Werewolf XXXVII: Middle-Earth - GAME ENDS. Who Won? Check it out!

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

I think that info can be taken from it, but not by lynching a good guy today.

see this game isn't like most (at this point with so many people required to lynch) where a simple majority lynches. we have to have half plus one.

So, you have some inside knowledge that they are good guys?

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Heres my problem with this...we have two evil factions, who cannot win the game with the other. So both evil factions want to eliminate the other, and likely dont know its members. So i can assume the first 3 are good, as the other evil faction had just as much reason to want scoobz dead as the rest of us.

not true

evil wins when they overwhelm good

they both win just not a major victory

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

st cronin...how am i UTR? I have plenty of posts in here, and I havn't been around 800 hours a day true, but that's because RL has reared its ugly head a bit.

*shrug* Others will have their own ideas about who is utr, or what it means to be utr - making lots of posts, to me, doesn't mean anything.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

not true

evil wins when they overwhelm good

they both win just not a major victory

well we're already -1 evildoer. and -1 good guy too, but with their smaller original #'s and the goodguy not being a ranger I think we have the upper hand.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

A simple majority is a half plus one, aka 51 out of 100 as in the US Senate. Most of our games have lynches done by a plurality instead of a majority. Just a semantic difference in terminology.

sorry that's what I ment.

thanks for clarifying it.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

dola - not saying lathum or CR are good either I just don't like them today

Outside of a seer or witness fingering someone, what is enough to justify voting for someone on day 1 or day 2? If you want no lynch, that is fine, but I think it is smart to build a track record and start taking using the tools available to us to solve things.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

So, you have some inside knowledge that they are good guys?

This argument has been posed multiple times today and has no base whatsoever.

Even if i was evil, and knew Chief and Lathum werent in my faction, he could still be in the other evil faction.

So how could anyone, on day 2, know 2 people are good already???

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

*shrug* Others will have their own ideas about who is utr, or what it means to be utr - making lots of posts, to me, doesn't mean anything.

still trying to get a handle on such a big game. it's only my what...3rd game? 1st real big game. and i'm probably falling into the geekiness too much.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

well we're already -1 evildoer. and -1 good guy too, but with their smaller original #'s and the goodguy not being a ranger I think we have the upper hand.

if you assume that evil only needs a 1:1 ratio

the rules seem to state that a 2:1 good to dark ratio could win them the game too.

it isn't clear, but it does infer that if it gets to a 1:1 we lose.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

So, you have some inside knowledge that they are good guys?

no and I stated that

I just don't like them as lynch canidates for today.

[BrianD]

So with all the people not liking the two lynch candidates, has anyone put forth another candidate?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

still trying to get a handle on such a big game. it's only my what...3rd game? 1st real big game. and i'm probably falling into the geekiness too much.

There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that there are some villagers on my utr list, in the same way that it's possible that one of the early voters for scooby was bad. It's a starting point, that's all.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Winning Conditions:

The game ends when the forces of darkness can overwhelm those of light, or when all of the darkness is destroyed.

For purposes of overwhelming, one agent of darkness can overtake two villagers with no problem. They are sheep and easily pacified. However, the rangers are much more difficult. It takes two agents to overcome each ranger. (So, for example, if 8 players are left, three agents and five townfolk, then the agents of darkness win, because three agents can take five villagers with no problem.)

If someone is not a townsfolk, nor a ranger, nobody knows how easily pacified they are.


Victory Conditions:

Townsfolk of Bree: A major victory if darkness is removed.

Rangers of the North: Major victory if darkness is removed and at least one ranger survives. No victory if all rangers die, no matter what happens to darkness.

Agents of Sauron: Major victory if darkness wins and no Agents of Saruman are alive.

Agents of Saruman: Major victory if darkness wins and no Agents of Sauron remain.

If the Agents of Darkness win, and both Sauron and Saruman are still represented, a power struggle begins. The GM will determine which faction wrests control and which faction is ousted.

For those who may not be aligned with a faction, they will have their own victory conditions spelled out in their role pm.

I stand corrected it does state a 2:1 ratio provided there are no rangers and no strong outsider.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by BrianD

So with all the people not liking the two lynch candidates, has anyone put forth another candidate?

Ive said Alan for two days, and i know a few people want me

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I'm not so against, but we have SO MANY OPTIONS right now. Why pick a guy that isn't going to be around to defend himself? What possible good motivation is there to it? I understand Alan doing it; he has a precise reason. But some of the other early votes were just "oh, he acts like this when he's bad", while it's probably a couple days too early for that, and the rest is a sheer dogpile. Why not pick someone that could reveal a good role if they have one instead of taking it to the grave with themselves? If you want to lynch me for having independent thoughts tomorrow, sure, go ahead.

now why would you want someone to do that?

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Ive said Alan for two days, and i know a few people want me

Right, so we have already established that we are playing WereWolf.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Outside of a seer or witness fingering someone, what is enough to justify voting for someone on day 1 or day 2? If you want no lynch, that is fine, but I think it is smart to build a track record and start taking using the tools available to us to solve things.

you can build a track record with a vote and no lynch still.

it is used in many games when a bad guy is caught to see who they voted for ect.

also used to see who a dead seer voted for assuming they survive past night 1 (unlike me in the football game)

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Alan T

(8) Chief Rum - Saldana (482), Alan (504), Schmidty (552), Lathum (555), Blade (574), Jonathan Ezarik (577), Thomkal (585), Grammaticus (593)
(5) Lathum - St.Cronin (557), Tyrith (565), Mr. Wednesday (583), Swaggs (594), Ntndeacon (595)
(1) Saldana - Chief Rum (446)
(1) Blade - Izulde (484)
(1) St.cronin - Sndvls (532)
(1) Spleen - BrianD (554)

brian here's vote recap...little outdated, but still a starting point

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Lathum

now why would you want someone to do that?

I'm saying that if we're going to lynch a guy we should pick someone that has the chance of coming out and saying that they're important if they are. Granted that we're going to going after someone, I'd much rather someone who was about to be killed tell us that they were important than just dying with the information.

[SnDvls]

OOC: be back bath time

[DaddyTorgo]

i'm not a big fan of either CR or lathum honestly. I think it's quite likely that they're both good.

no one has put forth another viable candidate though, so i suppose i'll just hop on the bandwagon of one...and of the two I think we would learn more from putting Lathum under a microscope as CR isn't here to defend himself and convince us. However I fear it's too late for that, hmm?

[Tyrith]

Right now I count it chief 8, lathum 7, others less.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

not true

evil wins when they overwhelm good

they both win just not a major victory

Where are you getting that from?

Here is what the rules post says:

Agents of Sauron: Major victory if darkness wins and no Agents of Saruman are alive.

Agents of Saruman: Major victory if darkness wins and no Agents of Sauron remain.

If the Agents of Darkness win, and both Sauron and Saruman are still represented, a power struggle begins. The GM will determine which faction wrests control and which faction is ousted.

Nothing about a minor victory or any other type of victory is specified. It appears to be winner take all within the dark side.

[saldana]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

aaargh. i don't know...there's really not that much to go on at this point, beside CR seeming suspicious for a bit. why did everyone get away from saldana after his attack on CR again?

please quote the post in which i attacked CR....i made two posts, one asking him to explain his logic, and one saying that he has a habit of accusations without thinking them through and then voting for him...both of these came after he voted for me first....i havent said a word about him since, so how exactly am i driving the vote against him....if you are gonna come at me, bring something more than a complete exaggeration of what was actually said.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I would call the following players utr, just at first glance:

BrianD
ntndeacon
Schmidty
Mr. Wednesday
Izulde
Thomkal
Grammaticus
Sublime2
DaddyTorgo

You left off LoneStarGirl.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Where are you getting that from?

Here is what the rules post says:



Nothing about a minor victory or any other type of victory is specified. It appears to be winner take all within the dark side.

Major victory implies that there are other victory conditions. And if you were playing on darkness and you overwhelm good wouldn't you consider it a partial victory?

[LoneStarGirl]

Okay guys, i am here, but im on page 9, so give me a minute

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

You left off LoneStarGirl.

Because she is on his team?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by saldana

please quote the post in which i attacked CR....i made two posts, one asking him to explain his logic, and one saying that he has a habit of accusations without thinking them through and then voting for him...both of these came after he voted for me first....i havent said a word about him since, so how exactly am i driving the vote against him....if you are gonna come at me, bring something more than a complete exaggeration of what was actually said.

okay...fair enough. fair enough. i honestly was just going off impressions and hazy memories rather than reading a specific post. i need to get better about that. attack withdrawn

[DaddyTorgo]

so do we want to go with CR? or another for Lathum? the vote is pretty close

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Major victory implies that there are other victory conditions. And if you were playing on darkness and you overwhelm good wouldn't you consider it a partial victory?

Not if the rules don't specify it or the GM let me know via PM.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

You left off LoneStarGirl.

As well as CR who actually has been UTR both in number of posts as well as post content.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I'm saying that if we're going to lynch a guy we should pick someone that has the chance of coming out and saying that they're important if they are. Granted that we're going to going after someone, I'd much rather someone who was about to be killed tell us that they were important than just dying with the information.

so your saying you are trying to get a good guy to reveal by voting for him....


Honestly I am a plain villegar so if I am lynched all you'll get is voting patterns which could be helpfull.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Not if the rules don't specify it or the GM let me know via PM.

Well, suffice it to say that if darkness overwhelms good the remaining good players are out of the game, and it wouldn't surprise me if it's in bad's best interests to get us out of the way before they completely decimate each other.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

You left off LoneStarGirl.

I guess you didn't read my OTHER list, where I explained why she was in my cot. That's cool.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Lathum

so your saying you are trying to get a good guy to reveal by voting for him....


Honestly I am a plain villegar so if I am lynched all you'll get is voting patterns which could be helpfull.

No, Lathum, fricking try to understand. If we ARE going to kill someone, which we are, and we aren't going to know anything about it, then wouldn't you rather someone with a good role be able to TELL US instead of just dying? We don't know role information on ANYONE so you can't say bull---- about it? We don't KNOW anyone is good, so stop trying to miscontrue my arguments you wolf.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

As well as CR who actually has been UTR both in number of posts as well as post content.

Well, I don't know how you define UTR, but I say anybody getting as many votes as Chief Rum is very much on the radar.

[LoneStarGirl]

Okay, I dont like that lathum jumped on the chief rum bandwagon, but he has been bad in what, the last 4 games? No way he could be bad this game too. Plus, I really dont think Blade is bad for those that keep jumping on him... He's just weird

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

btw, these were the first four votes for scoobz:

sndvls
alant
lsg
fouts

The first three are my circle of trust right now.

Why?

* He was the dark adept, not associated with a faction, so chances are pretty good that none of the bad guys realized what he was.

* There was no night one, so there is zero chance of a seer or that sort being involved.

I tell you, we did well to get the dark adept out of the game yesterday, but there is NOTHING to take out of the vote!

[Mr. Wednesday]

Er, no night zero.

[Lorena]

Almost caught up. If I vote at the last minute, don't hold it against me alright?

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

Why?

* He was the dark adept, not associated with a faction, so chances are pretty good that none of the bad guys realized what he was.

* There was no night one, so there is zero chance of a seer or that sort being involved.

I tell you, we did well to get the dark adept out of the game yesterday, but there is NOTHING to take out of the vote!

I completely and totally agree with this. Please don't try to take too much out of yesterday's vote.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I guess you didn't read my OTHER list, where I explained why she was in my cot. That's cool.

Because she was one of the first four votes for Scoobz?

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Do you think his teammates didn't know who he was? Do you think they piled on? Do you think they may have piled on after the die was cast, so they wouldn't look bad?

I think he DIDN'T HAVE TEAMMATES!

During the day, it was perfect for the bad guys, because there was never any risk involved; the leading votegetter was not on their team and he won in a runaway. It turned out poorly for them, because it wasn't a player they wanted to lose, but they were not exposed in any way in the vote.

I think there is information to take away from the Day 1 vote. Sorry if you disagree.

I think there's minimal information available. MAYBE we can try to tag the people in the middle of the vote who didn't go for a race, but I think that's a low-percentage play.

[DaddyTorgo]

anyone...is there an actual case against lathum?

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

Why?

* He was the dark adept, not associated with a faction, so chances are pretty good that none of the bad guys realized what he was.

* There was no night one, so there is zero chance of a seer or that sort being involved.

I tell you, we did well to get the dark adept out of the game yesterday, but there is NOTHING to take out of the vote!

I'm sorry, how do we know this? I see no mention of it in the rules. It just says he was on the side of darkness. Are you just assuming this?

[LoneStarGirl]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

You left off LoneStarGirl.

Awww, are you paying close attention to me? I feel special

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

anyone...is there an actual case against lathum?

About as much as there is an actual case against CR.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I'm sorry, how do we know this? I see no mention of it in the rules. It just says he was on the side of darkness. Are you just assuming this?

Because he wasn't revealed to be with a faction and factional affliations are revealed upon death.

[LoneStarGirl]

Okay, I agree that lathum and cheif aren't standing out to me. But i have always said a no-lynch is only good for the wolves. And since Cheif is leading the pack, i will help by voting him. Plus, like i said, no way lathum can be bad 4 games in a row!

vote cheif rum