a sense the wolves are blanketing those rooms, well we can stay away and focus on the who/what and leave the rooms for later.

just because a room is clear doesn't mean that nobody will be in it that night. and with the whole "adjoining" thing anyways, it's a pretty moot point. not like holding it to yourself makes you that much safer.

[st.cronin]

or they can pick you off and we'll never learn though lathum.

don't you see. as has been said earlier, with all that's going on this game COULD (if we get no blocks/are unlucky) be a 5 day game.

we need to get the information out there to maximize our chances. and just because someone clears a room doesn't mean that nobody can go there. people are of course free to go to rooms that are already "cleared" to try to learn other tidbits of the murder. but having all the information out there means that people will know which 8 rooms need to be checked at some point. if we get a sense the wolves are blanketing those rooms, well we can stay away and focus on the who/what and leave the rooms for later.

just because a room is clear doesn't mean that nobody will be in it that night. and with the whole "adjoining" thing anyways, it's a pretty moot point. not like holding it to yourself makes you that much safer.

Do you understand how this works? The wolves don't pick a room, and if there's somebody there, they get to kill them. They have to give a name and a room. That's why Lathum doesn't want to give up his rooms - he's not worried about the wolves killing somebody, he's worried about the wolves killing HIM.

[DaddyTorgo]

Do you understand how this works? The wolves don't pick a room, and if there's somebody there, they get to kill them. They have to give a name and a room. That's why Lathum doesn't want to give up his rooms - he's not worried about the wolves killing somebody, he's worried about the wolves killing HIM.

i understand it. and my point is that he can give up his rooms and then any of a number of different people can be involved in checking the rooms out, and if he wants to check them out he's going to have a lot harder time checking out all 14 remaining rooms on his own.

not to mention that with the "adjoining rooms" thing going on (the wolves being able to find you not just in one room but in adjoining rooms) his odds of survival really aren't increased all that much by holding onto the 2 names.

[Lathum]

i understand it. and my point is that he can give up his rooms and then any of a number of different people can be involved in checking the rooms out, and if he wants to check them out he's going to have a lot harder time checking out all 14 remaining rooms on his own.

not to mention that with the "adjoining rooms" thing going on (the wolves being able to find you not just in one room but in adjoining rooms) his odds of survival really aren't increased all that much by holding onto the 2 names.

we are all on our own for now unless you want to announce what room you are going to. I suggest not doing that.

[st.cronin]

i understand it. and my point is that he can give up his rooms and then any of a number of different people can be involved in checking the rooms out, and if he wants to check them out he's going to have a lot harder time checking out all 14 remaining rooms on his own.

not to mention that with the "adjoining rooms" thing going on (the wolves being able to find you not just in one room but in adjoining rooms) his odds of survival really aren't increased all that much by holding onto the 2 names.

So what's the point of him giving up his rooms if other people might want to check out his rooms, anyway. There's only a 1/3 chance of his clue being the one that gets verified, anyway, if somebody does decide to check his room.

As I said before, I understand if people want to try to narrow down who the murderer is. If I had a name, I would put it out there. That seems legit.

[DaddyTorgo]

because the information could prove valuable later once who discover who and how. but if people end up being killed and taking it to their graves we will never know.

and the murderer gets to kill every night without having to rely on guessing where people are. he ought to be high priority along with the wolves.

[DaddyTorgo]

dola

should read "once we discover" not "once who discover"

[Telle]

The room and weapon info is only valuable for the individual victory and in trying to trap the "bad guys" in a lie.

However, the person info is valuable in trying to capture the murderer, which is very important since s/he gets to kill someone every single night. So if you have received a person clue, please come out with it. Of course the murderer and possibly the wolves will lie, but we will hopefully be able to weed that out as we learn who to trust and who not to.

[DaddyTorgo]

The room and weapon info is only valuable for the individual victory and in trying to trap the "bad guys" in a lie.

However, the person info is valuable in trying to capture the murderer, which is very important since s/he gets to kill someone every single night. So if you have received a person clue, please come out with it. Of course the murderer and possibly the wolves will lie, but we will hopefully be able to weed that out as we learn who to trust and who not to.

no. we have to have all 3 pieces of the puzzle to capture the murderer i think.

i mean i guess we could lynch the murderer instead of accusing him.

has someone already asked pass what would happen then?

[Telle]

I believe what Pass has said is that if the murderer gets lynched before someone's made an accurate accusation then there's no individual victory. But as far as I'm concerned that's not a real big deal.. the bigger issue is getting a village victory.

[DaddyTorgo]

I believe what Pass has said is that if the murderer gets lynched before someone's made an accurate accusation then there's no individual victory. But as far as I'm concerned that's not a real big deal.. the bigger issue is getting a village victory.



aaaah okay.

well then yeah...names names names are what is important most of all

[DaddyTorgo]

there's only 7 possible people who could be the murderer assuming all information is accurate that is up there.

does anyone else have any names they were given?

[Alan T]

no. we have to have all 3 pieces of the puzzle to capture the murderer i think.

i mean i guess we could lynch the murderer instead of accusing him.

has someone already asked pass what would happen then?

I believe someone did. if we lynch the murderer he loses, but we don't fufill our goal. If we don't achieve a personal victory goal by outing the murderer, we then have to do the normal elimination of all of the wolves.

I think calling it a personal victory goal is kind of misleading though. Pass said multiple people can share the personal victory by posting the same accusation. So theoretically we can all get the personal victory by solving the clues from the murderer too. I don't think we should discount that option.

[Lathum]

Not sure if this is relevant, but by releasing who ISN'T the murderer aren't we putting a target on their backs?

[Alan T]

Not sure if this is relevant, but by releasing who ISN'T the murderer aren't we putting a target on their backs?

Maybe so, but if the list is 13-15 people long, how much of a target is that?

[DaddyTorgo]

I believe someone did. if we lynch the murderer he loses, but we don't fufill our goal. If we don't achieve a personal victory goal by outing the murderer, we then have to do the normal elimination of all of the wolves.

I think calling it a personal victory goal is kind of misleading though. Pass said multiple people can share the personal victory by posting the same accusation. So theoretically we can all get the personal victory by solving the clues from the murderer too. I don't think we should discount that option.

so if we achieve that victory condition does the "killing the wolves" goal just not matter? ie...the game will be over?

because if that's true than certainly we can work towards that too

[DaddyTorgo]

Maybe so, but if the list is 13-15 people long, how much of a target is that?

true. and the list of who the murderer could be will get smaller as people check back in with their clues after the night.

provides nice cover for the Mr. Green guy too...gives him a way to sneak his views into the results of the general population's

[Alan T]

so if we achieve that victory condition does the "killing the wolves" goal just not matter? ie...the game will be over?

because if that's true than certainly we can work towards that too

Well thats the thing that is confusing to me slightly. When an individual victory occurs, is the game over? PASSACAGLIA - Can you clarify this?



Accusation (individual victory)
An individual socialite wins the game by making an accusation. This accusation must be in bold, and must be of the form:
I accuse (Passacaglia) of murdering Mr. Boddy in the (Hall) with the (Revolver).
If this accusation is correct, that socialite wins the game. If this accusation is incorrect, the socialite is lynched for his or her rabble rousing. I will wait 12 hours before processing the accusation. If someone else wants to make the same accusation, they may do so, and share either the victory or death (I'm doing this in case an accusation comes right after deadline).

Socialite Victory
A victory for the socialites is obtained if all the wolves and the murderer are lynched before a successful accusation is made.


If this is indeed the case, those who horde their information might not necessarily be wolves, or the murderer.. but might be socialites trying to steal the victory for themselves. Does this mean that some of the villagers might lie in order to mislead the rest of us along the way too?

I know plenty of WW players who only feel if they win if they are alive at the end, so I wouldn't be suprised if some try to get the individual victory at the sake of the rest of us..

[oliegirl]

I haven't played too many WW games, I think this is my 4th or 5th...but something is puzzling me. I noticed that people started casting "No Lynch" votes last night, when the first deadline was still 24 hours away. What is the point of this? In my opinion, that flags them as a wolf...it would make sense that the wolves would want us as villagers/socialites to waste a night of voting and get that "bandwagon" started as soon as possible. I understand the reasoning behing a No Lynch vote, and I may end up voting that way, but to cast that vote so early doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Anyone have any insight into this? Opinions? Ideas???

[Passacaglia]

Well thats the thing that is confusing to me slightly. When an individual victory occurs, is the game over? PASSACAGLIA - Can you clarify this?

That is correct.

[DaddyTorgo]

I haven't played too many WW games, I think this is my 4th or 5th...but something is puzzling me. I noticed that people started casting "No Lynch" votes last night, when the first deadline was still 24 hours away. What is the point of this? In my opinion, that flags them as a wolf...it would make sense that the wolves would want us as villagers/socialites to waste a night of voting and get that "bandwagon" started as soon as possible. I understand the reasoning behing a No Lynch vote, and I may end up voting that way, but to cast that vote so early doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Anyone have any insight into this? Opinions? Ideas???

as placeholders? because they believe that this is the right way to go and unlike a vote to lynch a particular person their view is less likely to change?

[Alan T]

I haven't played too many WW games, I think this is my 4th or 5th...but something is puzzling me. I noticed that people started casting "No Lynch" votes last night, when the first deadline was still 24 hours away. What is the point of this? In my opinion, that flags them as a wolf...it would make sense that the wolves would want us as villagers/socialites to waste a night of voting and get that "bandwagon" started as soon as possible. I understand the reasoning behing a No Lynch vote, and I may end up voting that way, but to cast that vote so early doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Anyone have any insight into this? Opinions? Ideas???

Maybe I am biased being one of the early no lynch voters.... Basically long story short...


Long ago I used to be a heavy proponent of always wanting a lynch.. Lynch = info, etc.

I slowly have changed my opinion of this over the course of the past few months. The last two no lynch games I was a part of (One game I ran and one I was a bodyguard in), both games the villagers were tremendously helped by having a no lynch vote there. Perhaps it wasn't necessarily just the no lynch vote that helped, but the circumstances surrounding it also.. So it probably isn't a hard fast rule that says 100% of the time no lynch on day 1 is good.

However after the last two games, I think I've become convinced that if we don't have information on day 1 (since there is no night 0), we have basically a 3/19 chance of getting a wolf and a 16/19 chance of getting a villager. Likewise its a higher chance of having 2 or even 3 villagers before the first bad guy. So even a run off on day 1 between two people more often than not is just two villagers and we learn nothing from it.

If we push that day 1 kill back a day, now you suddenly have multiple people that night with new information, we'll all receive our clues, etc. We are that much more informed on who to vote for, and more importantly didn't do the wolf's work for them by killing one of our own, thus making it that much further away for them from their victory goals.

[DaddyTorgo]

that's hot. therefore all information becomes relevent. so i guess the question then becomes: hey socialites...do you see yourselves as villagers first and socialites second, or socialites first and villagers second?

[Alan T]

that's hot. therefore all information becomes relevent. so i guess the question then becomes: hey socialites...do you see yourselves as villagers first and socialites second, or socialites first and villagers second?

Is that your way of asking if other socialites would rather win the prize on their own and not share by giving out bogus information? :)

[DaddyTorgo]

lol. socialite...villager...wait i'm really confused.

so a villager victory we have to get BOTH? or not?

[DaddyTorgo]

Is that your way of asking if other socialites would rather win the prize on their own and not share by giving out bogus information? :)

yes. and still being confused by the victory conditions and unique game vocabulary. page 1 seems to say that we need both, and yet pass just said we didn't.

[Alan T]

lol. socialite...villager...wait i'm really confused.

so a villager victory we have to get BOTH? or not?

Individual victory (one or a group of socialites win) - A correct accusation of the murderer, the room and the weapon. Game is over, that socialite (or those socialites) win. If they are wrong, they die due to lynching.

Team victory (all socialites win) - we lynch the murderer and the wolves without anyone getting a correct accusation off.

So basically if anyone other than you gets a correct accusation off, you lose they win.

[DaddyTorgo]

wow...my head is spinning in circles...i need food.

basically: are people going to see an "individual victory" that we reach (since we all contribute and we can all make the same accusation and share the glory), as equally as good as a traditional villager-victory???

i sure hope so. i see no reason why not

[oliegirl]

As a socialite, I plan on doing what needs to be done to ensure a socialite victory, I really am not worried about an individual victory.

[Alan T]

yes. and still being confused by the victory conditions and unique game vocabulary. page 1 seems to say that we need both, and yet pass just said we didn't.


Ok, its like this:

Socialite can do the following:

1) Win as a team with all other socialites if they lynch all the bad guys and no correct accusations are made by anyone.

2) Win as a team with a select few socialites if they make a correct accusation of the murderer before he is lynched. (Anyone is able to join in on the accusation knowing if they are wrong, they die to the lynch).



PASSACAGLIA - new question.. What if a wolf makes a public accusation and other villagers join in.. but its a false accusation. Does the wolf die too, or only the villagers?

[Neon_Chaos]

I haven't played too many WW games, I think this is my 4th or 5th...but something is puzzling me. I noticed that people started casting "No Lynch" votes last night, when the first deadline was still 24 hours away. What is the point of this? In my opinion, that flags them as a wolf...it would make sense that the wolves would want us as villagers/socialites to waste a night of voting and get that "bandwagon" started as soon as possible. I understand the reasoning behing a No Lynch vote, and I may end up voting that way, but to cast that vote so early doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Anyone have any insight into this? Opinions? Ideas???

How is voting for a No Lynch considered as wasting a night of voting?

If anything, Wolves would much better have some random villager lynched on the very first day, than noone at all.

Given that in a 20-person game, there are 3-5 wolves. You have a 3/20 or a 5/20 chance to lynch a wolf. Odds that are not in favor of the villagers.

It's a very big hit or miss, and most likely, a villager (or even worse, someone with a role) might be lynched on the very first day rather than a wolf. If it's a random villager, that's a +1 kill for the wolves that they don't have to worry about. If it's someone with a role, it forces them to out themselves or die. Which basically is also a big + for the wolves.

A No Lynch is almost always the best course of action for the villagers for the first day (unless some stupid wolf slips).

Why would someone vote early? Hmmmm? Maybe to announce his intentions early on? To avoid the hassle of voting for a No Lynch late in the game? You really can't blame someone for just voting early, specially in a game where that person can actually change his vote on the fly. I voted early for the No Lynch. Unless something indicates otherwise, I have no other reason not to. How does that indicate wolf behavior?

[Alan T]

Also Passacaglia, another question :)

What if someone makes an accusation but then gets lynched before their 12 hour wait period is up?

Do they still win the indivudal victory ending the game even dead, or does their accusation get tossed out at lynch?

[oliegirl]

How is voting for a No Lynch considered as wasting a night of voting?

If anything, Wolves would much better have some random villager lynched on the very first day, than noone at all.

Given that in a 20-person game, there are 3-5 wolves. You have a 3/20 or a 5/20 chance to lynch a wolf. Odds that are not in favor of the villagers.

It's a very big hit or miss, and most likely, a villager (or even worse, someone with a role) might be lynched on the very first day rather than a wolf. If it's a random villager, that's a +1 kill for the wolves that they don't have to worry about. If it's someone with a role, it forces them to out themselves or die. Which basically is also a big + for the wolves.

A No Lynch is almost always the best course of action for the villagers for the first day (unless some stupid wolf slips).

Why would someone vote early? Hmmmm? Maybe to announce his intentions early on? To avoid the hassle of voting for a No Lynch late in the game? You really can't blame someone for just voting early, specially in a game where that person can actually change his vote on the fly. I voted early for the No Lynch. Unless something indicates otherwise, I have no other reason not to. How does that indicate wolf behavior?

If you read thought my original post I pretty much answered everything you asked me. I told you I'm fairly new to the game and my first thought when I see a No Lynch vote that early was that those people MIGHT be wolves hoping to persuade the socialites not to vote on the first night. Yes, the odds are against the socialites, but there is merit to the train of thought that the wolves would not want a vote b/c in ensures their survival and there is NO chance that one of them would get lynched.

I wasn't blaming anyone, I was simply asking a question and opening up discussion...

[Passacaglia]

If a wolf makes a false public accusation, the wolf dies.

If someone makes a correct accusation, but is lynched before 12 hours are up, they still win.

[Telle]

Well perhaps we can all agree that both the "individual victory" and the "villager victory" are a win for the "good guys" and a loss for the "bad guys".. so thus in both cases, are really a win for the village.

Sooo.. how about we all work together to try and make either of those two conditions happen, and not worry about who gets the personal glory of being the one to make a correct accusation?

[DaddyTorgo]

aaaah. the way i see it "select group of socialites" could/should include everyone, as when we get to that point we ought to be fairly certain about the information so i personally see that as a team victory too.

need lunch. dying of hunger (says the 240lb man)

[st.cronin]

Oliegirl, I have a long history of voting as early as possible. Some of my thoughts on that you can read in the voting pet peeves thread. Also I often push for a no-lynch on day 1, for the reasons outlined by others.

[Telle]

And regarding early "no lynch" votes.. the deadline is kind of early in the day, and if nothing else I'm sure there are people who may not be able to get on here during the day before deadline and thus put their votes in the night before.

[RendeR]

*sigh*

Now I see why most people never bother to be the one who takes charge and tries to get things rolling.

5 pages later everyone is rehashing shit I said on page 2 or 3 because they either failed to bother reading it all or just didn't get it when I posted it.

Returning to bored nameless quiet socialite mode. Trying to be proactive is a waste of effort it seems.

[Passacaglia]

Pass: What happens if a wolf makes a correct accusation?

Sorry I missed this. If a wolf makes an accusation, whether correct or incorrect, after 12 hours, the wolf still dies, and only the villagers who "jump on his bandwagon" so to speak, share the victory if it's correct.

[RendeR]

Ok, so now the wolves have an ability to try and take down a number of villagers with one blow, by hoping to get bandwagoners to join in n a false accusation.

[Alan T]

I am beginning to rethink how to play this now.

If I can't trust what anyone else tells me (Wolves/murder lying to me to cover up someone, villagers lying to try to get individual victory), and false accusations lead to death..

I now almost would rather no one share any more clues and we just work on trying to lynch the bad guys. It feels almost like the accusations are a recipe for destruction completly

[Passacaglia]

Here's my vote count. Let me know if I missed something:

NO LYNCH (8) -- st.cronin (98), Alan T (114), Neon_Chaos (117), DaddyTorgo (122), Crim (251), Jonathan Ezarik (263), Swaggs (265), ntndeacon (266)

NOT VOTED (11) -- Barkeep49, Chief Rum, Lathum, LoneStarGirl, oliegirl, path12, RendeR, saldana, Schmidty, SnDvls, Telle

[Crim]

Just on lunch break, checking in...

To the thought that clearing non-murderers puts a target on their back: Huh? Target for whom? The wolves already know who the murderer is, and vice versa, they just cannot communicate back and forth. I say we clear as many names as possible.

What about this: (since I'm still reluctant for us to give out cleared rooms) Everyone shares their person/wepon clue. Then we set up a system whereby we all check behind each other in a systematic way. Person/weapon clues can be checked from any room, so no extra wolf danger (which is the main thing I'm worried about).

Also, let's not let all this clue business blind us too much to the surefire way of winning: kill the hairy bastiches, and the no-good, low-down, dirty murderer. That's Werewolf 101, right? I just think that when we're sharing info, let's not fall into the trap of sharing info unique to this game, which would help the wolves' cause.


Okee, back to work, be back sometime this evening after deadline.

[Telle]

Here's my vote count. Let me know if I missed something:

NO LYNCH (7) -- Alan T (114), Neon_Chaos (117), DaddyTorgo (122), Crim (251), Jonathan Ezarik (263), Swaggs (265), ntndeacon (266)

NOT VOTED (12) -- Barkeep49, Chief Rum, Lathum, LoneStarGirl, oliegirl, path12, RendeR, saldana, Schmidty, SnDvls, st.cronin, Telle

You missed st.cronin voted "no lynch" in post #98.

[Passacaglia]

You missed st.cronin voted "no lynch" in post #98.

Thanks.

[LoneStarGirl]

no lynch

And I know that Render is not the murderer and the rope was not the murder weapon

[RendeR]

I am beginning to rethink how to play this now.

If I can't trust what anyone else tells me (Wolves/murder lying to me to cover up someone, villagers lying to try to get individual victory), and false accusations lead to death..

I now almost would rather no one share any more clues and we just work on trying to lynch the bad guys. It feels almost like the accusations are a recipe for destruction completly


Remember there is a difference between and ACCUSATION, which could win you the game and a SUGGESTION which you can do nightly to try and find more clues.

Suggestions and the sharing of information should be obvious no brainer plays. The rooms are meaningless since teh wolves have NO clue where anyone might go for a night to gain information. There are 15 good guys, the wolves have to have a name AND a location to nail anyone, so unless they ALL go after the same person and target their room choices properly they have at best a 1/3 chance to succeed on any given attack. if they do coordinate their attacks they can AT BEST kill any one player per night.

So guarenteed success for the badguys == 2 kills per night, which means a much longer game and a far better chance of the village winning.

I'm still utterly bewildered at the refusal to give out clues at this point, there is nothing to be gained by hoarding information. It only delays us in finding the murderer and allows him/her to kill 1 person per night.

[RendeR]

no lynch

And I know that Render is not the murderer and the rope was not the murder weapon


Thank you.

Did you have a third clue or was that all you recieved?

[oliegirl]

I'm casting my vote now:

VOTE NEON CHAOS

[Alan T]

Remember there is a difference between and ACCUSATION, which could win you the game and a SUGGESTION which you can do nightly to try and find more clues.

Suggestions and the sharing of information should be obvious no brainer plays. The rooms are meaningless since teh wolves have NO clue where anyone might go for a night to gain information. There are 15 good guys, the wolves have to have a name AND a location to nail anyone, so unless they ALL go after the same person and target their room choices properly they have at best a 1/3 chance to succeed on any given attack. if they do coordinate their attacks they can AT BEST kill any one player per night.

So guarenteed success for the badguys == 2 kills per night, which means a much longer game and a far better chance of the village winning.

I'm still utterly bewildered at the refusal to give out clues at this point, there is nothing to be gained by hoarding information. It only delays us in finding the murderer and allows him/her to kill 1 person per night.


Well I guess my change of heart is based on what Pass told us and a bit more about the victory conditions.

It only takes one person feeding us wrong information to lose the game in multiple ways.

Say we all work together and narrow down the lists pretty well.. down to two people.. someone gets a clue at night which solves the game for them, and they share that with everyone, but change it around. Now suddenly alot of people die with the wrong accusation and afterwards this guy can make the correct accusation and win the solo victory.

Even if we lynch him for spite, Pass said he still wins if he was right.

Not that I don't trust any of you anyways (This is WW right?) but now there is that much less reason to.. I already shared my information (I was the first one to do so), so its not about that as much as now wondering if its just asking for a new way to lose. (Instead of losing to the Wolves or murderer, we now lose to a villager who wants to win by themselves)

[RendeR]

And if I'm not screwing something up I have us at having 13 of 16 rooms cleared if all those withholding room info would share it:


<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 393px; height: 226px;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"><td class="xl24" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 113pt;" height="17" width="151"></td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Chief Rum livingroom
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RENDER bathroom
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DaddyTorgo lounge
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Crim 1 unknown room
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">path 1 unknown room
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Telle kitchen, study, billiard
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Jonathan Ezarik 2 unknown rooms
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">SNDvls 1 unknown room
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Lathum 2 unknown rooms
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

[RendeR]

Well I guess my change of heart is based on what Pass told us and a bit more about the victory conditions.

It only takes one person feeding us wrong information to lose the game in multiple ways.

Say we all work together and narrow down the lists pretty well.. down to two people.. someone gets a clue at night which solves the game for them, and they share that with everyone, but change it around. Now suddenly alot of people die with the wrong accusation and afterwards this guy can make the correct accusation and win the solo victory.

Even if we lynch him for spite, Pass said he still wins if he was right.

Not that I don't trust any of you anyways (This is WW right?) but now there is that much less reason to.. I already shared my information (I was the first one to do so), so its not about that as much as now wondering if its just asking for a new way to lose. (Instead of losing to the Wolves or murderer, we now lose to a villager who wants to win by themselves)

Umm, REALLY simple solution, DON'T BANDWAGON.

if someone makes an accusation, let them run with it, that way ONLY they get lynched for being wrong. if they win, they win and the game enes with a win for the good guys overall.

The ONLY two ways for the bad guys to win is for the 6 named socilaites to die OR the wolves to get into a 1-1 ration.

Lets get past this crap and getthe information moving, the odds are SO heavily in the good guys favor here.

[RendeR]

Alan, I think the simple gist of my opinion on the singular win is, go for it, a win is a win for the village, wether its one guy being the hero or all of us killing the wolves.

Trying to hoarde info just so you can BE that hero, is a rather pathetic grab for fame imo.

[Alan T]

Umm, REALLY simple solution, DON'T BANDWAGON.

if someone makes an accusation, let them run with it, that way ONLY they get lynched for being wrong. if they win, they win and the game enes with a win for the good guys overall.

The ONLY two ways for the bad guys to win is for the 6 named socilaites to die OR the wolves to get into a 1-1 ration.

Lets get past this crap and getthe information moving, the odds are SO heavily in the good guys favor here.


Thats how I felt before I asked pass in the thread. Pass said the game ends with the person having an individual victory... the good guys would lose there, we wouldn't win because he was right.

[RendeR]

Thats how I felt before I asked pass in the thread. Pass said the game ends with the person having an individual victory... the good guys would lose there, we wouldn't win because he was right.



You apparently missed the part where he said that if a WOLF makes an accusation he dies wether he is right or wrong? No win, just dead.

[RendeR]

And as long as a wolf can't win this way, who cares if there is an individual winner? the game is over and a good player wins? Thats win-win for the village.

[DaddyTorgo]

Alan, I think the simple gist of my opinion on the singular win is, go for it, a win is a win for the village, wether its one guy being the hero or all of us killing the wolves.

Trying to hoarde info just so you can BE that hero, is a rather pathetic grab for fame imo.

i agree with RendeR. just let one person and one person alone make every accusation. nothing says that we all have to bandwagon with them.

[Alan T]

You apparently missed the part where he said that if a WOLF makes an accusation he dies wether he is right or wrong? No win, just dead.

That was a different question I asked. Before that I asked if the game ends when a villager makes a correct accusation. Pass said the game ends with an individual socialite victory.

We can ask him to clarify that for us, but thats the way I read what he said at least.. if another socialite wins, we don't win.

[Alan T]

And as long as a wolf can't win this way, who cares if there is an individual winner? the game is over and a good player wins? Thats win-win for the village.

I must really be reading it wrong then.. I read it completely different..


PASSACAGLIA - If a socialite wins with the individual victory, does the rest of the socialites win as well, or do they lose?

[path12]

I would think an individual victory would not include all the socialites.

VOTE NO LYNCH

[Passacaglia]

I must really be reading it wrong then.. I read it completely different..


PASSACAGLIA - If a socialite wins with the individual victory, does the rest of the socialites win as well, or do they lose?

It's an individual victory. That socialite is the only one that wins. It's not a "minor victory" for the socialites in general or anything -- just a victory for that one person.

[RendeR]

I must really be reading it wrong then.. I read it completely different..


PASSACAGLIA - If a socialite wins with the individual victory, does the rest of the socialites win as well, or do they lose?



an individual win is just that Alan, but please tell me why thats a BAD thing? if a good guy wins by himself, is that not simply a good win either way? Or must we win as a village at all costs?

seems rather stupid to think that way.

[RendeR]

My point being, who really cares if all the socialites win or if just one does?

I see it as the whole village wins (we get all the wolves)

Or we have a village hero (makes the correct accusation)

I don't see how either of those is a bad thing? Seriously.

[DaddyTorgo]

mmmhmm. i agree with you RendeR. i could care less if i'm the person that won or not. as long as the wolves and the murderer don't win. it's going to be virtually impossible for one person to win all by themselves i'd think, or at least...very cumbersome to try.

and what would you get for that? bragging rights for some RP-ing game on a text-sim message board on the Internet??? please...if someone's self-esteem is low enough that that will be a significant boost I say we should all step back and let that person have it...they need it a lot more than anyone else.

[RendeR]

persactley

[RendeR]

Now here's another thought.

The murderer wins if the 6 named socialites die.

The village wins if we successfully accuse the murderer.

Why the hell would the wolves leave this guy alive???

The ONLY way they win is a one to one ratio or better and this guy, while he can kill each night, is a serious liability to them winning.

THey KNOW WHO HE IS.

Kill him and lets get on with the real game of werewolf ;)

[RendeR]

Add to the above post that as the wolves kill people each night they could in fact GIVE the win to the murderer.

How can they take that chance?

[Lathum]

Hey everyone. I just dropped Pass a PM and wanted to share with everyone that I need to drop out of the game. Molly's mother has been in and out of the hospital with heart problems and is back in and it looks like some rough times are ahead. She is in one of the best hospitals in the country but we feel it is important to be by her side so we are going back to NJ for a while. We hope our trip osn't necessary and she will make a speedy recovery. We appreciate your prayers and I hope I am back sooner rather then later.

Brian

[oliegirl]

Hey everyone. I just dropped Pass a PM and wanted to share with everyone that I need to drop out of the game. Molly's mother has been in and out of the hospital with heart problems and is back in and it looks like some rough times are ahead. She is in one of the best hospitals in the country but we feel it is important to be by her side so we are going back to NJ for a while. We hope our trip osn't necessary and she will make a speedy recovery. We appreciate your prayers and I hope I am back sooner rather then later.

Brian

Hope everything works out OK...sorry to hear about Molly's mom. You guys will be in our thoughts and prayers...

[Alan T]

Hey everyone. I just dropped Pass a PM and wanted to share with everyone that I need to drop out of the game. Molly's mother has been in and out of the hospital with heart problems and is back in and it looks like some rough times are ahead. She is in one of the best hospitals in the country but we feel it is important to be by her side so we are going back to NJ for a while. We hope our trip osn't necessary and she will make a speedy recovery. We appreciate your prayers and I hope I am back sooner rather then later.

Brian


Hope everything is ok Lathum.. You're in my thoughts :(

[Barkeep49]

Frankly I don't see it as an either or. I see us having the greatest chance of victory if we can get one socialite to piece it together and then have everyone climb aboard that accusation. If the wolves do they die. If socialites do, we win. Seems to me that is the way to go, at least for now.

Also I don't see a compelling reason, mathematically speaking, to wait a day for information to be gathered in this game and so I'm going with my typical "we need to lynch everyday" agenda. I don't have a candidate yet, but I do plan on voting for someone before I leave for a meeting at 2, Central time.

[Barkeep49]

Add to the above post that as the wolves kill people each night they could in fact GIVE the win to the murderer.

How can they take that chance?
Seems to me the wolves and murder help each other as each doing their kills makes it more likely that the other achieves their victory. I don't think the wolves need to worry at this point in the game of accidentally giving the murderer his victory.

[Alan T]

My point being, who really cares if all the socialites win or if just one does?

I see it as the whole village wins (we get all the wolves)

Or we have a village hero (makes the correct accusation)

I don't see how either of those is a bad thing? Seriously.

We don't really get the wolves there, they aren't really losing any more than we would though. Its just a socialite taking down the murderer.

Add to the above post that as the wolves kill people each night they could in fact GIVE the win to the murderer.

How can they take that chance?

I actually had considered this earlier on. People who played in the WW survivor game with me then might have remembered me trying to make a deal with a wolf in our team to reveal who the other wolves were and we'd let him continue as our team until it was just us left.

The reason this is different though, is the murderer knows who the wolves are and they know who he is. So I'm guessing if they revealed who he was, well he could return the favor. I wouldn't mind that too much, but I figured that wasn't likely to happen for us so didn't pursue it any further :)

Wolf Kills
Wolves know the identity of the murderer, and the murderer knows the identity of the wolves. However, they will not have PM privileges.

[RendeR]

Barkeep, we as villager/socialites CANNOT bandwagon, we simply cannot take that chance. If we all pile on the accusation and it comes up wrong, we DIE.

End of game.

Accusations must remain the proence of single players or we take the chance of a wolf or even the murderer slipping just enough false info in place to kill us as a group.

No bandwagoning on the accusations.

[st.cronin]

I doubt there will be any tension between the murderer and the wolves until one of them gets close to their victory condition.

[RendeR]

We don't really get the wolves there, they aren't really losing any more than we would though. Its just a socialite taking down the murderer.



I actually had considered this earlier on. People who played in the WW survivor game with me then might have remembered me trying to make a deal with a wolf in our team to reveal who the other wolves were and we'd let him continue as our team until it was just us left.

The reason this is different though, is the murderer knows who the wolves are and they know who he is. So I'm guessing if they revealed who he was, well he could return the favor. I wouldn't mind that too much, but I figured that wasn't likely to happen for us so didn't pursue it any further :)


Its a winning condition Alan, and it is only a winning condition for a GOOD player, who cares if we find the wolves? we have a way to win without finding them.

As for the wolves/murderer thing I'm not saying they should reveal who he was, I'm saying THEY should kill him off, they thereby FORCE the village into a full blown WW game and have a much better chance of winning than if they let the murderer run loose.(This is, I think, a mistake in Passacaglia's design. They shouldn't have known one another, therefor forcing them to worry about one another as well and not giving the village this possible advantage.)

[RendeR]

I doubt there will be any tension between the murderer and the wolves until one of them gets close to their victory condition.

True enough SC, but think about it. IF the villagers all pool their information and do so with anything new they find on night 1, he could be accused and the game over on day 2. its probably a longshot, but with so many socialites it IS possible if we pool all our knowledge.

If that happens, the wolves lose. I can't fathom the wolves taking a chance on losing day 2. I just can't see the logic in leaving ANY loophole that shortens the game against them. If I were a wolf I'd already have sent in the PM to kill him and spread the kill spots out to cover all but 1 room *assuming 3 wolves, if there are 4, he's dead*

[Alan T]

Well, looks like we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm going to consider from here on anyone trying for a singular victory condition as trying to win not with our team.. as the old saying goes... If you aren't with us, you are against us.

I was ok with the idea of us all working together to try to solve the clues and all jump on that victory condition, but with Pass stating what he has about how that condition works and how dangerous it would be for us to do that.. I can't help but think that is nothing but danger for us.

[Lathum]

thanks for the kind words. I don't want to threadjack Pass' game, There is a prayer request in GD. Thanks again everyone.

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=59343

[RendeR]

Well, looks like we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm going to consider from here on anyone trying for a singular victory condition as trying to win not with our team.. as the old saying goes... If you aren't with us, you are against us.

I was ok with the idea of us all working together to try to solve the clues and all jump on that victory condition, but with Pass stating what he has about how that condition works and how dangerous it would be for us to do that.. I can't help but think that is nothing but danger for us.


That stance really doesn't make any sense Alan. Why ingore a way to gain victory? wether its over the wolves or through finding the murderer?

There is NO danger in accusations so long as we're not stupid enough to pile on at the same time. THAT is the only danger in accusations.

If you really want to follow this reasoning then you must also agree with me that the wolves need to kill the murderer, no? because that FORCES us into a group win situation, eliminating any chance of a singular victory.

[Alan T]

That stance really doesn't make any sense Alan. Why ingore a way to gain victory? wether its over the wolves or through finding the murderer?

There is NO danger in accusations so long as we're not stupid enough to pile on at the same time. THAT is the only danger in accusations.

If you really want to follow this reasoning then you must also agree with me that the wolves need to kill the murderer, no? because that FORCES us into a group win situation, eliminating any chance of a singular victory.

Sure, I'm all for the wolves killing the murderer, but its not me that you have to convince of that :)

I'm all fine for the singular victory condition if its me achieving it, but I'm not really in the mood to hand over a win to someone else so I can lose because I shared and they didn't. At this point, I'm just going to focus on trying to lynch the wolves and murderer and have no intention of helping out with clues other than trying to point at who the murderer might be.

If I hear a villager is close to having a successful accusation though, I don't want to lose to them either. Pass has set this up to be a free for all, so I'll be watching my back.

[RendeR]

thanks for the kind words. I don't want to threadjack Pass' game, There is a prayer request in GD. Thanks again everyone.

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=59343


All the best Lathum, I hope everything turns out just fine.

[Barkeep49]

Barkeep, we as villager/socialites CANNOT bandwagon, we simply cannot take that chance. If we all pile on the accusation and it comes up wrong, we DIE.

End of game.

Accusations must remain the proence of single players or we take the chance of a wolf or even the murderer slipping just enough false info in place to kill us as a group.

No bandwagoning on the accusations.
Really? Cause I play to win, and would assume others do the same. Frankly, I would either like to see us agree to "bandwagon" on what looks to be a good accusation, or simply find the damn murderer lynch him, and play a normal game of WW. I am very inclined to have a team victory, but if some other socialite makes an accusation and wins, I will feel like I've lost. Especially considering that there was a way for me to have won.

[RendeR]

If I hear a villager is close to having a successful accusation though, I don't want to lose to them either. Pass has set this up to be a free for all, so I'll be watching my back.



DT, what was it you were saying a while back? ;)

[RendeR]

Ok, my suspect list is two strong now.

[SnDvls]

Hey everyone. I just dropped Pass a PM and wanted to share with everyone that I need to drop out of the game. Molly's mother has been in and out of the hospital with heart problems and is back in and it looks like some rough times are ahead. She is in one of the best hospitals in the country but we feel it is important to be by her side so we are going back to NJ for a while. We hope our trip osn't necessary and she will make a speedy recovery. We appreciate your prayers and I hope I am back sooner rather then later.

Brian

I'm sure I speark for everyone in that everyone is in our thoughts and prayers.

[Alan T]

Ok, my suspect list is two strong now.


Instead of suspecting me, just try to take a step back and understand what I am saying here.

Its not my rules, Passacaglia set up the game this way. Here is what I am proposing:

We share information on who the murderer is.

We do NOT share information on which room or weapons.

That helps us with vital information to try to track down who the murderer might be, and since the rules state he doesn't have to hunt for night kills like the wolves do, in early game he might be the biggest threat.

I am not the one saying I will lose if a villager gets an individual victory, Passacaglia is. I am saying I just don't want to lose via any means.

If you feel this is enough to suspect me, then well I can't help that. I feel it is very sound reasoning however based on how this game is designed.

[RendeR]

Really? Cause I play to win, and would assume others do the same. Frankly, I would either like to see us agree to "bandwagon" on what looks to be a good accusation, or simply find the damn murderer lynch him, and play a normal game of WW. I am very inclined to have a team victory, but if some other socialite makes an accusation and wins, I will feel like I've lost. Especially considering that there was a way for me to have won.


Anyone advocating a bandawagon accusation is either a fool or a wolf. Please try and grasp how utterly unnacceptable the consequences are of trying that and failing.

[SnDvls]

vote no lynch

to chime in and give my 2 cents on the individual/team victory thing that is going on.

I don't care one way or the other, because in my mind a villager win is a win for the good guys if it's only 1 or many the village wins..period.

I'm still holding my info in part because I feel someone will make a mistake giving out "fake" info and mine might help to catch them.

[DaddyTorgo]

lol

[path12]

Hey everyone. I just dropped Pass a PM and wanted to share with everyone that I need to drop out of the game. Molly's mother has been in and out of the hospital with heart problems and is back in and it looks like some rough times are ahead. She is in one of the best hospitals in the country but we feel it is important to be by her side so we are going back to NJ for a while. We hope our trip osn't necessary and she will make a speedy recovery. We appreciate your prayers and I hope I am back sooner rather then later.

Brian

Hang in there and best to you both. I've been dealing with a similar situation with my dad. Remember that they work wonders these days and stay positive.

[RendeR]

please tell me how capturing a murderer is losing? We all want to capture him. Why does it matter who does it?

It'll hurt your pride? Wow. Get over it :) It's just a game on a text sim :)

Easiest way to solve this is for the murderer to get killed tonight, HEY WOLVES, GET THAT?? KILL THE SOB!!!.

[RendeR]

I find it interesting that the loudest voices against sharing info have no solid reasoning for doing so bryond "they want to win at all costs" and none of the three have any clues clearing them....

St Cronin
Alan T
Barkeep

[Alan T]

please tell me how capturing a murderer is losing? We all want to capture him. Why does it matter who does it?

It'll hurt your pride? Wow. Get over it :) It's just a game on a text sim :)

Easiest way to solve this is for the murderer to get killed tonight, HEY WOLVES, GET THAT?? KILL THE SOB!!!.


I still don't think you are fully reading what I am saying.

My proposal is one to try to get the murderer lynched and get him out of the way (Although yes I would be fine with the wolves eating him).

For me a village victory = kill all of the bad guys (including the murderer)

If you still find this suspicious, then I'm not sure what else to do to change your mind :(

[Alan T]

I find it interesting that the loudest voices against sharing info have no solid reasoning for doing so bryond "they want to win at all costs" and none of the three have any clues clearing them....

St Cronin
Alan T
Barkeep

Once again, I don't understand how you could say this about me. I was the first to push for sharing information, and once Passacaglia clarified the victory conditions, I still am pushing for sharing information on who the murderer is from clues. I just don't want to lose to the wolves, the murderer or an individual socialite who wants to win instead of the village.

The best way I see to do this is: Share info on the murderer to try to track him down, do not share info on rooms (which admittedly helps the wolves some as well), and don't share info on the weapons (which is solely to prevent us from losing to a rogue villager).

I find it sound reasoning, If I can't convince you or others of this, well I guess thats unfortunate for the village. If people don't trust me, I fully welcome being scanned or followed by the FBI guy tonight as well.

I simply want the village to win as a group, not lose (per the rules) to a rogue villager.

[st.cronin]

I find it interesting that the loudest voices against sharing info have no solid reasoning for doing so bryond "they want to win at all costs" and none of the three have any clues clearing them....

St Cronin
Alan T
Barkeep

Try to pay attention, my reasons are nothing at all similar to what those two are saying.

[Barkeep49]

Anyone advocating a bandawagon accusation is either a fool or a wolf. Please try and grasp how utterly unnacceptable the consequences are of trying that and failing.
I don't appreciate being called a fool. I have grasped the consequences of being wrong. I've also grasped the consequences of seeing someone put out an accusation, done mostly through the knowledge that has been collectively gathered, and winning the game while I watch from the sidelines having had it in my grasp to join in. If you don't want to win that's your prerogative. I don't think it makes me evil or foolish to think differently.

[RendeR]

I still don't think you are fully reading what I am saying.

My proposal is one to try to get the murderer lynched and get him out of the way (Although yes I would be fine with the wolves eating him).

For me a village victory = kill all of the bad guys (including the murderer)

If you still find this suspicious, then I'm not sure what else to do to change your mind :(


I understand exactly what you're saying, what I'm saying is that isn't a requirement for me, i don't care how the good guys win or WHICH good guy wins as long as NONE of the bad guys win.

I'd love to catch all the wolves and get the murderer too, that'd be great, but if we can get a good guy win without having to do ALL of that and costing the lives of god's know how many socialites. I think thats a BETTER answer.

Less death == BETTER than more death and a fluffy chest for having caught all the goobers.

You're way is fine if you could care less how many of us get crushed under foot so it can happen. I'd rather have 12+ villagers alive and the game won personally. That is a VILLAGE victory, having a whole VILLAGE left alive.

Not sure why you're against that.

[RendeR]

I don't appreciate being called a fool. I have grasped the consequences of being wrong. I've also grasped the consequences of seeing someone put out an accusation, done mostly through the knowledge that has been collectively gathered, and winning the game while I watch from the sidelines having had it in my grasp to join in. If you don't want to win that's your prerogative. I don't think it makes me evil or foolish to think differently.


Ok then BK, YOU tell me how you plan to protect people from misinformation getting into an accusation. Tell me how you want to ensure that people jumping on your bandwagon will KNOW they have the information correct.

You can't.

Therefore, persuing such a tactic is foolhardy. I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm simply pointing out how rediculous trying to persue a mass accusation is.

If you persist in pushing/suggesting/wanting/whatever a group accusation you're simply hanging a sign on your neck screaming *I'm a wolf, sopmeone tie the noose a bit tighter please*

[RendeR]

Try to pay attention, my reasons are nothing at all similar to what those two are saying.

True, but you're hold even less water than theirs. You're worried about being pegged in a given room if the known rooms are out there and thats just silly. nothing forces you to go into obvious rooms to gain information on any given night.

[Alan T]

I understand exactly what you're saying, what I'm saying is that isn't a requirement for me, i don't care how the good guys win or WHICH good guy wins as long as NONE of the bad guys win.

I'd love to catch all the wolves and get the murderer too, that'd be great, but if we can get a good guy win without having to do ALL of that and costing the lives of god's know how many socialites. I think thats a BETTER answer.

Less death == BETTER than more death and a fluffy chest for having caught all the goobers.

You're way is fine if you could care less how many of us get crushed under foot so it can happen. I'd rather have 12+ villagers alive and the game won personally. That is a VILLAGE victory, having a whole VILLAGE left alive.

Not sure why you're against that.


I guess I just try to adjust each game to what the rules are, and this is how Pass set the rules. He said we lose, so Im trying to play within those confines.

Explain to me why my idea isn't a good one? Why wouldn't we want to narrow down who the murderer is, lynch them early on, get rid of the person who has the sure night kill and then focus on the handicapped wolves the rest of the time?

I think if everyone was being honest/open about who is not the murderer based on their clues and we ignored the rest of them, then there would be Zero reason for the villagers to lie about their clues. We couuld get the murderer and move on. As is currently, we dont know who to trust is all.

[Barkeep49]

Render why do you keep creating your own victory conditions? I mean I coach basketball. That's like saying "Well we scored more points in 3 out of the 4 quarters, so that's a win" even if we lost the game. I'm really happy you're content like that, but given the rules laid out before us I don't consider what you're stating, being "alive" at the end of the game a victory. In fact in all wolf victories there are villagers who are "alive" at the end of the game. They've still lost, but they're alive on the last day of the game.

[Barkeep49]

Ok then BK, YOU tell me how you plan to protect people from misinformation getting into an accusation. Tell me how you want to ensure that people jumping on your bandwagon will KNOW they have the information correct.

You can't.

Therefore, persuing such a tactic is foolhardy. I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm simply pointing out how rediculous trying to persue a mass accusation is.

If you persist in pushing/suggesting/wanting/whatever a group accusation you're simply hanging a sign on your neck screaming *I'm a wolf, sopmeone tie the noose a bit tighter please*
Render, I've stated my position. I understand it's different than yours. You can go ahead and think I'm a wolf. When an accusation is put out there we have 12 hours to determine if it's right or not. In that time I think we could figure out with the information people have about whether it's right or not. If it's right, I'd like to win the game. If it's wrong, I simply don't join in. You have a different idea of victory than I do. That doesn't make me a wolf, though you're welcome to waste time thinking otherwise.

[Alan T]

Render, just tell me honestly..

Do you think I would be the first out with my information, push for others to provide information and then only change when we find out more information about some of the victory conditions that were a bit cloudier when the game started if I was the murderer?

Once again, I fully welcome the FBI guy or the seer to view me tonight, I just don't want what I feel is sound reasoning to be lost because of what I feel is unfound suspicions.

Once again, my suggested plan that I hope everyone else would be on board with:

- We reveal clues about who the murderer isn't.
- We reveal no other clues.

I'm going to try to keep pushing this as long as I live in this game. Until I am either lynched or night killed, as I honestly feel it is the right course. I am going to play the game under the rules as set down by the GM here.

[st.cronin]

True, but you're hold even less water than theirs. You're worried about being pegged in a given room if the known rooms are out there and thats just silly. nothing forces you to go into obvious rooms to gain information on any given night.

You've not been paying attention at all, I see. That is ONE example of what my concerns are. My point is that we have zero reason to trust info that is put out there, putting info out encourages foolhardy trust, and will allow the wolves/murderer to play us in many ways.

[Schmidty]

Just woke up. Going to take a shower and go get something to eat. I should be back in a couple hours.

[Telle]

I am not the one saying I will lose if a villager gets an individual victory, Passacaglia is. I am saying I just don't want to lose via any means.

Technically, he didn't say that the rest of the villagers lose.. just that the one (or more) particular socialite wins. And I think it's fair to feel that one or more of the socialites winning is a win for the village in general.

[Telle]

You've not been paying attention at all, I see. That is ONE example of what my concerns are. My point is that we have zero reason to trust info that is put out there, putting info out encourages foolhardy trust, and will allow the wolves/murderer to play us in many ways.

But isn't one of the ways to catch a bad guy is to catch them in a lie? So the more people share their information, the more we have to look at as the game progresses and we begin to identify who can be trusted and who can't.

[RendeR]

You've not been paying attention at all, I see. That is ONE example of what my concerns are. My point is that we have zero reason to trust info that is put out there, putting info out encourages foolhardy trust, and will allow the wolves/murderer to play us in many ways.


And again, you ignore the fact that there is only 1 single player in the game with even the slightest reason to lie. And by bringing out everything that lie will be caught. So, forgive me if I see anyone withholding information as a suspect because they're doing exactly what the murderer has to do in this scenario.

This game is won or lost based on the information at hand. No matter WHO wins or loses. The Information is requried to get anywhere in any sort of timeframe.

The longer this goes the less likely a village/villager victory is possible. There are too many opportunities for both the wolves and the murderer to kill poeple off.

If they have a great night there are 4 dead socialites tonight. leaving 2 to get picked off at their leisure.

I want to avoid that posibility, i want to get everythingon the table, nail the murderer and end ANY chance of EITHER the wolves OR the murderer winning the game.

Sorry, but personal pride is a piss poor excuse for putting the village at risk.

[st.cronin]

And again, you ignore the fact that there is only 1 single player in the game with even the slightest reason to lie.

You're crazy if you think the wolves aren't going to help the murderer.

[RendeR]

You're crazy if you think the wolves aren't going to help the murderer.


Ok, I'm really trying to fathom where this is coming from.

The Wolves CAN'T help the murderer, if the murderer succeeds the wolves LOSE.

There are only 6 named characters. The wolves only care about a couple of them (seer/BG) they don't care if the other 4 are the last 4 players on teh good side to survive. The murderer however has a HUGE benefit if the wolves leave him alive. Every time they kill someone it could be setting him 1 more step closer to winning, and with (assuming again 3 wolves) 3 possible kills per night if they hit perfect, he could be done on night two and everyone loses.

Call me crazy all you want, the wolves are MORONS if they help the murderer in any way based on the information available. They smartest move is to kill him, thereby forcing the prolonged normal WW game.

[st.cronin]

Ok, I'm really trying to fathom where this is coming from.

The Wolves CAN'T help the murderer, if the murderer succeeds the wolves LOSE.

There are only 6 named characters. The wolves only care about a couple of them (seer/BG) they don't care if the other 4 are the last 4 players on teh good side to survive. The murderer however has a HUGE benefit if the wolves leave him alive. Every time they kill someone it could be setting him 1 more step closer to winning, and with (assuming again 3 wolves) 3 possible kills per night if they hit perfect, he could be done on night two and everyone loses.

Call me crazy all you want, the wolves are MORONS if they help the murderer in any way based on the information available. They smartest move is to kill him, thereby forcing the prolonged normal WW game.

This is a very odd point that you're trying to push, and seems completely crazy to me. The wolves will at least want to keep him around until he kills most of his targets, because those are kills they don't have to make.

[Telle]

The Wolves CAN'T help the murderer, if the murderer succeeds the wolves LOSE.

Actually, I see either the murderer or the wolves winning as a "win for the bad guys" just like I see a personal accusation or village win as a "win for the good guys".

However, it does make sense that the murderer is a liability for the wolves because if we manage to make a correct accusation before the murderer is killed in some manner (lynch, wolves, or Mrs. White) then the wolves lose.

[RendeR]

This is a very odd point that you're trying to push, and seems completely crazy to me. The wolves will at least want to keep him around until he kills most of his targets, because those are kills they don't have to make.

I can see why you'd think that, but remember, they don't know who the socialites are either, they can't wait for "most" of them to get killed because then their own night kills are simple dice rolls on losing each night.

Its not that difficult to grasp when you think about how many deaths there could be on any given night (I'm counting up to 5? with Mrs. White's lone shot)

If I'm a wolf I don't need his healp, we have three possible kills per night, or one all but guarenteed. I want to eliminate anything that jeopardizes that chance of winning, the murderer is a HUGE liability. I kill him first.

[Telle]

This is a very odd point that you're trying to push, and seems completely crazy to me. The wolves will at least want to keep him around until he kills most of his targets, because those are kills they don't have to make.

Yeah I'd think they'd want to keep him around for at least a few days to get some free kills out of him. Then off him if it looks like we're getting close to making an accusation. Although I'm not quite sure why we're helping the wolves with their strategy??

[RendeR]

Yeah I'd think they'd want to keep him around for at least a few days to get some free kills out of him. Then off him if it looks like we're getting close to making an accusation. Although I'm not quite sure why we're helping the wolves with their strategy??


Well I'm pushing for them to kill the murderer for two reasons:

#1 if they off him, it eliminates any more conflict on our parts as villagers and the need to worry about clues at all, its a straightforwad WW game from then on and the wolves have 1 less chance to lose.

#2 If they keep him around just because I want him dead that benefits the village in a roundabout way, minimally, in that the wolves could very well hand the murderer the win.

Keeping him alive makes this game seriously hard for the wolves to win. Killing him gives them a 50-50 shot.

[DaddyTorgo]

i'm for sure going to have to put my stuff in in the next hour here. won't be on till like an hour past deadline.
sticking with no-lynch.

[RendeR]

Think of it this way, the murderer is a kill shot.

If the villagers get him, they win. This could happen in 2-3 days if information is shared and not horded. Short games are not the wolves friends, they need time to win.

If the murderer is left alive he could get helped by wolf night kills and win by night 3.

Removing the murderer immediately, extends the game, allows the villagers to get a group win or the wolves a chance to last long enough to win.

The murderer is the one guy that MUST get killed to eliminate 90% of our problems.

[DaddyTorgo]

telle...you had a pretty good list...what's the updated on what's known/unknown?

[Telle]

telle...you had a pretty good list...what's the updated on what's known/unknown?

Not much has changed since then.. although I've added in where people have said that they know a room/weapon/person but didn't say what they were.

Rooms:
Kitchen - Telle
Study - Telle
Billiard Room - Telle
Living Room - Chief Rum
Bathroom - RendeR
Lounge - DaddyTorgo
? - Lathum
? - Lathum
? - st.cronin
? - Jonathan Ezarik
? - Jonathan Ezarik
? - path12
? - SnDvls
? - Crim

Weapons:
revolver - Alan T
knife - DaddyTorgo
candlestick - oliegirl
frying pan - Crim
? - st.cronin
? - path12
rope - LoneStarGirl

People:
Daddytorgo - Alan T
Telle - Chief Rum
Schmidty - RendeR
Lathum - Barkeep49
saldana - Barkeep49
Jonathan Ezarik - oliegirl
LoneStarGirl - Neon_Chaos
oliegirl - Neon_Chaos
SnDvls - Crim
? - SnDvls
RendeR - LoneStarGirl

[DaddyTorgo]

thanks. i appreciate it. will copy that over to my laptop when i get home so someone else has it too.

[RendeR]

thanks. i appreciate it. will copy that over to my laptop when i get home so someone else has it too.


I've got a spreadsheet with everything on it too, I think more of us are turning to that just to keep stuff straight.

[Telle]

I'm leaving work soon so I'm going to put in my vote..

VOTE NO LYNCH

[DaddyTorgo]

order submitted

[RendeR]

Hrm, yeah the next couple hours may well be hectic with dinner and errands to run.

VOTE NO LYNCH


just because its already a landslide. Why fight fate.

[DaddyTorgo]

RendeR...might be helpful if you posted that along with like...the available choices for all the different things? i know i just had 3 windows open to send in my action (1 pm to Pass, 1 on page 1, and one on telle's list).

[Chief Rum]

My point being, who really cares if all the socialites win or if just one does?

I see it as the whole village wins (we get all the wolves)

Or we have a village hero (makes the correct accusation)

I don't see how either of those is a bad thing? Seriously.

100% with you here, Render. People going for the individual victory to the point that they are completely unhelpful to the rest of the village are selfish gits, IMO. If the wolves and murderer are dead, we villagers all win, and I could give a flying crap if Pass says "X Player wins, you all lose" (no offense emant, Pass).

[Schmidty]

Back from lunch.

No Lynch

This is the only game I would ever do this in, as I HATE No Lynches.

[RendeR]

RendeR...might be helpful if you posted that along with like...the available choices for all the different things? i know i just had 3 windows open to send in my action (1 pm to Pass, 1 on page 1, and one on telle's list).


What is it you want me to post? Telle's list has the same info mine does, or are you looking for the complete lists of each group of info along with what we know thus far?

[Chief Rum]

I am very inclined to have a team victory, but if some other socialite makes an accusation and wins, I will feel like I've lost. Especially considering that there was a way for me to have won.

Yup, and there's the disconnect for me. People who think like this and me are two completely different people, and I don't understand them. No offense, BK, different shakes, you know? But I don't understand this thinking. It's just not the way my mind works.

[DaddyTorgo]

What is it you want me to post? Telle's list has the same info mine does, or are you looking for the complete lists of each group of info along with what we know thus far?

not for me mind you. my order is already in. but the second maybe? i mean if you have it handy and you can just cut n paste or whatever. if not...hell...we're all big boys. someone else can do it or people can do their own legwork.

[RendeR]

Yup, and there's the disconnect for me. People who think like this and me are two completely different people, and I don't understand them. No offense, BK, different shakes, you know? But I don't understand this thinking. It's just not the way my mind works.


Its like there are two groups of people, those that have to BE the hero or feel like they failed, and those who simply want to find a hero wether it is themselves or someone else in their group.

I'm in the latter group, as long as the winner is on the good side, I'm jazzed.

[RendeR]

Bold items we have been told are NOT the murder weapon.
<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 107pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="143"><col style="width: 107pt;" width="143"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 107pt;" height="17" width="143">Weapons</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Rope</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Lead Pipe</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Knife</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Revolver</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Wrench</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Candlestick</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Poison</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Hammer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Frying Pan</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

[RendeR]

There are also 2 people that say they have weapon clues but have not given them out as yet.

[Schmidty]

Anyone advocating a bandawagon accusation is either a fool or a wolf.

I freaking HATE BS like that, and it makes me lose respect for people that use that card, even if they are good or bad. There are many ways to play the game without being blatantly insulting. I have gotten mad in the past, and understand people being vociferous and emphatic, but to call people names because they don't agree with you is garbage.

[Chief Rum]

Barkeep suggested it earlier, and I agree with him on the need for a lynch. We need to be able to verify information from people, and right now, death is the only way to do it.

I understand where Alan is coming from, but I don't think it works as well with this game, because in the other games we weren't given all of this information to start, and there was very limited value in lynching. In this game, though, there is value.

Too many people have voted for No Lynch, so I suspect it will be for naught, but I also have said I would hold as most wolfish those who hold their information. I have to make that threat real if I am to be taken seriously.

My three prime "resistance" candidates are Lathum, saldana and st.cronin. Lathum, of course, had to leave the game. I think st.cronin is more likely right now to be a bad guy than saldana.

So...

LYNCH ST.CRONIN

[Schmidty]

So anyway, other than knowing who Mrs. Peacock is, I know 3 socialites who do NOT commit the murder. Should I share, or not?

[RendeR]

<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 420pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="561"><col style="width: 113pt;" width="151"> <col style="width: 107pt;" width="143"> <col style="width: 83pt;" width="111"> <col style="width: 117pt;" width="156"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td colspan="4" class="xl29" style="border-right: 0.5pt solid black; height: 12.75pt; width: 420pt;" height="17" width="561">Rooms</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl28" style="border-top: medium none; height: 15pt;" height="20">Lounge</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Den</td> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Parlor Room </td> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Library</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 15pt;" height="20">Basement</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Hall</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Kitchen</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Study</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 15pt;" height="20">Ballroom</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Dining Room</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Bathroom</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Livingroom</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 15pt;" height="20">Conservatory</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Billiard Room</td> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Bedroom</td> <td class="xl26" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Attic</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

Items in bold italics are NOT the locations, there are 7(yes SEVEN) more rooms that people are not giving out as yet.

We could be down to 2 weapons and 3 rooms tonight and possibly have the murder mapped by day 2.

Players to come.

[Schmidty]

So anyway, other than knowing who Mrs. Peacock is, I know 3 socialites who do NOT commit the murder. Should I share, or not?

That should be "did NOT", as opposed to "Do NOT".

[RendeR]

So anyway, other than knowing who Mrs. Peacock is, I know 3 socialites who do NOT commit the murder. Should I share, or not?


Yes, please share Schmidty. I had you as a clue so I trust your information.

[RendeR]

I freaking HATE BS like that, and it makes me lose respect for people that use that card, even if they are good or bad. There are many ways to play the game without being blatantly insulting. I have gotten mad in the past, and understand people being vociferous and emphatic, but to call people names because they don't agree with you is garbage.


keep reading the thread and get over it, I explained that I wasn't trying to be insulting later on.

[Schmidty]

Yes, please share Schmidty. I had you as a clue so I trust your information.

The murder was not committed by Neon_Chaos, Barkeep49, or Swaggs.

[Schmidty]

keep reading the thread and get over it, I explained that I wasn't trying to be insulting later on.

Again with the snide crap. Bah, whatever. Let's play the game.

[DaddyTorgo]

So anyway, other than knowing who Mrs. Peacock is, I know 3 socialites who do NOT commit the murder. Should I share, or not?

YES

everyone agrees people-information needs to be shared. preferably ASAP so i can change my night-action before i leave work

[DaddyTorgo]

dola

i see you're one step ahead of me. thanks schmidt-man...none of those people were the person i chose so it's all good.

[RendeR]

<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 220pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="294"><col style="width: 113pt;" width="151"> <col style="width: 107pt;" width="143"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 113pt;" height="17" width="151">Lathum</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-left: medium none; width: 107pt;" width="143">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">st.cronin</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;"> </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Jonathan Ezarik</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Swaggs</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Chief Rum</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;"> </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">path12</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;"> </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DaddyTorgo</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">LoneStarGirl</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Barkeep49</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">oliegirl</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Neon_Chaos</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">SnDvls</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">saldana</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">ntndeacon</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;"> </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Crim</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;"> </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">RendeR</td> <td class="xl27" style="border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Schmidty</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Telle</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;">Not Murderer</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl25" style="border-top: medium none; height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Alan T</td> <td class="xl24" style="border-top: medium none; border-left: medium none;"> </td> </tr> </tbody></table>


Please let me know if I have something wrong in my lists.

[RendeR]

Now as for how trustworthy the data is, I can only point out that the only person with a good reason to lie is the murderer, and as we go through night 1 guesses and get responses from PASS we should be able to detect lies that came out.

[Chief Rum]

Now as for how trustworthy the data is, I can only point out that the only person with a good reason to lie is the murderer, and as we go through night 1 guesses and get responses from PASS we should be able to detect lies that came out.

I wouldn't accept it all on faith. It needs corroboration.

No, the wolves don't need to lie, but why would they tell the truth either? Even if there is no reason in the rules for them to lie, I could see them lying simple because they're wolves and we're villagers.

And it has already been shown we have some more selfish people here who only want the individual victory. It's a sad statement that I must admit these people are in the game and might be lying as well.

No, we need to build on what we have. Nothing is certain unless we have at least two separate people to corroborate it (and even then it will depend on the people furnishing the clues).

[ntndeacon]

True enough SC, but think about it. IF the villagers all pool their information and do so with anything new they find on night 1, he could be accused and the game over on day 2. its probably a longshot, but with so many socialites it IS possible if we pool all our knowledge.

If that happens, the wolves lose. I can't fathom the wolves taking a chance on losing day 2. I just can't see the logic in leaving ANY loophole that shortens the game against them. If I were a wolf I'd already have sent in the PM to kill him and spread the kill spots out to cover all but 1 room *assuming 3 wolves, if there are 4, he's dead*

Why do you assume that they can cover all but one room? Just from the fact they can each cover 5/16th of the rooms? This is clearly NOT the case SInce I was bored at work I tried to come up with a plan to do what you are saying and failed. With the assumption of 3 wolves, I only saw ways for them to cover 13/16 ths of the rooms. of course this isn't much better odds, but is a little.

[Chief Rum]

Why do you assume that they can cover all but one room? Just from the fact they can each cover 5/16th of the rooms? This is clearly NOT the case SInce I was bored at work I tried to come up with a plan to do what you are saying and failed. With the assumption of 3 wolves, I only saw ways for them to cover 13/16 ths of the rooms. of course this isn't much better odds, but is a little.

Really? I'll have to give this a shot. I had thought I had worked in my mind how they could do it, but I'll be happy if I am wrong.

What if there are four wolves, though?

[Chief Rum]

Four wolves, they could get it all. You're right, though, it only works out to 13/16. Still, practically an automatic kill, but at least there's a little more of a chance of survival.

[Chief Rum]

13/16 with three wolves, that is.

[ntndeacon]

I understand exactly what you're saying, what I'm saying is that isn't a requirement for me, i don't care how the good guys win or WHICH good guy wins as long as NONE of the bad guys win.

I'd love to catch all the wolves and get the murderer too, that'd be great, but if we can get a good guy win without having to do ALL of that and costing the lives of god's know how many socialites. I think thats a BETTER answer.

Less death == BETTER than more death and a fluffy chest for having caught all the goobers.

You're way is fine if you could care less how many of us get crushed under foot so it can happen. I'd rather have 12+ villagers alive and the game won personally. That is a VILLAGE victory, having a whole VILLAGE left alive.

Not sure why you're against that.

No. That is not a village victory. In terms of this game it is an individual victory in that case. If I put in the winning accusation or Crim or olliegirl, and you don't. you lose.

[SnDvls]

Okay I feel there is enough information out there that I can release my player info.

I know path is not the murderer...I'll continue to hold onto my room location at this time.

[Alan T]

I fully encourage Mr.Green to make use of the player list that is available. I see that it seems like most people are disagreeing with my point of view here, but I think if we keep sharing murderer clues, we'll enable Mr.Green to do his job to narrow down the murderer as well as tell us if someone else lied.

Even though I am on the list of people that haven't been cleared as murderer, I think its a good thing that the list is narrowed down for Mr.green. I also think Mr.Green should reveal as soon as he finds the murderer so we can lynch him.

PASSACAGLIA - one more question.. what happens if someone makes an accusation for the murderer, are correct but we lynch the murderer before the 12 hours are up? Does the lynch supercede the accusation, or do we still lose the game?

[SnDvls]

we also need to realize that just because a person isn't the murderer doesn't mean they aren't a wolf correct?

[Passacaglia]

PASSACAGLIA - one more question.. what happens if someone makes an accusation for the murderer, are correct but we lynch the murderer before the 12 hours are up? Does the lynch supercede the accusation, or do we still lose the game?

The person making the accusation wins at the time the murderer is lynched.

[Alan T]

we also need to realize that just because a person isn't the murderer doesn't mean they aren't a wolf correct?

Correct, the rules say the wolves got initial clues as well. Thats why when I originally suggested for us to all share the clues, I made sure to state that we couldn't give trust to anyone for doing so.

All we do with the clues is narrow down who the murderer is either to lynch him or to lose the game if someone makes a correct accusation and we don't

[Chief Rum]

No. That is not a village victory. In terms of this game it is an individual victory in that case. If I put in the winning accusation or Crim or olliegirl, and you don't. you lose.

ntn, be sure to recognize the potato-potAto discussion going on here. The results are the sim. What is different is how different people view them. Perhaps you see that as a loss. Render doesn't.

[Chief Rum]

Results are the same, that is.

[ntndeacon]

oh by the way Crim is not the murderer

[Neon_Chaos]

Jeez. With Mrs. White, the Murderer, and the Wolves... we might have a potential 4-5 dead. Yeesh.

[Neon_Chaos]

I meant in one given night.

[Passacaglia]

The line is dead.

[Passacaglia]

Vote Count:

NO LYNCH 14 -- st.cronin (98), Alan T (114), Neon_Chaos (117), DaddyTorgo (122), Crim (251), Jonathan Ezarik (263), Swaggs (265), ntndeacon (266), LoneStarGirl (324), path12 (338), SnDvls (367), Telle (401), RendeR (403), Schmidty (406)
st.cronin 1 -- Chief Rum (414)
Neon_Chaos 1 -- oliegirl (327)

A couple people shout out names of who we might be the murderer, or maybe a wolf, but for the most part, the socialites are content to gather their clues.

You spend the night sometimes sleeping, but mostly sneaking around for more clues. But, when you wake up, you realize that two people are missing.

You all run to the Basement, where you find that Jonathan Ezarik has been eaten by wolves! Looking through his belongings, you see nothing out of the ordinary. Jonathan Ezarik was a Socialite!

When you return, you find that Lathum has been murdered. Again, looking through his things, you find nothing special. Lathum was a Socialite!

A bit shaken, you dust yourselves off, and try to see what sort of discussion awaits you today.

(JE, now that you're dead, your next assignment is to find out if this is the longest Day 1 we've ever had).

[saldana]

gang, bunch of crap came up at work and i just walked in the door, sorry i missed the deadline

fwiw, i would have voted no lynch. (not like it would have mattered)

i will be out tonight as well, but should be able to catch up during the morning and day tomorrow....sorry again...my job blows

[SnDvls]

I can verify that the revolver was not the murder weapon

[oliegirl]

And I can verify that the victim wasn't poisoned

[Alan T]

I can verify that the revolver was not the murder weapon

I know another room that was not where the murder happened. However until someone convinces me why that is useful to give out I won't do so.

[RendeR]

I know another room that was not where the murder happened. However until someone convinces me why that is useful to give out I won't do so.


If I say please?

[SnDvls]

I know another room that was not where the murder happened. However until someone convinces me why that is useful to give out I won't do so.

you're keeping your info for probally the same reasons I am on a room.

[Chief Rum]

I also found a room where the murder did not happen, but I am not immediately sharing for an entirely separate reason. I found a secret passageway from it to another room, and it was not the room I anticipated.

Meaning that how we judge the "adjacent rooms" for rooms on the edge could very well be flawed.

BTW, knowing his situation, I won't harp too much on Lathum's passing here, but it should be noted that in dying, he takes his information with him. Information he could have freely offered up before this came to pass.

[SnDvls]

interesting that the people who witheld all their info were killed off too.

[Alan T]

If I say please?

Only if you add ice cream :)


On a slightly unrelated topic.. so I had to meet my wife out at Babys R Us to look at new cribs after work. I was pretty slammed today at work (You probably couldn't tell from the amount of posting on here), and the last hour there I literally was tied up and couldn't even look here. I realize the time and rush out the door to go meet her.

When I get there, I tell her... "uh.. any chance you think we might be done in about 45 minutes? I kind of need to get home by then"

She asks Why I have to be home.. is there some work I need to do?

"No.. its one of my online games I play, I need to do something before 6..."

She gave me a look and asked,"Is this your wolf game?"

"Yeah I need to submit some clues I want to suggest and forgot to do that before I left work..."

She rolled her eyes and kept walking on ...

[Alan T]

I also found a room where the murder did not happen, but I am not immediately sharing for an entirely separate reason. I found a secret passageway from it to another room, and it was not the room I anticipated.

Meaning that how we judge the "adjacent rooms" for rooms on the edge could very well be flawed.

BTW, knowing his situation, I won't harp too much on Lathum's passing here, but it should be noted that in dying, he takes his information with him. Information he could have freely offered up before this came to pass.

I found the same. I had expected the hidden tunnels to be linear connecting. (ie: Far left room connects to far right room through hidden tunnel). In my case, I found without saying much that it was the room adjacent to the one I had expected instead. Still on the same "wall" so to speak, but just a different room.

[Chief Rum]

I found the same. I had expected the hidden tunnels to be linear connecting. (ie: Far left room connects to far right room through hidden tunnel). In my case, I found without saying much that it was the room adjacent to the one I had expected instead. Still on the same "wall" so to speak, but just a different room.

Yes, it seems you and I have discovered much the same thing. My situation there equates exactly with yours, although I will (hopefully) assume we're talking about different rooms.

[Passacaglia]

All PMs are sent out. If you didn't get a PM by now, it's because you didn't send me one, or I made a mistake.

[path12]

Yes, it seems you and I have discovered much the same thing. My situation there equates exactly with yours, although I will (hopefully) assume we're talking about different rooms.

Yeah, the passage I found was on a diagonal from the room I was in.

[Alan T]

Yes, it seems you and I have discovered much the same thing. My situation there equates exactly with yours, although I will (hopefully) assume we're talking about different rooms.

I wasn't told anyone else was in the room with me, so I assume we don't learn that information that we have in other similar WW games.

[Neon_Chaos]

I confirmed that Crim didn't commit the murder, and an secret passage that I won't name (not sure how the rooms actually work, though.)

That's a double confirmation on Crim, I believe.

[Alan T]

I confirmed that Crim didn't commit the murder, and an secret passage that I won't name (not sure how the rooms actually work, though.)

That's a double confirmation on Crim, I believe.

Interesting, I had assumed I found the secret tunnel because I had found a clue about the room. Did you also find a clue about the room you were in? (Dont mention which room if so), or just found the tunnel by being in there?

[Neon_Chaos]

interesting that the people who witheld all their info were killed off too.

Maybe it's because the wolves/murderers don't want any other info coming out?

[RendeR]

I found this exact same situation. Though no further information on the room I was in came to light. I am able to verify that barkeep is NOT the murderer.

[RendeR]

I was posting in regards to a room having a secret tunnel.

[Neon_Chaos]

Interesting, I had assumed I found the secret tunnel because I had found a clue about the room. Did you also find a clue about the room you were in? (Dont mention which room if so), or just found the tunnel by being in there?


Nope, no additional information. it was the room i was in for the night. I did get the Crim confirmation, though. So there.

[ntndeacon]

I can confirm that the frying pan wasn't used

[Alan T]

So Ntn, Render and Neon_Chaos all provided secondary backup for day 1 reveals that were already given. Its nice having the secondary confirmation in case of someone lying, but I am more interested in the list of people who are left as not being cleared as a murderer.

I realize fully I am on that list, and am hoping that as more people check in, that at least one person could vouch for me..

I can imagine us ending up with 2 names from the list of people to look at (and if the FBI agent chose one of them last night its even easier hopefully)

I think we should do it (Even if I am one of the only ones left)..

Or do people think folks have submitted bogus entries already (based on people already doublechecking on already vouched for people instead of unvouched for people).

Or are people still fixated on trying to lose the game by letting someone else have an individual victory? :)

My own choice I think we should go for a run off of whoever is left unvouched for as the murderer after people check in.

[Telle]

I have received a clue that the murder did not take place in the Parlor Room.

[SnDvls]

Only if you add ice cream :)


On a slightly unrelated topic.. so I had to meet my wife out at Babys R Us to look at new cribs after work. I was pretty slammed today at work (You probably couldn't tell from the amount of posting on here), and the last hour there I literally was tied up and couldn't even look here. I realize the time and rush out the door to go meet her.

When I get there, I tell her... "uh.. any chance you think we might be done in about 45 minutes? I kind of need to get home by then"

She asks Why I have to be home.. is there some work I need to do?

"No.. its one of my online games I play, I need to do something before 6..."

She gave me a look and asked,"Is this your wolf game?"

"Yeah I need to submit some clues I want to suggest and forgot to do that before I left work..."

She rolled her eyes and kept walking on ...

I get the same reaction from my wife so you are not alone in that.

[Telle]

The following people did not vote on Day 1: Lathum, Barkeep49, saldana

[Swaggs]

Hey guys... I'm kind of in a similar situation as Lathum, as my mother is in the hospital from a stroke, so I am a bit sleep deprived and generally out of it. I am going to try and catch up with things after a bit, but I am pretty fried right now.

I'll go ahead and share what info, I have from my PM.

Not in the Ballroom
Not in the Conservatory
Not with Poison

Hope it helps and I will check back in after awhile to get caught up.

[LoneStarGirl]

I got that it wasn't path and there is a secret passage way somewhere

[oliegirl]

I'm perplexed as to where we should start tomorrow. I like AlanT's suggestion and suggest that as a possible plan, if anyone has any theories at this point please throw them out there.

My only theory surround Neon_Chaos. When I posted earlier asking about the no lynch votes that were cast super early, all the replies were informative and helpful. However, Neons stuck out to me because he was incredibly defensive, making it sound like he interpreted my question as a full blown accusation. That was why I voted for him today. At this point its my only theory and only gut feeling on someone.

[Neon_Chaos]

I'm perplexed as to where we should start tomorrow. I like AlanT's suggestion and suggest that as a possible plan, if anyone has any theories at this point please throw them out there.

My only theory surround Neon_Chaos. When I posted earlier asking about the no lynch votes that were cast super early, all the replies were informative and helpful. However, Neons stuck out to me because he was incredibly defensive, making it sound like he interpreted my question as a full blown accusation. That was why I voted for him today. At this point its my only theory and only gut feeling on someone.

I tend to get wordy when trying to explain things.:D

[Telle]

Well st. cronin's been pinging my radar.. and he's one of the four unaccounted for suspected murderers at this point.

[DaddyTorgo]

back. miss anything important?

[DaddyTorgo]

wasn't NTN. And I found a secret passageway too.

[DaddyTorgo]

let's try to update who it wasn't for green. We can add path+ntn+crim to the list of who it wasn't...anyone else?

[DaddyTorgo]

My own choice I think we should go for a run off of whoever is left unvouched for as the murderer after people check in.

I like this idea.

Let's not forget about the WW' either though

[DaddyTorgo]

the doubling up on certain people doesn't bother me. I don't see it as a problem

[RendeR]

Right now we're looking at the following with no murder clearance in any way as yet:

Alan T
St Cronin
Chief Rum

[RendeR]

I like this idea.

Let's not forget about the WW' either though


I agree, but I think we need to trust in the seer to get moving on the wolves at this early stage. Assuming everything is revealed upon death/lynching, he is still out there.

[DaddyTorgo]

Pass: Are roles fully reveled upon death?

[DaddyTorgo]

I agree, but I think we need to trust in the seer to get moving on the wolves at this early stage. Assuming everything is revealed upon death/lynching, he is still out there.

agree. Just wanted to remind people of that so we don't get "off-track."

i'd also point out to the seer that they needn't worry themselves about those who havn't been cleared of being the murderer, as the murderer can't be a wolf.

While it is possible one of those 3 guys is a wolf, it's not statistically likely, so hopefully the seer focuses on those who have been cleared of being the murderer.

sure that's fairly apparent, but just spelling it out for everyone

[Passacaglia]

Pass: Are roles fully reveled upon death?

Yes. They're revealed in the end of day post, and in Post #1.

[DaddyTorgo]

Yes. They're revealed in the end of day post, and in Post #1.

oh. duhhhh

[Crim]

Back from work, dinner eaten, kitchen cleaned, daughters put to bed, puter fired up, catching up now...

[Crim]

okee, it may be too late to stop the cleared rooms from coming out, but I'll try: By my count, if everyone were to reveal their cleared rooms, there would be only three possibilities left. Now, suppose, the wolves want to kill me desperately, because they're mad that I removed my side-splitting post signatures. With only three uncleared rooms, each wolfie (if we're still assuming three wolves) just PMs to Passacaglia: kill crim in room a, b, c There's a good chance that with three uncleared rooms, Crim's dumb ass will be in one of them, and BAM automatic kill by our sharp-clawed friends.

Share cleared suspects? Definitely, as it helps us get closer to lynching the bad human. Share cleared weapons? ehhh, I'm not sold on that, as I come down closer to Alan's pov than RendeR's with regard to victory conditions. Different reason, though: I think it's kind of outside the spirit of the game to interpret minor victories where it's not spelled out in the rules. YMMV, but there ya go. That said, I wouldn't be mad if a socialite wins like this, but I don't think I want to actually play in that direction.

Now, sharing cleared rooms?!? Please stop, as I think it has much larger upside for wolves than for us, and much more immediately.

[Crim]

interesting that the people who witheld all their info were killed off too.

Makes sense, too, as the less information the better for the bad guys, at least with regard to solving the crime (making an accusation).

Still, I can't blame them for withholding some info, <---- Duh, as I've also chosen to withold some info.


:o

[Crim]

IS it just me or was DT's post in greek?

Why wouldn't the wolves help the murderer? they're goal and his are almost the same, kill everyone and anyone to get the win.

Just reading back through, and pointing out "hmm" moments. RendeR has been a dynamic character thus far.

[Barkeep49]

Just reading back through, and pointing out "hmm" moments. RendeR has been a dynamic character thus far.
I've read this a few times and I'm still not sure what you're going for here. Can you elaborate?

[Chief Rum]

okee, it may be too late to stop the cleared rooms from coming out, but I'll try: By my count, if everyone were to reveal their cleared rooms, there would be only three possibilities left. Now, suppose, the wolves want to kill me desperately, because they're mad that I removed my side-splitting post signatures. With only three uncleared rooms, each wolfie (if we're still assuming three wolves) just PMs to Passacaglia: kill crim in room a, b, c There's a good chance that with three uncleared rooms, Crim's dumb ass will be in one of them, and BAM automatic kill by our sharp-clawed friends.

Share cleared suspects? Definitely, as it helps us get closer to lynching the bad human. Share cleared weapons? ehhh, I'm not sold on that, as I come down closer to Alan's pov than RendeR's with regard to victory conditions. Different reason, though: I think it's kind of outside the spirit of the game to interpret minor victories where it's not spelled out in the rules. YMMV, but there ya go. That said, I wouldn't be mad if a socialite wins like this, but I don't think I want to actually play in that direction.

Now, sharing cleared rooms?!? Please stop, as I think it has much larger upside for wolves than for us, and much more immediately.

Crim, we have been over this. Not going to rehash yesterday's argument. If you want to see both sides played out, read the interchange between me/Render and cronin/Lathum/saldana about three or four pages back or so.

There is risk to room revealing, yes. How much risk is for each individual to work out for their own. I for one don't agree with you, beause I would hope that people would have enough sense to realize that if they are a likely wolf target, they won't place themselves in uncleared rooms.

Frankly the best people to send to those rooms are UTR types who are unlikely to be pinging the wolves' radar right now. And we can't name those UTR types by name, of course. They will have to make that call themselves.

[Chief Rum]

Just reading back through, and pointing out "hmm" moments. RendeR has been a dynamic character thus far.

If you mean he has been active and engaging, yes, he has. I would also point to myself, st.cronin and AlanT as being particularly pointed in our play. I am curious what you think this means, though.

[Crim]

Oh, no huge thing, just thinking out loud...

RendeR started out proclaiming that the wolves would be helping the murderer. Later he's vociferously campaigning that they would in fact be better off killing the murderer.

Alan and others (CR, to a certain degree) have also altered positions at some point. I don't think this indicates any guilt on RendeR's part, really, but I was amused by the turnaround, is all.

[Crim]

Chief, I get your point, but since I was absent during most of that exchange, I wanted to chime in. And, utr types beware, seems to me that in some WW games, they are among the first to have their throats ripped out, simply because the wolves don't like to interfere in villager-on-villager violence.

Regarding our night 1 results, though, I'm just saying, killing two villagers who a) hadn't revealed info, and b) were engaged in the conversation seemed like a decent bad guy play. Less info available for us, and because JE and Lathum (especially Lathum) were into the exchange, there existed the possibility that you or Render might have changed their mind about it, and then we'd collectively have more info to go on. Whereas, the utr types who hadn't discussed clues seem unlikely to be persuaded, since they really don't seem to be taking part in the conversation.

[Crim]

And, for what it's worth, I'm thinking more and more that RendeR's right, in that it helps the villagers AND the wolves for us to lynch the murderer.

Let's say that everyone comes out with their cleared suspects list. Wolves, too; everyone posts who they've found isn't the murderer, honestly. We'll be left with, at most, prolly two suspects, we lynch one and the wolves kill one, and we (the villagers) have one less baddie to contend with, and (as more eloquently championed by RendeR) the wolves get rid of a dangerous rival for their victory.

Way I see it, everyone in the game, except for the murderer him (her?) self, is better off lynching the murderer.

[Crim]

I've got to get to bed soon, and I want to get the ball rolling on voting for possible murderers. Gonna take a few minutes and justify to myself which one seems most likely. I do not think another no lynch is in our best interest at this point, we do have some more info to go on.

[path12]

There is risk to room revealing, yes. How much risk is for each individual to work out for their own. I for one don't agree with you, beause I would hope that people would have enough sense to realize that if they are a likely wolf target, they won't place themselves in uncleared rooms.

Frankly the best people to send to those rooms are UTR types who are unlikely to be pinging the wolves' radar right now. And we can't name those UTR types by name, of course. They will have to make that call themselves.

As I think about it more, I'm not as worried about uncleared rooms and keeping that info quiet. I might argue that for a nameless socialite, one of the best services they could provide to us is to risk an uncleared room so that we may more quickly narrow down the murderer.

This has me mulling over the idea of revealing my room.

[path12]

Way I see it, everyone in the game, except for the murderer him (her?) self, is better off lynching the murderer.

If we lynch the murderer, don't we extend the game for the wolves? I'd think that someone solving the case is the best way to end the game. It's an individual rather than a group victory, but it is definitely not a wolf win.

Again, I'm just thinking things over. I didn't pay strict attention to the day 1 clarifications. Though I will say I think I learned much more this day 1 than in most.

[ntndeacon]

the problem with this strategy is that the cleared and uncleared rooms are in close proximity. one could hide in a cleared room, but that is probably next to an uncleared room. Shoot, it may be thier strategy to stay in a cleared area near several uncleared areas. Not sure how this would work cuz dont remember off the top of my head where the cleared rooms are. So staying in a cleared room is not that much of a better situation if they are looking for one of us.

[path12]

Does a secret passageway count as an adjacent room?

[path12]

To follow up on what ntn said, it also struck me that every single WW game we risk getting killed at night unless we luck out and get a BG block.

Here we have the opportunity that the wolf has to know where we're gonna be PLUS the chance that Mustard is protecting us, so we're actually safer than usual as long as the wolves don't know where we're at.

With that in mind, I'll go ahead and tell you that the murder was not committed in the Den.