Werewolf XXXIV: Tombstone (GAME OVER - Night 13)

[Fouts]

So, does the sheriff jailing 2 people thwart any attacks on them tonight? This would, in effect, be a bodyguard type action.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by saldana

sorry sndvls...i confused you and swaggs. you actually had more posts than i did during the day today. (but you still have less than 1000 and dont really count )

you just didn't see my posts 'cause you have me on ignore

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

That's pretty funny.

correction

Anxiety had 6 at the deadline

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

That's pretty funny.

I laughed too

[LoneStarGirl]

Originally Posted by Fouts

So, does the sheriff jailing 2 people thwart any attacks on them tonight? This would, in effect, be a bodyguard type action.

Good question, anybody going to answer.

[SnDvls]

just for other info if the whole posting thing is important

I'll probally only do this for day 1 FYI, sorry if I'm off a post on someone

Bullett 53
Barkeep 44
ChiefRum 32
Hoops 21
Saldana 14
St. C 21
SnDvls 17
LSG 19
Chubby 10
Spleen 14
fouts 11
glen 9
path 10
anxiety 6
lathum 6
racer 8
thomkal 7
ntn 7
gram 5
GE 3
Swaggs 3

[Glengoyne]

Initially this is your position.

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Probably a crap shot at this point, but I'd look at quiet people who are not newbies or relatively new.


-Anxiety

Then you throw my name in the hat, when this is my second outing.

Originally Posted by Anxiety

saldana, here are some poeple I'd look more closely at -

Thomkal
SnDvls
Glengoyne

Have they posted much during the day? My impression was that they didn't, but I don't know, so I'd go back and investigate if I were the sheriff.

I don't see how I meet your initial criteria. Could it be because you know I'm not a cowboy, and you'd like to see as many townfolk as possible in the pokey?

The more I think about it, the less likely I am inclined to think you are just randomly throwing names out there, and the more I sense that you are targetting me. Maybe the others as well.

[LoneStarGirl]

I would really like to see how the night actions take place before we make a big move, but St. Cronin did say he didn't want to be sheriff because his role wouldn't work well with it, so i think he should be a candidate for jail tonight

[LoneStarGirl]

I dont think bullet should have that many posts because he was drunk and just jabbering in half of them

[saldana]

Originally Posted by Fouts

So, does the sheriff jailing 2 people thwart any attacks on them tonight? This would, in effect, be a bodyguard type action.

thats what i thought too, except the people in jail are the only ones we can lynch tomorrow, so that kind of backfires

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Fouts

So, does the sheriff jailing 2 people thwart any attacks on them tonight? This would, in effect, be a bodyguard type action.

Originally Posted by rules

In the Center of the town is the Town Jail. The Town jail is small and only has room for three prisoners at any one time. All prisoners are kept in seperate cells, and are prevented from having contact with any other player while in the jail. Prisoners may participate in sheriff election votes, and town lynch votes but are prevented from participating in any other day or night period actions.

bolded part mine. not sure how Alan ment for this to be interperted.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Fouts

So, does the sheriff jailing 2 people thwart any attacks on them tonight? This would, in effect, be a bodyguard type action.

I agree with LSG, this is a good question. A point of timing, I'd imagine. Does the deputy show up ahead of the assassin? Or do they arrive at the same time?

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I laughed too

you probally could have heard my laugh when I counted my posts and your posts

[SnDvls]

hey look I reread the rules and might have found something useful...though I bet Alan didn't intend for it to be that way

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

I dont think bullet should have that many posts because he was drunk and just jabbering in half of them

that's okay none of them "really counted"

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Fouts

So, does the sheriff jailing 2 people thwart any attacks on them tonight? This would, in effect, be a bodyguard type action.

I have been asked similar questions a few times tonight. I'm not going to state the exact order of night action execution as it would take away some things from the game. My answer for these questions most of the night has been that actions are processed in order based both on type of action as well as location of the action.

With all actions there is a possibility it can occur entirely before another action thus voiding the later action, happen at the same time as another action and causing an alternate result than expected, or occur after another action and being affected or invalidated due to it.

[Swaggs]

I'm going to have real limited access tomorrow because of a heavy workday, but I will be back for the deadline.

For what it is worth, I think we should try to jail some people so that we can make a lynch tomorrow. It is an unpleasant, but necessary part of the game.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Initially this is your position.



Then you throw my name in the hat, when this is my second outing.



I don't see how I meet your initial criteria. Could it be because you know I'm not a cowboy, and you'd like to see as many townfolk as possible in the pokey?

The more I think about it, the less likely I am inclined to think you are just randomly throwing names out there, and the more I sense that you are targetting me. Maybe the others as well.

Honestly I thought you had played more. I was looking for traditionally quiet returners like Thomkal or traditionally noisy returners that I thought were quiet, which is why I listed SnDvls. I thought you were a traditionalyl quiet returner who had severl games under his belt, not just one. I figureed you were on five or so. Therefore, I apologize for lumping you with the other two.

Thinking of you as a returner with some experience should be taken as a compliment, however

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I have been asked similar questions a few times tonight. I'm not going to state the exact order of night action execution as it would take away some things from the game. My answer for these questions most of the night has been that actions are processed in order based both on type of action as well as location of the action.

With all actions there is a possibility it can occur entirely before another action thus voiding the later action, happen at the same time as another action and causing an alternate result than expected, or occur after another action and being affected or invalidated due to it.

You sound like a politician.

[saldana]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I agree with LSG, this is a good question. A point of timing, I'd imagine. Does the deputy show up ahead of the assassin? Or do they arrive at the same time?

as sheriff, i know that my arresting someone may or may not affect their ability to perform a night action...depending on where that persons actions fall in the order of resolution, they may or may not get to do their action tonight...they wont be able to on any nights after that.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I have been asked similar questions a few times tonight. I'm not going to state the exact order of night action execution as it would take away some things from the game. My answer for these questions most of the night has been that actions are processed in order based both on type of action as well as location of the action.

With all actions there is a possibility it can occur entirely before another action thus voiding the later action, happen at the same time as another action and causing an alternate result than expected, or occur after another action and being affected or invalidated due to it.

looks like the cowboys are worried about it too.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

hey look I reread the rules and might have found something useful...though I bet Alan didn't intend for it to be that way

And?

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Honestly I thought you had played more. I was looking for traditionally quiet returners like Thomkal or traditionally noisy returners that I thought were quiet, which is why I listed SnDvls. I thought you were a traditionalyl quiet returner who had severl games under his belt, not just one. I figureed you were on five or so. Therefore, I apologize for lumping you with the other two.

Thinking of you as a returner with some experience should be taken as a compliment, however

There we go. Forming a CoT already.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

And?

see post #411

also now know as the information post due to the post #

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

bolded part mine. not sure how Alan ment for this to be interperted.

The way its meant to be interpreted is once they are in the jail cell they can not participate in day or night actions (their actions or other people's actions performed on them.) This includes night kill attempts, Showdowns, etc.

They are limited to being able to participate in town discussion (posting in this thread), and the votes of the day (if they want to lynch themselves, they are more than welcome to), or elect a new sheriff if they feel the current one mistreated them. (Even though in jail, they are still tombstone citizens and can still vote)

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by saldana

as sheriff, i know that my arresting someone may or may not affect their ability to perform a night action...depending on where that persons actions fall in the order of resolution, they may or may not get to do their action tonight...they wont be able to on any nights after that.

I think you should use the jail for lynch suspects and let them be prosecuted (and prosecute each other) rather than go for the bodyguard route. I like to see how players act and react when they have a little heat on them. It is how we will learn what is what in this game, in my opinion.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Alan T

The way its meant to be interpreted is once they are in the jail cell they can not participate in day or night actions (their actions or other people's actions performed on them.) This includes night kill attempts, Showdowns, etc.

They are limited to being able to participate in town discussion (posting in this thread), and the votes of the day (if they want to lynch themselves, they are more than welcome to), or elect a new sheriff if they feel the current one mistreated them. (Even though in jail, they are still tombstone citizens and can still vote)

so in essence it is a form of a bodyguard role as they are potentally safe from a night kill, if they are put in jail prior to someone's night kill action.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

You sound like a politician.

Maybe I will run for sheriff some day.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by saldana

as sheriff, i know that my arresting someone may or may not affect their ability to perform a night action...depending on where that persons actions fall in the order of resolution, they may or may not get to do their action tonight...they wont be able to on any nights after that.

Very cool, I imagine the morning will be interesting.

On one hand, I think it would be prudent to hold off jailing anyone until after the sun comes up and the night's activities have been revealed. In other words, perhaps we will learn something tomorrow that will actually give us real suspects tomorrow.


Then again, passing on jailing someone might very well make the night more exciting. Jail away.

Just not me.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Maybe I will run for sheriff some day.

I'd hold out for town mayor if I were you. I'd guess your shelf life would be a little longer.

[LoneStarGirl]

Although at first I thought throwing two people in jail was a good idea right off the bat, I dont see the benefit to it. What do we learn from having anybody in jail? And right now we don't have anybody we are suspicious of (at least i dont) so it would seem unfair to just pick a name and throw them in jail and then lynch them tomorrow.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Although at first I thought throwing two people in jail was a good idea right off the bat, I dont see the benefit to it. What do we learn from having anybody in jail? And right now we don't have anybody we are suspicious of (at least i dont) so it would seem unfair to just pick a name and throw them in jail and then lynch them tomorrow.

I think this game gives us a nice advantage over the cowboys in that only two people can receive lynch votes, so cowboys will not be able to make throwaway votes. At some point, we will have to begin lynching people and I think the sooner the better because it will begin to give us track records.

[Racer]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Although at first I thought throwing two people in jail was a good idea right off the bat, I dont see the benefit to it. What do we learn from having anybody in jail? And right now we don't have anybody we are suspicious of (at least i dont) so it would seem unfair to just pick a name and throw them in jail and then lynch them tomorrow.

Killing people off though is likely to help establish voting patterns not to mention that we have a better chance to win mathematically if we kill someone off each night (with the exception of when it is down to four people with one of the four being a wolf).

[saldana]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Although at first I thought throwing two people in jail was a good idea right off the bat, I dont see the benefit to it. What do we learn from having anybody in jail? And right now we don't have anybody we are suspicious of (at least i dont) so it would seem unfair to just pick a name and throw them in jail and then lynch them tomorrow.

how does having no one in jail help the town...if i dont jail anyone, and then we dont lynch anyone tomorrow, all that does is give the cowboys a free day to kill us at night...it may seem a bit unfair to have picked two people today, but its more fair than a usual first lynch, as at least those in prision will have the day tomorrow to plead their case.

[SnDvls]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I think this game gives us a nice advantage over the cowboys in that only two people can receive lynch votes, so cowboys will not be able to make throwaway votes. At some point, we will have to begin lynching people and I think the sooner the better because it will begin to give us track records.

it will only be a two pony race if we only keep 2 in jail...after tonight we can put 2 more in jail and have a 3 person race.

[LoneStarGirl]

Well ten thirty is my bed time so im off and y'all talk it out and i'll catch up tomorrow morning and throw in my two cents. Sal, any idea when you are going to put two people in jail?

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by LoneStarGirl

Although at first I thought throwing two people in jail was a good idea right off the bat, I dont see the benefit to it. What do we learn from having anybody in jail? And right now we don't have anybody we are suspicious of (at least i dont) so it would seem unfair to just pick a name and throw them in jail and then lynch them tomorrow.

The upside of jailing people tonight, is that it increases the chances that there will be glorious encounters as night actions collide. That will yield information, possibly shedding light on some of the people in jail, or possibly others. If we don't have reason to suspect someone, then the sheriff lets them go the next night. If we suspect someone that isn't in jail, the sheriff jails them the next night. Or we get ourselves a new sheriff.

The downside of jailing people tonight, is the default action will seemingly be to string them all up. It is also possible that the information yielded by the night's activities will be unclear, and we will lynch the wrong person hopefully yielding a one-for-one exchange. Which, if you think about it, is another upside.

[spleen1015]

We absolutely have to jail to folks tonight. It gets us started on lynching. Without anyone in jail, we can't lynch anyone. Lynching gets us more information. What type of information is dependant on all kinds of shit.

If we don't put anyone in jail, I feel like we're behind from the start.

[path12]

I was going to just agree that we need to have two in jail tonight, but then I read Glengoyne's post and all of a sudden felt rather un-erudite.

It is far more interesting than the usual day one stab in the dark, seems to me.

[path12]

Dola, I just noticed -- man, I lost a lot of posts. Fascist bastards.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by saldana

...it may seem a bit unfair to have picked two people today, but its more fair than a usual first lynch, as at least those in prision will have the day tomorrow to plead their case.

Does this mean it is a fait accompli? Do I need to stop analyzing posts, hoping to shed some light on a target or two? Too late to defend myself?

Just curious.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Does this mean it is a fait accompli? Do I need to stop analyzing posts, hoping to shed some light on a target or two? Too late to defend myself?

Just curious.

Sounds that way. Maybe we'll find out when night actions are posted?

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by path12

Dola, I just noticed -- man, I lost a lot of posts. Fascist bastards.

Explaining this to my wife, she indicates that some people have too much time on their hands if they are worried about other people's post counts. "Get a dog." was her response.

[path12]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Explaining this to my wife, she indicates that some people have too much time on their hands if they are worried about other people's post counts. "Get a dog." was her response.

Got the dog. Didn't notice the post thing until just now, so I guess it wasn't one of my big priorities. I find the whole thing pretty funny.

[Fouts]

Originally Posted by SnDvls

so in essence it is a form of a bodyguard role as they are potentally safe from a night kill, if they are put in jail prior to someone's night kill action.

This is what I was refering to - say the sheriff picks 2 people to jail, and the assassins pick 1 of those as their kill target. Them getting thrown in jail would block the kill attempt.

I read what Alan said, and it appears he will randomize it. So, I guess we'll find out when it happens.

[Grammaticus]

Saldana,

I think we should jail GoldenEagle for not voting in the election and

We should jail Glengoyne for suggesting we don't jail someone at all.

Those are the two most damaging things to the townsfolks so far. If we don't lynch the wolves have far greater odds of winning. So glenhoyne's and LSG's seconding that is a horrible action for the town. Then GE not voting is not good, as he covers any voting record. Either way those two things are the best we have to go on so far.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I think this game gives us a nice advantage over the cowboys in that only two people can receive lynch votes, so cowboys will not be able to make throwaway votes. At some point, we will have to begin lynching people and I think the sooner the better because it will begin to give us track records.

Actually, I think as the town we should require three votes.

First ELECT the sheriff every round, In many cases this will be a confidence vote for the current sheriff, but gives us the chance to see who votes for someone else and who that is.

Second, VOTE for lynch on who is currently in the pokey. We have to lynch someone every round or the wolves win percentage goes up with each day a lynch does not occur. Which side are you on?? Cowboys want "no lynch", townies want "lynch".

Third, JAIL nominate who should be placed in the pokey. The sheriff then follows through with the JAIL nomination, highest vote recepient wins. If there is a tie, the sheriff selects fromt he tied candidates.

Require all to vote on all three ballot options, not voting gets you jailed and lynched. Also, always keep three people in jail.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

Saldana,

I think we should jail GoldenEagle for not voting in the election and

We should jail Glengoyne for suggesting we don't jail someone at all.

Those are the two most damaging things to the townsfolks so far. If we don't lynch the wolves have far greater odds of winning. So glenhoyne's and LSG's seconding that is a horrible action for the town. Then GE not voting is not good, as he covers any voting record. Either way those two things are the best we have to go on so far.

Did you actually read what I posted? Not only that you have the order of events wrong. LSG suggested not jailing someone. I weighed in on it, and pretty much said there is no real downside to jailing someone.

Again, I'm feeling somewhat targetted. How many cowboys are there?

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

...
Also, always keep three people in jail.

I'm new to this game, so I'm curious. Who benefits is roles are suppressed?

-I understand that lynchings are crucial to a villager win, so demanding a lynching, possibly even without evidence, has merit.

-Demanding that as many people as possible are prevented from utilizing their roles, albeit while enjoying relative safety.

Who does that help?

-If it is the wolves, does the fact that there are three people at risk outweigh that negative? In other words. It doesn't appear to necessarilly be the lynchings themselves that help the villagers, but rather the actions of the targetted and possibly their counterparts that yield the benefit.

This isn't an accusation. I'm sorta thinking outloud while examining whether or not you have a motive behind your suggested course of action.

[Glengoyne]

ooops should be "Who benefits if roles are suppressed?"