Tol-in-Guarhoth CIX - Ten Year Anniversary Game: Dead Thread

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Agan

Hmm what's this? Is she preparing to reveal as something?

It looks like that! I really hope she's the Seer and has some wolfsies, and is asking for opinions on them before revealing their identities to catch some packmates. Might be wishful thinking though!

Originally Posted by Agan

Why do people think I thought Legate was the seer? I voted for Greenie rather than Mac because I thought Rikae was the seer. (Well not really but I wasn't going to chance it.)

Even more interestingly, they seem to think that I have to be a wolf because I was killed by the Hunter.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

It looks like that! I really hope she's the Seer and has some wolfsies, and is asking for opinions on them before revealing their identities to catch some packmates. Might be wishful thinking though!

Could also be an ordo fishing for reactions. If the wolves think she's the seer who has some of them, it might make them backtrack quickly.

Even more interestingly, they seem to think that I have to be a wolf because I was killed by the Hunter.

Yeah because a gifted is never wrong.

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Agan

Could also be an ordo fishing for reactions. If the wolves think she's the seer who has some of them, it might make them backtrack quickly.

That's why I said "wishful thinking"

[Macalaure]

I don't think the living are going to go along with Sally's suggestion. Unless she's faking it, which I highly doubt, they'll at least have a known innocent.

If Sally's lover is smart s/he will drop some seer-ish hints and be Night killed. The ranger would then have to assure that Sally survives the next Night.

[Aganzir]

So if we went by Firefoot's plan, we'd have to empower Nilp or Shasta today. I am NOT comfortable with Nilp. His question about the lovers' orientation looked fishy. As for Shasta, my gut is saying he's okay right now (I was uneasy about him on DAY 1 though), but there's always what the phantom pointed out earlier:

Now Boro listed Rikae, Shasta, Lommy, and Legate as his innocent group of four yesterday. Why wasn't he suspected of being the Seer and killed? Because he had a Wolf from each pack listed as innocent? That would certainly take him off the kill list. Or if he himself is in a pack and listed a Wolf (or two) from another pack.

[Aganzir]

Do you think sally and Nerwen could be lovers? If Nerwen is thinking of doing a fake seer reveal, the wolves would probably focus on her, and no matter who the ranger picks at least one of them would survive. Obviously this plan has a lot of holes and risks, but it's... not impossible?

[Aganzir]

In any case, I read through Nerwen's posts, and if she is the seer, she's hiding it better than Boro. She's barely said anything specific about anyone. Which, in this game, would make sense. But I don't know.

Looking forward to seeing how this will unfold.

[A Little Green]

Nilp or Shasta? I'm not super happy about either of those, to be honest. Nilp I can't read at all, and Shasta, while making sense, creeps me out. He feels innocent the way he does when he's a wolf, if you follow me.

[Aganzir]

Yeah, I'm not going to empower either unless they vote for somebody super suspicious. If we're going to give the village false information though, it had better be about somebody being innocent even if we haven't checked them - especially if a lover will come round shortly to clear it up.

Let's hope if they give us an option for not communicating information.

I'm not sure what to think of Firefoot's suggestion in the first place. Could be she's an innocent who hasn't thought through the fact that we may be suspicious of the people we are supposed to vote for, or it could be a wolfish ploy to empower votes against a non-fellow. That would require a lot of planning though, especially if she took the names pretty much in the same order as they're on the player list.

[the phantom]

Don't have time to more than skim at the moment. Has anyone living or dead pointed out yet that (as I mentioned much earlier) Sally dropped a Lover hint in her very first post of the game and directed it at Nilp?

How likely do you think it is that she put down a false hint on purpose hoping she could get the packs to attack the wrong person? But of course it wouldn't take them long to figure that out, particularly if one of the packs includes Nilp.

Anyway, rather busy at the moment...

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Don't have time to more than skim at the moment. Has anyone living or dead pointed out yet that (as I mentioned much earlier) Sally dropped a Lover hint in her very first post of the game and directed it at Nilp?

Not sure. It could be a hint, but it could also be just sally and Nilp's mutual history. I doubt she'd leave an actual hint when she knew the rules and knew they'd have to keep quiet if they were to fill their role.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

Not sure. It could be a hint, but it could also be just sally and Nilp's mutual history. I doubt she'd leave an actual hint when she knew the rules and knew they'd have to keep quiet if they were to fill their role.

Do they have any mutual history?

...in-game, I mean. Given that Nilp hasn't been playing for ages and sally was one of the "newer" generation of players (she joined after me, and I joined ages after Nilp had already disappeared from most games - he played a couple of times since then, though, in some bigger ones, I guess).

Anyway, I think the idea of going with Firefoot's list might not be that bad. Of course unless the person in question votes somebody totally off and we don't want to empower that kind of behavior.

[Aganzir]

Well, given that sally and I started werewolfing around the same time, I've played with Nilp more than once, and sally has played in more games than me, I'm quite sure they have a mutual history.

In any case, let's see what Nerwen says and who Nilp and Shasta vote for before doing anything. And sadly as we don't know your role, Legate, we can't have absolute trust in your honest intentions regarding this vote.

Conclusion: you should just listen to Greenie and me.

[Rikae]

Empowering Shasta or Nilp doesn't mean we trust Shasta or Nilp.

I hope the living abide by the plan of getting their voting out of the way early, so we know how/whether we're influencing the lynch, but unless someone up there decides to change the signals, I will vote for either Nilp or Shasta.

Barring some scenario where, oh, doing so would lynch the seer.

After all, it's not like we have much more information than the living do, at this point. Giving our vote to someone simply because we trust them, and thereby giving false information, when we don't know when/whether anyone is going to visit and straighten things out? No, I won't condone that.

So, Nilp or Shasta it is - and which, for me, depends on how they vote.

I'd actually suggest that those who leave early split their votes between the two, so that the USA can heroically vote at DL having seen Nilp's and Shasta's votes first, but of course that requires ya'all to trust us Americans when we could, after all, all be wolves. It's up to you.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Okay, I have to go and it's possible I won't be able to get back online later, so I guess I can't sit on this any longer. I said I had a particular reason for wanting to hear everyone's opinion's of everyone else, and here it is:

I received a pm telling me that the Seer had dreamed two wolves, Macalaure and Lottie.

It was *not* explained to me why I was being sent this interesting communication, nor can I find anything about it in the rules. Maybe this is a once-off thing (on the Seer's death?), or maybe a different person has been sent dreams each Night. Maybe the Dead are involved, or the mystery role. I honestly have no idea.

I realise I have no way of backing any of this up, and am asking you all to take my word for it, but I do think there's decent circumstantial evidence against both Lottie and Mac.

Wooooooow what's this

[Macalaure]

I thought Firefoot just made up her assignments as an example.

It's way too early. It has to be done near the end, when at least almost all the votes are cast. What if Shasta and Nilp decide to vote for the same person?

[Rikae]

Crossed with Nerwen, obviously...

Well, I can believe a Lottie-wolf, and Mac is certainly not off the menu.

But... such a message would presumably come from the dead, and it obviously doesn't.

Maybe it's some kind of... yeah, palantir-related, evesdropping sort of role.

The thing is, the seer is alive and knows if Nerwen is full of it or not.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

I thought Firefoot just made up her assignments as an example.

It's way too early. It has to be done near the end, when at least almost all the votes are cast. What if Shasta and Nilp decide to vote for the same person?

Could be, but it also could be that no one changes them. If it's the best thing we've got to communicate with, I intend to use it.

[Macalaure]

I thought there was only one secret role.

Now we have an assassin and one who can deliver seer dreams?

Something is not adding up here.

[Aganzir]

Options:

1. Everything happened just as Nerwen said, and it's something to do with the mystery role.
2. Nerwen is a clever seer who dreamed Mac and Lottie wolves.
   • If either of these is true, Mac reacted waaay more coolly to Rikae's reveal than I would've expected. Which kind of makes me wonder if they were wolves in the same pack and Rikae used their death to their advantage.
3. Nerwen is a wolf. But what would she gain from doing this? Get the seer to reveal? I need to do some math.
4. Nerwen is the other lover.

Need to go now but will keep checking the thread as well as I can.

[Macalaure]

1. This possible. Though in that case Kuru is leaving us in the dark about so many things... unclear narrations, tons of mystery stuff. Why would he give Nerwen wrong information?
2. I don't think so. Each pack is going to suspect that Lottie and me are wolves from the other pack. She has a target on her back now, this way or another.
3. I agree, hard to believe.
4. This is very possible.

[Rikae]

Or she could be gambling.

It does seem entirely possible I'm here because Lottie is a wolf, and, if so, it's plausible that I'm the seer, and Mac's role is unknown.

Maybe Nerwen wants to bus Lottie? Would that make sense?

Even if she was very sure Mac was in the other pack, she'd be losing her pack's advantage over them, but she could see Lottie as a lost cause (if I'm so very seerish) and want to distance herself.

Or is she trying to protect the seer? Or force the seer to reveal?

Edit: X'd with Agan & Mac

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Why would he give Nerwen wrong information?

Wait, I got that wrong. According to Nerwen's claim, Kuru only relayed information to her from someone else. So if she is correct, then that other person is passing on incorrect information. I don't even want start guessing what's behind that.

[Rikae]

Of course, the other lover looking to be night-killed.

Sally did mention they were plotting, and Nerwen seemed to be positioning herself to look seerish.

The thing about that, though, is that she is risking flushing out the seer (although at this point that might not be a bad idea). It could make sense if she believes the seer is most likely dead, or onto her plan.

[A Little Green]

What the actual ??? For now I'm leaning towards thinking Nerwen is telling the truth - am I the only one who thinks making up something like that would be a pretty unsporting thing to do? Unless of course she's the Seer herself and tries in this way to avoid getting butchered next Night.

Originally Posted by Agan

Conclusion: you should just listen to Greenie and me.

Yes, because you've already set such a great example of how innocents can't be wrong. *cough*

[Rikae]

Well, I feel stupid for trusting Mac, anyway.

If Nerwen does get night-killed she can tell us if she was gambling or not (and if she's resurrected we'll know we can believe her). Much as I'd like to scry Mac, it might end up being redundant.

[the phantom]

Yeah, it could be she's just the Seer and is trying to avoid the Night kill, but at the same time it might encourage the Ranger not to protect her.

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Rikae

If Nerwen does get night-killed she can tell us if she was gambling or not (and if she's resurrected we'll know we can believe her). Much as I'd like to scry Mac, it might end up being redundant.

I agree. I guess we'll have to wait and see who they end up lynching, although barring further reveals (nothing will surprise me at this point) they'd be a bit foolish not to go for Lottie.

As for Nerwen being Sally's lover - I guess it's possible (was this the plan Sally was talking about?) but I'm not sure why Sally would reveal as a lover and Nerwen come forward with that information right after. The lovers can PM also during the Day (right?) and so if Nerwen is a lover I'm guessing she would have told her lover about it first. And I don't know, having both of them come forward in that way, right after each other, seems awfully risky to me. Unless there's some obvious tactical advantage I'm missing?

Also, what's with Sally's conviction that Rune was killed for looking like a rival wolf? Now I'm supposed to have wanted to kill him for whatever reason, and that's why Agan shifted her pick to me? Wow. I hope this is a part of whatever plot she's hatching with her lover because otherwise it doesn't make any sense.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

As for Nerwen being Sally's lover - I guess it's possible (was this the plan Sally was talking about?) but I'm not sure why Sally would reveal as a lover and Nerwen come forward with that information right after. The lovers can PM also during the Day (right?) and so if Nerwen is a lover I'm guessing she would have told her lover about it first. And I don't know, having both of them come forward in that way, right after each other, seems awfully risky to me. Unless there's some obvious tactical advantage I'm missing?

All I can think of is that if Nerwen gets killed toNight, Sally can be ranger-protected the following night so that Nerwen can return.

[Nogrod]

Only catching up - and I can see things are happening - but just can't resist poking at this one more time...

Originally Posted by Aganzir

Let's hope if they give us an option for not communicating information.

*Ahem* Without this grandiose plan someone suggested and many supported there wouldn't be this problem. We could have just said: nonsense plan, let's forget it - and had it much easier now.

On the contrary I got lynched on D1 for saying that aloud and we're in this mess with how the village will interpret anything we do.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

I thought there was only one secret role.

Now we have an assassin and one who can deliver seer dreams?

Something is not adding up here.

Actually, personally now thinking about it, it would make sense. Remember how the three of us randomly died, while common sense would expect two people dying? What if we have a "shapeshifter" role who, say, one Night kills a person, one night dreams a person, you know what? (Although to be honest it would still require a lot of over-combining to have a role which dreams two people and then passes the info to somebody else. Then again... actually why not? Because, say that your role says "you can dream 2 people" - that being fairly powerful - "but you have to tell this to somebody else" - i.e. to share it with a random person who, potentially, could be a Wolf??? And then again, the only way that would make sense would be if the info came through from the dead - because otherwise the person could just say it aloud herself... anyone has anything to say about this?)

The options you folks mentioned up here seem a bit more plausible (such as the lover trying to get herself killed-thing)... But who knows. Then again Kuru originally considered to put into the game this kind of "speaker to the dead"-role... this would feel kinda similar.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

What the actual ??? For now I'm leaning towards thinking Nerwen is telling the truth - am I the only one who thinks making up something like that would be a pretty unsporting thing to do?

If you ask me, sporty or not, it actually would be a very Nerwen-y thing to do. But I am not inclined to disbelieve her.

Though also in this game, she could be also just trying to freak the wolves out: there is fairly high percentual chance she'd name at least one Wolf correctly, and the Wolf could think the other person she named is from the opposite pack.

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Legate

Though also in this game, she could be also just trying to freak the wolves out: there is fairly high percentual chance she'd name at least one Wolf correctly, and the Wolf could think the other person she named is from the opposite pack.

That would be a rather risky strategy though - what if she named the real Seer, for instance? I don't think an ordo Nerwen would do that just to freak the wolves out.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

That would be a rather risky strategy though - what if she named the real Seer, for instance? I don't think an ordo Nerwen would do that just to freak the wolves out.

Point taken. Well, hard to say.

Btw: not that I can do much with that, being dead, but after just reading the Living thread, if Eomer is not a Wolf, I am going to eat my socks. (*ahem* ... I know the danger this entails.) He is so fishy that Gollum would go all crazy over him.

Anyway, as for the things that we can do, I see no problem in going according to the Firefoot-list and empowering either shasta or Nilp (from my perspective, preferably shasta).

[Nogrod]

Looking at all the complexities of the game - and how kind of rough (read:impossible) the setting has been to the innocents - I'm not actually surprised from anything strange happening, or that even one odd turn of events would be favouring innocents for a change.

So my first reaction is I tend to (or hope to) believe in Nerwen, especially as I think Lottie is one of the best candidates there are (alongside Sally btw. - I'm not that happy to believe her lover-revealment in the first place).

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

*Ahem* Without this grandiose plan someone suggested and many supported there wouldn't be this problem. We could have just said: nonsense plan, let's forget it - and had it much easier now.

And had absolutely no way to communicate to the living that Greenie was innocent, which could be crucial information (look at how people there are assuming she was a wolf and Legate - who may well be a wolf - was the seer!)

And what do we lose now? Most likely the living will overwhelmingly vote for Lottie. Our empowered vote won't have any impact on that, nor do we have any special knowledge about the living to convey. At least this way, we can accomplish something.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Looking at all the complexities of the game - and how kind of rough (read:impossible) the setting has been to the innocents - I'm not actually surprised from anything strange happening, or that even one odd turn of events would be favouring innocents for a change.

Exactly my thoughts. If nothing else, it would counterbalance the three kills last Night (okay, even if there is the possibility some of the three of us might have been Wolves, but still, the more dead, the worse for the village in general).

Aaaand I see now quite a few of the Living started voting. I see no problem with doing it the way they are doing it now. So after shasta or Nilp vote, if the vote is reasonable, I see no problem with voting for them as well.

Also for the record, I like Mith, she does not post much, but now her latter posts show she's got all her wits very well together...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Rikae

And had absolutely no way to communicate to the living that Greenie was innocent, which could be crucial information (look at how people there are assuming she was a wolf and Legate - who may well be a wolf - was the seer!)

Yeah, I hope they will drop it - that's why I just mentioned Mith, because she seemed to notice some things that don't make sense if I was the Seer. But I think it's fine, because at least they do not seem to base their votes on my lists. (Maybe good I didn't list anyone except Greenie in the red zone.)

And what do we lose now? Most likely the living will overwhelmingly vote for Lottie. Our empowered vote won't have any impact on that, nor do we have any special knowledge about the living to convey. At least this way, we can accomplish something.

Totally. One thing we should keep in mind: however much fun we are having here, and even if we discover the roles of everyone, it is the Living that matters. Once there are, say, 3 wolves and 3 villagers left, even if we know the roles of everybody on this thread, it's not worth anything to the village. So there. (And as for voting Lottie, that seems just like what they are doing... so far.)

[the phantom]

Not able to keep up with things this afternoon. Has anyone other than Firefoot attempted to update/refine her Dead communication post earlier? (The one that had us giving our vote to Nilp or Shasta to signal Green innocent.)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Not able to keep up with things this afternoon. Has anyone other than Firefoot attempted to update/refine her Dead communication post earlier? (The one that had us giving our vote to Nilp or Shasta to signal Green innocent.)

I think not.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Rikae

Most likely the living will overwhelmingly vote for Lottie. Our empowered vote won't have any impact on that, nor do we have any special knowledge about the living to convey. At least this way, we can accomplish something.

Haven't yet reached the Living Thread that far, but that being the case, I'm ready to take my words (or intentions) back (I was actually going to say I'm totally going to be out of this madness and will not be giving my vote for extra-powers to someone I distrust or who is voting someone I trust).

It seems, after all, a situation where our vote hasn't any power. So yes, I agree, if it is going to be this kind of unanimous bandwagon.