Werewolf XXXIX: The Lady of La Rochelle–GAME OVER.

[dubb93]

OK, I got 20 minutes to decide where I'm going to go. I'm going to be catching up real quick. The good news is that I have tuesday and wednesday off to be more active if I make it that far. I will say that with no new information(if there is not any) I'm leaning toward voting Lathum.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by dubb93

OK, I got 20 minutes to decide where I'm going to go. I'm going to be catching up real quick. The good news is that I have tuesday and wednesday off to be more active if I make it that far. I will say that with no new information(if there is not any) I'm leaning toward voting Lathum.

care to share why?

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Fouts said he had two suspects, chief and alan...he killed chief, and then he sent congratulatory wine to alan that someone managed to get their hands on and poison before it went to alan? That makes sense to you?

I dont think fouts is bad, but id like someone to explain a story that makes more sense then fouts killed his other top suspect last night with the wine he purchased and gave to alan. Why send wine to, after chiefs death, your top suspect?

What makes you think that Fouts sent the wine to Alan as a congratulatory gesture?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

What makes you think that Fouts sent the wine to Alan as a congratulatory gesture?

in that version of events Fouts is a musketeer, or at least has a different agenda then alan.

[BrianD]

Blade/Hoops, I'll have to retract my statements about Alan. Looking back, I see that he mentioned a few times that if a person with an important role was in danger, they should let it be known so they weren't part of the duel.

When Alan didn't take part in the duel and then showed up to be the seer, I must have combined his earlier statements to make me think he gave out clues. Looking back, I don't see any clues like I thought I saw. Now I'm not sure why Alan was targeted last night.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

You rush to AlanT’s room and look about. Sure enough a fine bottle of Anjou wine is uncorked and open upon the table. A glass lays broken upon the floor where it was dropped. M. AlanT’s body is lying stretched out towards the door. He has a look of shock and disbelief upon his face. A face that is twisted and bloated blue.

...

You look about and notice a small piece of paper almost hidden under the bed. It is a receipt for purchase of two bottles of Anjou wine, total price 50 Livre and addressed to M. Fouts. It must have been dropped upon delivery.

"It must have been dropped upon delivery." Is this what you're referring to, Blade, when you talk about a screwed up assassin attack? Was the real target Fouts, but somehow the wine got sent to Alan? Where is the second bottle?

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

care to share why?

The same reason I voted him yesterday b/f switching it while pissed off. He added little to nothing and then voted me with no explanation. He later explained himself, but I didn't like it nor has he appeared to add anything today.

As for hoops, I hope he took the nook I gave and hooked it. But I would like to get more information on path. I have no clue what the hell he is talking about happened last night. It appears he could possibly identify a bad guy but is withholding information?

[path12]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

like they can advance to fouts role?
I like to see what St. C does/finds out on his sabitacol (sp?) today too, so long as it doesn't hurt us or him giving the info.

I think there is possibly some sort of bribe system (or vice thing like in the Tombstone game). Now why a guard would find it necessary to attempt to coerce another guard is the big money question. It seems like too unbalancing a capability for a musketeer.

That's why I suspect some people have their own agenda.

[hoopsguy]

Originally Posted by dubb93

OK, I got 20 minutes to decide where I'm going to go. I'm going to be catching up real quick. The good news is that I have tuesday and wednesday off to be more active if I make it that far. I will say that with no new information(if there is not any) I'm leaning toward voting Lathum.

I've started trying to compile notes from Day 1 and the one I have on Lathum is "2nd vote on Dubb (first person with two votes)".

I would like to see more discussion coming from both Lathum and Barkeep in terms of their interpretations of events up to this point. Both of those two seemed to find themselves on the other side of discussions with you over the weekend (in fairness, so did people like Tyrith). It is still very early in the game, but going off of "feel" I would probably vote for one of those two right now if I was up against the deadline.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Now I'm not sure why Alan was targeted last night.

I'm starting to see it as either a botched attack against Fouts or a deliberate attempt to frame Fouts. Either way, it looks like Fouts was the intended overall target.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

care to share why?

Oh if you meant why only 20 minutes that would be because I am on lunch break and don't get off work till 10PM

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Fouts said he had two suspects, chief and alan...he killed chief, and then he sent congratulatory wine to alan that someone managed to get their hands on and poison before it went to alan? That makes sense to you?

I dont think fouts is bad, but id like someone to explain a story that makes more sense then fouts killed his other top suspect last night with the wine he purchased and gave to alan. Why send wine to, after chiefs death, your top suspect?

I think we have to consider the note was forged. It's possible Fouts killed Alan, but WHY? He was mostly clear after yesterday, and he could have saved the kill, unless he was deathly afraid of dying lastn ight. If he did kill Alan last night he 1) was dealt a VERY powerful role and 2) really screwed us in the process of us screwing him.

[path12]

Originally Posted by dubb93

But I would like to get more information on path. I have no clue what the hell he is talking about happened last night. It appears he could possibly identify a bad guy but is withholding information?

I already clearly stated I could not identify anyone from last night. I received a visitor sent from an unknown source. If I wanted to withhold the information I wouldn't have said a word about the whole thing.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by path12

I already clearly stated I could not identify anyone from last night. I received a visitor sent from an unknown source. If I wanted to withhold the information I wouldn't have said a word about the whole thing.

Ah, I must have skimmed that part, sorry. I thought you were saying you had a visitor but weren't going to identify him b/c you thought he may have been a good guy instead of a bad guy. My bad, I was pressed for time and didn't read clearly.

[BrianD]

Dubb, did you explain why you sent the tail to Hoops?

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I think we have to consider the note was forged. It's possible Fouts killed Alan, but WHY? He was mostly clear after yesterday, and he could have saved the kill, unless he was deathly afraid of dying lastn ight. If he did kill Alan last night he 1) was dealt a VERY powerful role and 2) really screwed us in the process of us screwing him.

I really don't think so. I think Alan probably was the target last night, not Fouts, but I don't understand why. I can't believe how hard both you and Jesse(last night) seem to be trying to discredit Fouts.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Dubb, did you explain why you sent the tail to Hoops?

I did what?

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by dubb93

As for hoops, I hope he took the nook I gave and hooked it.

Doesn't this mean you sent Hoops the tail?

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by dubb93

I really don't think so. I think Alan probably was the target last night, not Fouts, but I don't understand why. I can't believe how hard both you and Jesse(last night) seem to be trying to discredit Fouts.

I don't get what you're trying to say here. I was just saying that it was possible a bad guy assassin just wrote Fouts name on a note to make the whole thing stick -- would take random wine? I am pretty certain Alan was the target.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Y'all really need to stop posting so much, its hard to read 5+ pages and then write something intellectual and insightful that hasn't been said.

Heh. A very astute observation.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by BrianD

Doesn't this mean you sent Hoops the tail?

That means nothing that concerns you M. BrianD.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by dubb93

That means nothing that concerns you M. BrianD.

You were the one that brought it up.

[dubb93]

I really don't think so. I think Alan probably was the target last night, not Fouts, but I don't understand why. I can't believe how hard both you and Jesse(last night) seem to be trying to discredit Fouts.

Jesse obviously=Jon, wrong name, sorry, but I really do have to make a vote right now, with what appears to be incomplete information as I will be out the rest of the name(damn work)

I'm going to stick where I was with a UTR vote for

LATHUM

I really feel something isn't adding up with him from both yesterday and his UTR play today. Sorry I can't stick around and walk through things with everybody, but I will be around tonight and then again all day tuesday and wednesday if I am still alive.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by path12

So it appears that the receipt of the poisoned wine with Fouts' name is being totally discounted as a red herring? Anyone think differently?

I don't distrust him ATM, but I'm not sure we should just throw that piece of information away.

Im still playing cath up with my readibgs, but as of right now, I'm honestly lookinga t him for my vote.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by BrianD

You were the one that brought it up.

It was between me and M. hoopsguy sir.

[path12]

I'm gonna need to remember to put M. before anyone's name. I love that.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by path12

So it appears that the receipt of the poisoned wine with Fouts' name is being totally discounted as a red herring? Anyone think differently?

I don't distrust him ATM, but I'm not sure we should just throw that piece of information away.

I was waiting to see who would go down that route. Think about it. What is the point of killing off Izulde and Alan, and dropping my name? It works to take away the trust I gained by using my duke power.

While your post is subtle, you are the first to broach the subject.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

Unless we have a multiple kill assassin, the night one thing seems a little too crazy for me to believe. I'm more inclined to think they might get multiple kills.

Unless they were on the chopping block yesterday and had reason to beleive that they might be again tonight.....

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

If there are three musketeers and each gets a night action, this adds up. But if what path was saying about Alan dying even if the poison didn't get him, sounds like there could be four wolves out there.

How about this: one musketeer kills Izulde, one poisons Alan, and the third is a backup against Alan in case the poison doesn't work. If this is true, where do the visitors come in? If they were sent from a baddie, it could be a musketeer sympathizer. The person that can become the fourth musketeer.

Do I sound off base here?

I was thinking that someone is looking for the fourth musketeer. Once that role is hit, they become activated.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Unless they were on the chopping block yesterday and had reason to beleive that they might be again tonight.....

No reason to think he would be on the block today; the consensus was that he was probably good. However, there was a decent chance he would have got killed last night for his trouble.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

I think the poison was a cardinals guard assasin who just screwed up. Or fouts himself had a one time assasin role as well.

Izulde was the muskateers i believe, and the back-up night action on alan was likely another cardinals guard(not to kill though, i suspect).

So that would be 1 kill by the muskateers, 1 by fouts or a cardinals guard, and one night action by some other guard. Its works in my head.

So you are saying I am the duke and the assassin? Wow, how powerful I am. Do you have 2 roles, too?

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Fouts said he had two suspects, chief and alan...he killed chief, and then he sent congratulatory wine to alan that someone managed to get their hands on and poison before it went to alan? That makes sense to you?

I dont think fouts is bad, but id like someone to explain a story that makes more sense then fouts killed his other top suspect last night with the wine he purchased and gave to alan. Why send wine to, after chiefs death, your top suspect?

I don't have any night actions. I did not send any wine.

[Tyrith]

I get this feeling that Fouts wants someone to soothsayer him or something with all these very factual, concise statements he's been making.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Originally Posted by dubb93

I really don't think so. I think Alan probably was the target last night, not Fouts, but I don't understand why. I can't believe how hard both you and Jesse(last night) seem to be trying to discredit Fouts.

You might have missed it in scanning over the posts, but I haven't been attacking M. Fouts ( ) today. If anything, I'm becoming convinced that he was the target last night and Alan's death was an accident.

[Abe Sargent]

Okay, here's my Fouts logic:

If they really tried to frame Fouts, then that would be a very bad call. He is arguably the only player to have a reason to trust, so why try to frame him when it may backfire? Instead, frame any one of the other players about whom we know nothing. Frame Blade, Barkeep, hoops, Lathum, anybody really.

Instead, we have them trying to frame Fouts? That just doesn't make sense.

On the other hand, I;ve seen botched failures to attack with poor dice rolls. I've seen it happen in my own games as well as in games run by others. As such, I am very comfortable with the clue last night being an accident and real instead of a forgery.

Plus, I've never been in love with Fouts like some of you seem to be.

If your vote today is just random, then vote Fouts. At least there is some reason to vote him.

Vote Fouts


-Anxiety

[path12]

Originally Posted by Jonathan Ezarik

If there are three musketeers and each gets a night action, this adds up. But if what path was saying about Alan dying even if the poison didn't get him, sounds like there could be four wolves out there.

I missed this until I saw Fouts quoting it and need to clarify: I did not say that Alan would have been killed if the poison didn't get him, only that it was apparent to me based on my interaction last night that he was being targeted. There's a difference.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

I get this feeling that Fouts wants someone to soothsayer him or something with all these very factual, concise statements he's been making.

Nope. I am just speaking the truth. The bad guys would like you to lynch me and save them the trouble.

Over and over again players try to believe the longshot, is pulling the wool over my eyes. Lets believe the farfetched ideas, and ignore other possiblities. Why not just believe the duke is a good guy, like 99% of the other time? People want to be the hero and catch the 1% of the time the duke is the bad guy.

The real truth is, I am the duke, I used my power as intended (to save my ass). People don't like who I chose, too bad, when you are duke you can choose whoever you want. I'm not telling you how to play your role.

Rant over.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

If your vote today is just random, then vote Fouts. At least there is some reason to vote him.

Vote Fouts


-Anxiety

Honestly, what is your agenda? Do you think I have the duke power, can assassinate people, and still pose a threat to you? Wow, let me snap my fingers and watch you die.

vote anxiety

[Coffee Warlord]

Unvote Jonathan

I may be switching to Anxiety very soon. For now, we'll leave it open.

[Jonathan Ezarik]

Hoops,

Can you confirm that it was dubb who sent you your guest last night?

[Coffee Warlord]

Btw. If the Bears game is good tonight, that's where I will be directing my attention to, not here. Fair warning.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Btw. If the Bears game is good tonight, that's where I will be directing my attention to, not here. Fair warning.

da bears ?

[path12]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

da bears ?

No, M. Bears.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by path12

No, M. Bears.

Don't ever associate the Bears with the French, thank you very much.

[Grammaticus]

Here is how I have the votes as of post 839

Day 2 Vote:

2 Ntndeacon – Tyrith (719), DaddyTorgo (766)
1 DaddyTorgo – BrianD (739)
1 SnDvl – Path (793)
1 Lathum – Dubb (823)
1 Fouts – Anxiety (835)
1 Anxiety – Fouts (838

Not Voted: st.cronin, Jonathan Ezarik, Lathum, Barkeep, Blade, ntndeacon, Mr. Wed., Coffee Warlord, SnDvls, LoneStarGirl, hoopsguy

[Lathum]

So I like how Dubb dosn't come into the thread until almos 6:00 then has the balls to say I have been UTR when I said earlier today I would be out most of the day at work where I have no internet acsess. If this is all he has to go by that's bs but he can play his game.

My feelings on AlanT's death are it is possible Fouts did kill him in a botched assasin attempt. It seems this could be a one time kill and some people still weren't sold on Fouts. The fact that this game could be on a quickened pace lead me to believe it is possible Fouts did kill Alan. It almost seems TO obvious.

I'm leaning towards Dubb since he said I voted for no reason and was UTR yet he did the same to me but I am not sold on Fouts.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Don't ever associate the Bears with the French, thank you very much.

I am hoping to see M. Grossman surrender multiple receptions to the Seahawk secondary in the playoffs.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Fouts

So you are saying I am the duke and the assassin? Wow, how powerful I am. Do you have 2 roles, too?

Somewhat, yes...i have two talents, not so much 2 roles.

[Tyrith]

I don't like Anxiety's vote at all. There is also some reason NOT to vote him; there is a better than average chance he has a good role. Although in this game I'm not putting it past Fouts to be bad. And Fouts rubs me the wrong way.

However, the logic is weird enough that I don't think it's going to be pick up a bandwagon or anything, so I don't think it's a really wolfish move.

Dubb's play doesn't make much sense to me either, although he was rushed...

[Lathum]

vote FOUTS

as much as I want to vote Dubb something about Fouts doesn't add up