How can we have ten players and four are now claiming to be vanilla? And we already agreed there are roles that aren't being used, correct?

Way too many people jumping into the vanilla pool... and I think some people are too smart to jump vanilla and may do it just to make sure the villagers or vamps don't hunt outside of that pool. I also think some baddies will use that for cover D1. For that I..

vote LoneStarGirl

Do we have any people who have jumped from a baddie to the wolf team? I ask because I think a few of us switched within the wolf team but I am not sure yet if people can switch from good to bad and bad to good. Autumn played this exactly the way I would have played it so is in my "good" column for sure.

I need to hear from everyone today as I agree it could be a fresh start for all of our information building. If we use any info from D1 it could be misleading unless it is to compare to tone and types of discussion a player has between D1 and now. i.e. who has changed teams if anyone.

For now, I'm assuming it is a brand new game.

ChiefRum just implied that he switched from bad to good.

agree henry, new game with a reroll of everything seems likely. and I just reread all of D1 extended and the early morning start of D2. Chief is claiming to have done exactly what I questioned everyone about. We'll see if it holds true.

Weird question... would it help if we all provided what we were originally on D1? Or does that break the game a bit? If it is a reroll then it doesn't really matter but I guess it could just muck up our D2 information gather. Maybe we just leave it for the aftermath.

Not implied.

I flat out said I did.

Absolutely roles that are not being used... initial ad states 11 roles for 10 people.

The advert states we will have wolves and villagers and maybe vampires. A reroll could mean that we originally had vamps and now do not or vice versa. I think all roles may be in play and it is likely that we have some vanilla villagers but not a ton.

Sorry, bad wording on my part. It is possible, maybe not likely but possible, that it is subterfuge is what I wanted to say.

I don't think that would be a good idea.

First off, if the game was re-rolled but the exact rolea are the same from one game to the next, we give the bad guys that info for free. Right now, they're guessing what dangerous rolea are out there.

Second, if we reveal that info, we will probably be opening ourselves up to being manipulated by the baddies, who will know if the game is the same or not, just re-rolled.

Of course. It's a game of werewolf after all. :devil:

I don't expect anyone to take it at face value.

Thanks Chief... just realized I was using 'reroll' instead of using 'complete reset' in some of my posts. I figured a reroll would mean EF not only rolled who had what role but also rolled what roles were in the game.

Ughh.. I need coffee.

That is why I said implied. Probably insinuated is a better word. I'm not sure yet if I believe you based on what I know.

So was RendeR a villager before too?? I'm 99% certain, but there's always room for doubt in my brain...

so if CR went from bad to good then its a solid assumption the entire game just flipped around. Which means a good guy or two are now on the evil side of things.

On day one (or two) I thought Brittrock was a good guy and even had him followed since that was my skill. Unfortunately I lost that skill and learned nothing from it as I am now a vanilla wolf.

Following that logic

vote brittrock

So, I apologize for creating the tie that caused this mess. As a true data geek, I am cringing at what happened. I could not even imagine EF would get anywhere near THIS creative. I just assumed that I should not let a good guy die (me) if I could avoid it at all. And yes, I still am a good guy.. just not quite the same as before.

Chief, what is your understanding then of why there was no night kill?

The most common tie mechanics are that both targets are lynched, or that a random player is lynched, both of which are terrible outcomes for the village, so I would not suggest ever going for the tie unless you are a bad guy.

I have two thoughts regarding Telle's original D1 role... it'll be interesting to find out which way she falls. She certainly made this game interesting! Do we think the restart will help the good team or the bad team more? Chief had some good initial thoughts in post #360.

Some probability exercises.

Let's assume there are 3 total baddies. If there was a total role reassignment last night, the players have a 70% chance of being assigned good, 30% of being assigned bad. For those 7 who were good on D1.0, you can expect 5 of them to still be good. For those 3 who were bad on D1.0, you can expect 1 to still be bad (with whatever alignment). And 2 players on each side (4 total) would have switched alignment.

If there are only 2 total baddies (1 each of villager/vampire?, no vampire team?), you're likelier only to have 1 pair of players swap alignment, though you could still have 2 pairs do so.

Adding to the probabilities, we need to make an assumption on if just roles changed or if team's changed. If team's stayed the same, Chief Rum's play is a great one to save himself for a day or two. I'm going to vote for him now, to test that theory.

Vote Chief Rum

Certainly if no one else comes clean about having swapped sides, it starts to look bad for Chief. I'm waiting to see if anyone else has anything to say about their previous team. I know that someone here is now a neutral role, as I was, they're not going to want to come clean. Neither are however many bad guys we have. But if you've switched from bad to good, that's good for us to know. If no one else is coming out, perhaps the bad guys only switched bad guy roles, or swapped bad guy teams or something, in which case we can actually use Day 1 info.

I'd agree with that. Additional reveals just force the reveal of information... although I don't agree with folks revealing vanilla it's somewhat harmless. More reveals will either force CC's for people who have valuable roles or put bad info out there if the person doesn't choose to CC.

I see 2 strategies for today... treat like a regular day 1 and let the chips fall where they may, or concentrate on the group that claimed vanilla with the strong suspicion that there just isn't room for 4 vanilla in this game. I like the latter strategy quite a bit because a lynch gives us good information, we're not hitting a seer or lookout and if that group gets whittled down the seer can concentrate one of the others for tonight.

I'll put up somebody who hasn't got any heat, either yesterday or so far today I guess.

Vote GoldenEagle

GE - as you claimed seer before the switch, maybe you could tell us who you were planning to look at N1 and why?

I have a couple thoughts on that. First, I want to dispute that there are 4 vanilla wolf claims. I did not claim vanilla.

Second, you're saying "we're not hitting a seer or lookout" as if it is possible anyone was going to come out and claim they had a good guy role. Teh fact that those three people claimed vanilla to me means very little. If we want to examine the fact that they decided to claim a side, or claimed a previous role, I find that very useful information. But i don't see any reason to expect it's "safer" to vote these folks because they claimed vanilla.

Third, I do think it's useful to consider who claimed a previous role and who did not, and if those claims hold up. This is what I'm looking at right now.

This is an example of a reveal that I don't think helps us, as it outs a role that previously may or may not have been in the original role set. However, it ironically makes me feel better about LSG because if she had swapped to a bad guy role, she'd keep that info to her bad guy team.

On the other hand, voting people we think were good D1 on the assumption they've flipped sides I don't think is a strategy.

All I can see is a whollllllee lot of bullshit being slung around here today.....


We can't all be vanilla wolves.

How is that different than any day though? Doesn't everyone check in every normal game by saying, "regular old villager here" ...

To me what's interesting is what they claim to have been in the past.

Very much in agreement here. If someone has a special good guy role, they can't publicly say that. That would just be giving the bad guys an easy target for a night kill! Assuming there is a night kill.. this game has been so weird already, it's not outside the realm of possibility that that's different too.

I had planned to scan CR and if he is telling the truth, he would have came back as a villager. The reason I chose CR is because I think he is very influential and I wanted to know where he was at.

The post-analysis of this game is going to be crazy.

VOTE CHEIF RUM

Two reasons:
1. The fact that no else has claimed they switched sides.
2. He set on his vote at deadline and didn't anything. That essentially became a wasted vote. We can say the same for LSG.

Furthermore, if CR was a villager, it implies that the villagers do not know who each other are. I guess that is possible. Maybe the villagers have to unlock some sort of condition to get to communicate. Either way, it smells funny.

In which case why claim villager at all in a game with potentially three teams and mechanics we don’t really understand? It’s not a smart decision and I still strongly suspect there’s a baddie or two in there.

I can respect Autumns reveal somewhat as he did give info on confirming a previous role, but as he’s now got a target on his back I still wouldn’t have done it. We also don’t know that all the n1 roles are even still in the game so the info he revealed for might not even help us.

Ugh, I said villager again when I mean goodie. Force of habit.

Remember, no confirmed sources for vampire sightings yet. That's not to say they aren't in there but just that we have had wolf (obviously), villager and recently converted wolf claims. We may or may not have had a full restart with all roles opened back up between D1 and D2. At some point we can start assembling better possibilities as to what roles may be present.

Thus we also do not know exact night actions as EF was so nice in providing the list with the following caveat, "if the associated roles exist".

And... do we know if the killed player roles will be exposed after night actions?

Because this is werewolf and everyone's paranoid and paranoid about everyone else being paranoid? I don't think it's uncommon in these games to proclaim oneself a good guy. Obviously doesn't mean anything though since the bad guys will say the same thing. So not really much there to go on.. but if this is almost like a redo of Day 1 then we don't have much to go on beyond that either.

Just reread D1a (and D1b) to get any insight into Chief's claim and who he may have been a villager with and the interactions with Henry seem to indicate a pattern where the two may have been working together. Chief sits votes bhlloy and then switches to henry late in D1a. Only others on henry were autumn and me. Then D1b when henry gets voted up 4-2-2 chief evens it out 3-3-2. Henry then starts a run on telle. If chief flipped to wolf then odds may say henry is still a baddie. I am not sure he would vote chief like he did D2 but still worth tracking maybe.

At this point I feel safe in saying that unless EF stated a rule clearly, we can make absolutely no assumptions about the game mechanics. This seems to be anything but a normal werewolf game, which is just so much fun for our first game back after eons of no play! :)

It's easy enough to test Chief's statement of previously being a villager. He has to supply us a list of his original fellow villager(s). Then we see if they confirm that or not. If not then we've identified a small group where at least one person is lying, and that's a good place to start.

Are we willing to put any stock into probability exercises at this point???

My assumption is that if CR is telling the truth (a big IF....) that he didn't know who the other villagers were or if he did all those roles have switched to.

What do you know haha?

I'm not outing anyone out unless they do it thenselves. It's not going to help the current villagers to know there were previous villagers. They know that. It could help the villagers if they know how many there were, allowing them to have information on the game we don't have. They would then know if it's the same number of villagers as before.

i wouldn't sweat it. If I was good, I would have risked the tie too.

The villagers or vamps would almost certainly know each other wouldn't they though? I guess whichever of the two is assuming the typical wolf role. It is certainly possible that all bad roles have switched to good roles but not very likely.

I am merely guessing here, but I would suppose it is because the lynch happened first. The tie triggered the re-role, or whatever it is, and EF wouldn't then turn around and ask newly made baddies or good guy roles to make decisions on no information. No night kill because the game reset meant no night actions for anyone.

FTR, you were our target. We decided you were a combination of dangerous but playing too quiet to likely be protected.

I like it... a tie mechanism for a future game...

Better reread the lengthy Day 1. In neither case did I make a deadline vote. And in the tie vote, I made my vote hours before, and well before the whole run on Telle happened.

Not really going to argue the whys of my votes, as I was a villager then and I have my reasons, which now no longer matter.

Good call though to scan me. That would have worked out well for you.