WW XXXIII - Other Minds and Hands - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Boromir88 · 05-14-2007, 10:42 PM

4 werewolves! 4 werewolves! I'm used to having 3 and thats bad enough! But now there's 4! All hope is lost. No point in resistings the wolves will devour us all. Flee for your lives, I say, if you can! Or die in what was seems best. Durelin, fetch me wood and oil:

++Boromir88

Anguirel · 05-15-2007, 01:06 AM

I am now lost in a multiplicity of voting candidates.

I could vote for that unsavoury cook due to his vulgar mention of the Jackson travesty.

I could vote for the Lord Denethor, for though he is reputed to be wise he seems to be planning to burn down some vegetation in a pyre, which I disapprove off.

I could vote for the discourteous so-called Legate Curunir.

I could join the campaign to remove the uncanonical zombie.

Charmed though I am by the wig-maker Diamond, I wonder if her liking for Elvish hair is an attempt to gain the support of the Elvish votes? I doubt it actually. Wolf-Diamond would probably work through chaos, not politics.

I am grateful to the Lord Denethor for reminding me about the fourth wolf. That means that one in four and a half of us are guilty...

The Sixth Wizard · 05-15-2007, 02:41 AM

Hello all you potential dwarf slanderers! I have my eye upon you with your 'toss me's' and your 'nervous system's.

I have not much time toDay to say anything, but, as Legate said we should speak up and I may as well voice my opinion.

Usually on Day 1 we jump to less than well-founded suspicions, so here we go! When reading over the thread I came to the conclusion that Anguirel looked the most suspicious thus far, posting a lot and being in character too much. He looks a bit like he has something to hide to me. I see that SpM has come to the same conclusion.

Speaking of whom, SpM also looks suspicious to me at this point. I don't know why, I got this feeling last game, but he makes me feel angry.

Ta-ta till I vote, peeps!

Thinlómien · 05-15-2007, 03:08 AM

A flame veiled in shadow approached the discussers. The wing-like shadows it casted were dark, avoiding the sunlight. "You shall not pass", a booming voice said. Then, after a moment: "Oops! It was not my line!"

I'll try to be useful toDay (useful on Day1

) as I'm not sure if I can get online at all during Day2 (see old post on admin thread). So, where to start...?

Like Mr Saucer noted, there has been less constructive posting than usually. That kind of worries me - after all, such intelligent people as Ang, Mith and Legate seem to have had plenty of time online. (Though, I admit, they've been very amusing.

) On the other hand there's not much to say during the early hours, but...

This is a rather big game and I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of weird roles - knowing the CG animator.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ang

It seems to me unlikely that wolves will risk adhering to each other too closely so early on, and deliberate distancing may prove a helpful guide.

I wouldn't count on this, Mr Pointy-Eared Silverhead. I've seen wolves bantering with each other during the early hours, though I admit that's not too usual. However, this statement by Ang this early when he, Mith and Legate have been chatting quite intesively makes me a bit alarmed... (Even though I must say Legate and Ang don't look like partners in crime...)

Sixth then... I don't know what to make of him jumping against Anguirel. I took SPM's words about Ang as a joke, but Sixth seems to be serious about it and jumping to it quite quickly. Might be an over-eager wolf first-timer...?

**The Saucepan Man** · 05-15-2007, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sixth

When reading over the thread I came to the conclusion that Anguirel looked the most suspicious thus far, posting a lot and being in character too much. He looks a bit like he has something to hide to me. I see that SpM has come to the same conclusion.

Actually, as Lommy the Balrog has correctly noted, my accusation of Anguirel was mere flippantry. Anguirel is far from being the only one to have posted mostly in character and, indeed, is one of the few to have made some points of substance among the frippery. You seem to accept that your suspicion is less than well-founded, but why single out Anguirel from all the banterers?

I am ever suspicious of those who pick up on flippant accusations, so my eye is on you Sixth.

Porridge anyone?

Macalaure · 05-15-2007, 03:17 AM

Pure in-character content within one of the first 10 posts is okay...

But pure in-character content within any of the later posts begs for quick death!

xyzzy, Rune, Brinniel, Boro and excessively Mith and Legate.

Speak sense, you filthy maggots! Don't you know we're at waaar!?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legate

Silence kills. Especially now. Early time it might be, but we must grasp as much knowledge as we could, and this is not accomplished by just silence or idle monologues. Rather, let us talk.

Idle monologues? Look who's talking...
Legate really looks like the worst of all these.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kath

On that subject there is a point I would like to bring up but I may wait until tomorrow or even the next Day to do so, as it's one that can cause a first Day to descend into a flurry of arguments the likes of which we see every time.

So you would rather turn Day Two into a flurry of arguments?

PS: I agree with Lommy and SPM regarding Six.

Rune Son of Bjarne · 05-15-2007, 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Pure in-character content within one of the first 10 posts is okay...

But pure in-character content within any of the later posts begs for quick death!

xyzzy, Rune, Brinniel, Boro and excessively Mith and Legate.

Speak sense, you filthy maggots! Don't you know we're at waaar!?

Idle monologues? Look who's talking...
Legate really looks like the worst of all these.

What a load of rubbish! If one is not allowed to make in-charachter posts then what is the point of the charachters Mac?

Of course it is a problem if people keeps on doing it for a whole day and nothing else, but to set up rules saying that 10 posts in maximum is just way to rigid a system.

I really see no problem in my first two "intruduction" posts being in charachter just because that a sertain number of people have posted before me.

Let it be up to people them selves to judge and if it bothers you say so.

Boromir88 · 05-15-2007, 03:43 AM

Well my incharacterness first post had a plan along with it, but umm that really didn't turn out exactly as planned. Since I have to vote in about 10 minutes, before I went to sleep I wanted to get some reaction and talk besides all this in-character stuff, so I at least had something to go off of for voting.

--Boromir88

Pah I was foolish to think anyone would fall for that one. Obviously you are all smart enough to know a noble Lord like myself would not stoop to the level of the heathen kings; killing themselves in their madness. No, you need a Lordly master, like myself (and not some chump from Elf Land) to lead us through these times. With that I shall officially vote for:

++Anguirel

No real reason, besides the fact that he is too jovial and chipper for my liking. That's all I have, now I must be gone. I do hope the rest of the day picks up a little bit. Where's Nogrod, to pick up the village chatter, when you need him.

Macalaure · 05-15-2007, 03:48 AM

Why this sudden fit of defensiveness, Rune?

There is nothing wrong with in-character-ness. You might have noticed that I left Ang and Diamond out of my list. That's because they mixed their in-character fun with actual points. And of course there's also nothing wrong with pure in-character stuff. All you have to do is deal with my suspicion then.

Thinlómien · 05-15-2007, 05:01 AM

As for being in-character, I don't have anything against every person's first post being something in-character regardless of the time it is posted - after all otherwise the late-comers would always miss the banter which could be sad - but I think excessive ic-posting hinders the village.

Anyway, I don't like Mac throwing all those people into the same category. While Mith and Legate clearly iced (like were in-character, nothing to do with ice

) a lot, they had some constructive (or un-in-character) points in there. (Even such a goatee-having cobbler like you, Mac, should see it.

) Thus I don't think they should be compared with Rune, Xyzzy, Brinn and Boro.

**The Saucepan Man** · 05-15-2007, 05:31 AM

Lord preserve us from any hard and fast rules about when banter is permitted and when it’s not. Surely it’s a matter for individuals to judge whether someone’s use of banter seems incriminating or not.

As far as I can see, the only banter here so far has either been a first post (fair enough, in my view) or else mixed in with some substantive points.

I take the 7th Morc in the 3rd row’s point about the Legate of Orth Ankh counselling everyone to speak, while saying little of substance himself (and Legate certainly bears watching). However, the most suspicious thing that I have seen so far is Sixth’s hastiness to jump on Ang, following of my own flippant accusation. So I shall vote:

++The Sixth Wizard

Macaroons anyone?

Rune Son of Bjarne · 05-15-2007, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Why this sudden fit of defensiveness, Rune?

There is nothing wrong with in-character-ness. You might have noticed that I left Ang and Diamond out of my list. That's because they mixed their in-character fun with actual points. And of course there's also nothing wrong with pure in-character stuff. All you have to do is deal with my suspicion then.

Defensiveness? I would rather call it anger . . .

Actually it was a matter of me thinking you chritisism was unfair. It is alright to think there is too much in charachter stuff going on, but I thought your point about the rules was weird. . .

It kind of seemed like a way to stir things up and whether that is with good or bad intentions I cannot say.

The post seemed like a good way to
1. get some talking going
2. get my views said
3. meet your demands on less in charachter posting

05-14-2007, 10:42 PM	#1
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,519	4 werewolves! 4 werewolves! I'm used to having 3 and thats bad enough! But now there's 4! All hope is lost. No point in resistings the wolves will devour us all. Flee for your lives, I say, if you can! Or die in what was seems best. Durelin, fetch me wood and oil: ++Boromir88 __________________ Fenris Penguin

05-15-2007, 01:06 AM	#2
Anguirel Byronic Brand Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: The 1590s Posts: 2,778	I am now lost in a multiplicity of voting candidates. I could vote for that unsavoury cook due to his vulgar mention of the Jackson travesty. I could vote for the Lord Denethor, for though he is reputed to be wise he seems to be planning to burn down some vegetation in a pyre, which I disapprove off. I could vote for the discourteous so-called Legate Curunir. I could join the campaign to remove the uncanonical zombie. Charmed though I am by the wig-maker Diamond, I wonder if her liking for Elvish hair is an attempt to gain the support of the Elvish votes? I doubt it actually. Wolf-Diamond would probably work through chaos, not politics. I am grateful to the Lord Denethor for reminding me about the fourth wolf. That means that one in four and a half of us are guilty... __________________ Among the friendly dead, being bad at games did not seem to matter -Il Lupo Fenriso

05-15-2007, 03:43 AM	#8
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,519	Well my incharacterness first post had a plan along with it, but umm that really didn't turn out exactly as planned. Since I have to vote in about 10 minutes, before I went to sleep I wanted to get some reaction and talk besides all this in-character stuff, so I at least had something to go off of for voting. --Boromir88 Pah I was foolish to think anyone would fall for that one. Obviously you are all smart enough to know a noble Lord like myself would not stoop to the level of the heathen kings; killing themselves in their madness. No, you need a Lordly master, like myself (and not some chump from Elf Land) to lead us through these times. With that I shall officially vote for: ++Anguirel No real reason, besides the fact that he is too jovial and chipper for my liking. That's all I have, now I must be gone. I do hope the rest of the day picks up a little bit. Where's Nogrod, to pick up the village chatter, when you need him. __________________ Fenris Penguin

05-15-2007, 05:01 AM	#10
Thinlómien Shady She-Penguin Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: In a far land beyond the Sea Posts: 8,093	As for being in-character, I don't have anything against every person's first post being something in-character regardless of the time it is posted - after all otherwise the late-comers would always miss the banter which could be sad - but I think excessive ic-posting hinders the village. Anyway, I don't like Mac throwing all those people into the same category. While Mith and Legate clearly iced (like were in-character, nothing to do with ice ) a lot, they had some constructive (or un-in-character) points in there. (Even such a goatee-having cobbler like you, Mac, should see it. ) Thus I don't think they should be compared with Rune, Xyzzy, Brinn and Boro. __________________ Like the stars chase the sun, over the glowing hill I will conquer Blood is running deep, some things never sleep Double Fenris

05-15-2007, 05:31 AM	#11
The Saucepan Man Corpus Cacophonous Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: A green and pleasant land Posts: 8,390	Lord preserve us from any hard and fast rules about when banter is permitted and when it’s not. Surely it’s a matter for individuals to judge whether someone’s use of banter seems incriminating or not. As far as I can see, the only banter here so far has either been a first post (fair enough, in my view) or else mixed in with some substantive points. I take the 7th Morc in the 3rd row’s point about the Legate of Orth Ankh counselling everyone to speak, while saying little of substance himself (and Legate certainly bears watching). However, the most suspicious thing that I have seen so far is Sixth’s hastiness to jump on Ang, following of my own flippant accusation. So I shall vote: ++The Sixth Wizard Macaroons anyone? __________________ Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind!

05-15-2007, 02:41 AM	#3
The Sixth Wizard Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Stuck under a rock in Valinor with Ar-Pharazon. Posts: 480	Hello all you potential dwarf slanderers! I have my eye upon you with your 'toss me's' and your 'nervous system's. I have not much time toDay to say anything, but, as Legate said we should speak up and I may as well voice my opinion. Usually on Day 1 we jump to less than well-founded suspicions, so here we go! When reading over the thread I came to the conclusion that Anguirel looked the most suspicious thus far, posting a lot and being in character too much. He looks a bit like he has something to hide to me. I see that SpM has come to the same conclusion. Speaking of whom, SpM also looks suspicious to me at this point. I don't know why, I got this feeling last game, but he makes me feel angry. Ta-ta till I vote, peeps!

05-15-2007, 03:48 AM	#9
Macalaure Fading Fëanorion Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: into the flood again Posts: 2,911	Why this sudden fit of defensiveness, Rune? There is nothing wrong with in-character-ness. You might have noticed that I left Ang and Diamond out of my list. That's because they mixed their in-character fun with actual points. And of course there's also nothing wrong with pure in-character stuff. All you have to do is deal with my suspicion then.