WW LII -- Clue (SOCIALITES WIN)

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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?

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]

Originally Posted by Alan T

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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/...ad.php?t=59343

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by 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/...ad.php?t=59343

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

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Alan T

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by 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!!!.

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by 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

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

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by Alan T

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]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

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]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by Alan T

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]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

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]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by RendeR

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]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

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]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

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]

Originally Posted by Telle

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]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

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]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

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.