Ten Year Anniversary Game: Living Thread

[Kuruharan]

POST GAME EDIT: Link to Dead Thread

I'm including the rules here for the convenience of the players.

RULES

General Rules:

There will be no multi-lynches on the Living Thread or multi-vote granting from the Dead Thread. Vote ties in the Living Thread will result in no lynch and vote ties in the Dead Thread will result in no bonus vote being granted that DAY.

Voting should be done as follows: ++Kuruharan. Failure to vote three DAYS in a row will result in murder and sending the player to the Dead Thread. Participation in the Dead Thread is optional as you are already dead and I won't kill you again.

There are no retractable votes.

Living Thread:

Usual Werewolf, except roles are not revealed on death.

Dead Thread:

After there are THREE residents of the Dead Thread, every DAY the dead get to vote on giving one of the living an extra vote. The dead are subject to the same deadline (heh heh) as the living. The living will not know who among them will get an extra vote until it is revealed in the closing narration of the DAY.

Since in the Afterlife (or in the anteroom of the Afterlife) it is hard to hide one's true nature from one's fellow residents, every NIGHT after there are three residents the dead get to vote for one among themselves to determine their true nature. Their specific role will not be revealed but rather the voted player will be described as either PREDATOR or PREY.

The living may not look in the Dead Thread. The dead may continue to read the Living Thread but may no longer post there or interact with the Living in any way except through the mechanism of the Dead Thread bonus vote. The dead can read the whole Dead Thread, not just what happens after one dies. For those roles that resurrect, it is permitted for them to read the entire thread before their death and continue to read and participate in the Dead Thread until the time that I post the narration announcing their return to the Living Thread. After that post, the resurrected player may no longer read any further in the Dead Thread until such time as they return to it. For those who resurrect, they may only paraphrase but NOT directly quote or cite posts in the Dead Thread. However, the Dead may quote and cite posts from the Living Thread.

Please note: It is NOT ALLOWED for a Living Player to click on the post count link of the Dead Thread to check and see how many times Dead Thread players have posted. Obviously you will be able to see how many posts there are in total and who the last poster is, but that is all that is allowed. Do not check who has posted how many times, do not cite who has posted how many times, do not base arguments on it. You are the Living and they are the Dead and you don't know what they are up to.

I think that is pretty much it for the Rules.

Roles:

First things first - there is an undescribed role. The role has a particular power and a few particular vulnerabilities that follow from said power. That's all I'm going to say about it. Everyone (and I mean everyone) will have to keep their wits about them during the game.

The Party (also known as the Village in normal parlance...)

Ordos - ordinary players, with no special powers. Will stay in the Dead Thread after death.

Lovers - Usual lovers in the sense that they can PM each other during the game. Unusual in the fact that if one of them dies, and if the other lover remains alive in the Living Thread, the dead lover will spend one DAY cycle among the dead and then returns to the Living Thread for one DAY. When that DAY is done, the resurrected lover returns to the grave permanently. Note: Unlike the previous game, the living lover is not killed at the death of the resurrected lover but continues to play as usual until death. However, the second lover does not come back after death. The lovers may not PM with each other across the divide of death. If one dies they may only PM during the DAY when the dead lover resurrects. After that, they may only PM each other again after both are in the Dead Thread. The lovers are both on the side of the Party and win and lose with it. They are not a separate category or "side" in this game.

Ranger - Like the lovers, if killed the Ranger will spend one DAY cycle in the Dead Thread and then return to the Living Thread the next DAY. The Ranger has one protection initially. If the Ranger dies and is resurrected, the Ranger then has two protections. The Ranger can self-protect but cannot protect a person twice in a row. The Ranger cannot protect someone from being lynched, nor can the Ranger protect someone from a Hunter kill.

Seer - The Seer has two dreams while in the Living Thread and one dream while in the Dead Thread. While in the Living Thread, the Seer may only dream of players in the Living Thread. While in the Dead Thread, the Seer may only dream of players in the Dead Thread. If they are killed they remain in the Dead Thread.

Hunter - The Hunter may send me one name every DAY and NIGHT of somebody they would like to kill if they themselves are killed during that specific time period. Once they have sent me a pick they cannot change it until the next time period. They may pick the same player every single time or pick a different person every time as they wish. If they are killed they remain in the Dead Thread. EDIT: Since we've just gotten started and the Hunter role seemed so lackluster, I've made a slight change.

The Baddies (also known as the Baddies in normal parlance...) This is where things get fun!

There are two wolf packs of three each: the Grip Pack and the Fang Pack. Because of Evil's inability to get along with itself, the two packs are against each other as well as against the Party. Winning for the Baddies is defined as the number of surviving villagers being equal to the number of surviving members of the most populated pack. After consulting with the Lord High Scorekeeper, it was decided that if there are equal wolves remaining in a Baddie victory the game will be recorded as a tie, so the wolves need to worry about each other as much as the Village.

However, this little spat is impenetrable to the Party and their only goal is to get all six wolves. Additionally, should the Seer dream of a wolf, the Seer will not be able to tell which pack the wolf belongs to. The members of one pack will not know the members of the other pack.

While in the Living Thread members of the same pack can PM each other during the NIGHT. While in the Dead Thread members of the same pack can PM each other at any time. There is no communication across the bounds of death except through the mechanism of the Dead Thread bonus vote, which a wolf will probably want to try to manipulate as best as possible.

You have probably noticed a distinct trend on my part to slow up the non-NIGHT killing somewhat. This is intentional what with two NIGHT kills per cycle plus regular lynchings the Dead Thread is going to populate quickly. Everyone is going to need to be on their toes a bit for this one.

~~~~~~~~~~~ Our Tale ~~~~~~~~~~~

Tragedy had befallen the whole world. A great whiteness had befallen the world severing everyone from each other. Life as it had been known ceased to exist. All was stillness.

But lo! The powers that underlay the world woke anew and brought forth life and movement again to the world! Great was the rejoicing of all at this event!

Among those who celebrated was a mighty throng who gathered at the Halls of Kuruharan and his pet dragon Chrysophylax in the Mountains of Rhun to feast and celebrate the rejuvination of Middle earth. Many friends arrived, some who had not been seen for many a day. The feasting, fireworks, bouncy castles, party games, water balloon fights, and dragon rides for a nominal fee passed all description. After a full day of revels all collapsed exhausted into slumber.

Alas, with the reviving of the world, evil revived with it and not all the guests were what they seemed.

It is now NIGHT 1. Wolves and Lovers may PM. Wolves do not make a NIGHT kill this NIGHT. The Seer dreams some dreams.

The Living:
Formendacil
Rikae
satansaloser2005
Macalaure
Gwathagor
McCaber
Loslote
Boromir88
Aganzir
Nogrod
Nerwen
Rune Son of Bjarne
Firefoot
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Eomer of the Rohirrim
mormegil
Nilpaurion Felagund
Shastanis Althreduin
Legate of Amon Lanc
the phantom
Mithalwen
A Little Green
Kath

[Kuruharan]

Light filtered down from the windows hidden in the mountainside. As the guests arose, there was a palpable sense of unease in the air. Something was very wrong, but what?

They were trapped! All the doors and passages were locked and bolted from the outside. There was no escape!

The surprised inmates congregated in the main hall where they made a curious discovery. In the middle of the hall they found a guillotine next to a large urn. Beside the urn was a large stack of papers.

Taped to the guillotine was a note that read:

Scallywags, Fiends, Trespassers, Bounders!
You have violated the confines of my home
and attempted to murder me in the night!

You are now trapped in here and you will not
escape! I call upon the innocent among you
to ferret out these rascals and kill them!

I have given you the tools to do so! Once
they are dead Chrysophylax and I will emerge
from hiding and the party will resume!

The guests eyed each other with new trepidation and set about the work before them, either to save or destroy.

DAY 1 has begun. Wolves will stop PMing, Lovers may continue to do so.

The Missing or Dead:
Kuruharan

The Living:
Formendacil
Rikae
satansaloser2005
Macalaure
Gwathagor
McCaber
Loslote
Boromir88
Aganzir
Nogrod
Nerwen
Rune Son of Bjarne
Firefoot
Thinlómien
Lalaith
Eomer of the Rohirrim
mormegil
Nilpaurion Felagund
Shastanis Althreduin
Legate of Amon Lanc
the phantom
Mithalwen
A Little Green
Kath

Housekeeping note: I modified the Hunter rules slightly to allow the Hunter to send one pick per DAY and NIGHT.

[McCaber]

Ah, it's good to be back among old friends, even if these aren't the best of circumstances. But hopefully we'll weather this storm in the same fashion we weathered the Silent Times when the only voices heard here whispered "404". And we're here now and our voices can be heard by all.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

++Nilpaurion Felagund

I'm literally sneaking away from my students to post this, so a more substantive post shall come later (and it shall be substantive, I promise.) For now, enjoy!

[Firefoot]

Ah, old friends! Or rather, those I thought were friends. Apparently I really don't know some of you half as well as I ought to, if you're going to go around murdering people in our freshly restored barrow!

Guess we've got about a 25% chance of nailing a baddie today, so good luck to us...

[McCaber]

Originally Posted by Nilpaurion Felagund

++Nilpaurion Felagund

Good to see nothing's out of the ordinary here at least.

[Nerwen]

Ah, three posters already!

So which one of you is the wolf?

[Firefoot]

Well, like I said, 1 in 4 of us is a wolf, and you make four posters, Nerwen. So you must be right, one of us must be one. Nilp clearly thinks it's himself.

[Rikae]

Kuru claims someone tried to murder him, yes, but do we have any proof? How do we know this isn't just a plot to get us killing each other off for his sick entertainment?
I think we should find Kuru and have a stern talk about the inappropriateness of kidnapping one's party guests. That's what I think.

[the phantom]

I'm feeling a bit giddy just posting on the Downs again.

Would I completely be ruining the mood if I immediately launch into strategy and population/role analysis?

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Originally Posted by the phantom

I'm feeling a bit giddy just posting on the Downs again.

Would I completely be ruining the mood if I immediately launch into strategy and population/role analysis?

If I hadn't a class thrust into me during the time DAY had started, that's exactly what I would've done.

Well, after voting for myself, of course.

[Loslote]

My question is, what sort of creature could cause our host and his pet dragon to hide in fear?

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Nilp

If I hadn't a class thrust into me during the time DAY had started, that's exactly what I would've done.

Too bad you didn't have time for it. I'm itching to start things rolling.

But the self-vote... Was it just tradition, or an honest tactic? (i.e. You can't be around much at first anyway so may as well die since you'll still be alive in the Dead Thread and it will dodge the chance of a Gifted being offed Day 1... Sort of a noble kinda-sorta-sacrifice.)

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Would I completely be ruining the mood if I immediately launch into strategy and population/role analysis?

Honestly, given our current circumstance, it would be calming. Or at the least, it would give me something else to be stressed about.


Meanwhile, my darling boy seems to be settling back in quite nicely. I see you've taken comfort in old habits during this time of tragedy.

Let's keep our focus though, precious. We mustn't lose sight of what's important: Ridding ourselves of these hooligans so we can party!


Full disclosure: ToDay likely will be rather quiet for me, as I have a busy evening tomorrow and am not sure how much I'll be able to (read, remember to) get on the Downs.

[the phantom]

I swear, every time I refresh the Mirth forum I think, "Ooo, haven't read that thread!" and nearly click on the Dead Thread.

Am I the only person this is happening to?

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by the phantom

I swear, every time I refresh the Mirth forum I think, "Ooo, haven't read that thread!" and nearly click on the Dead Thread.

Am I the only person this is happening to?

Is this your way of asking us to kill you? Because I think ++Nilp's approach might be more effective.

(Also, yes, me too. I'm going to have to be very careful while on my phone so I don't mix up the two threads.)

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by me

Would I completely be ruining the mood if I immediately launch into strategy and population/role analysis?

Originally Posted by Sally

Honestly, given our current circumstance, it would be calming. Or at the least, it would give me something else to be stressed about.

Well then, since I have permission, I do believe I'll work on a very non-fluffy post.

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Well then, since I have permission, I do believe I'll work on a very non-fluffy post.

Bless.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Firefoot

Guess we've got about a 25% chance of nailing a baddie today, so good luck to us...

Indeed, and about a 21% chance of lynching a Gifted. Bleh.

Okay, so the tally is 18-3-3. Let's paint a couple of scenarios...

We lynch an innocent the first two days (not unlikely). At night the Wolves do not kill each other (not unlikely). So we would open day three at 12-3-3, meaning that we could successfully lynch a Werewolf FIVE times in a row and still be down to a final day scenario.
(these numbers represent the tally at the end of the stated period)
D3 12-3-2
N4 10-3-2
D4 10-3-1
N5 8-3-1
D5 8-2-1
N6 6-2-1
D6 6-1-1
N7 4-1-1
D7 4-1-0
N8 3-1-0

Thus on Day 8 there would be one Wolf among 4 villagers, and getting it wrong would equal a Baddie victory.

My point is, in such a case we are absolutely depending on one or more of the following things-
1) Ranger successfully protects someone (but NOT one WW from the opposing WW team, as has happened before )
2) Hunter kills a WW
3) WW team A kills WW team B

I think #3 is the most intriguing aspect of this contest. The Baddies definitely don't want to lose the double kill each night (see my chart above for how quickly it diminishes our population), BUT they can't allow the opposing pack to equal or outweigh them, so really I think the WWs will be just as interested in lynching accurately as the rest of us. Lynching the opposition is the way to go, because it buys goodwill and they don't have to waste night kills on offing the other pack- hunting for Gifteds instead.

(let's break this up, it's getting long)

[the phantom]

But anyway, that first scenario might be a bit dark, so let's look at another direction this thing can go...

Seer dreams of two innocents Night 1 and two innocents Night 2 (not that unlikely). We purposefully tie the vote Day 1 and 2 so we don't lynch anyone. Night 2 kills are only Ordos (or a WW and an Ordo, or a protection and an Ordo).

Day 3 Seer reveals himself and 4 innocent dreams and Ranger/Hunter/Lovers also reveal, giving us 9 known innocents. That night the Ranger protects the Seer and the Seer brings us two additional innocents to balance the Ranger/Lover that were offed during the Night. We would at that point have 9 known innocents in a village of 19, thus giving us a 60% chance of lynching a WW. Let's say that night the WWs kill the Seer and other Lover, but the day before the Seer could tell us exactly who he was dreaming that night and whoever he finds innocent he'll make sure the Dead Thread gives a bonus vote to that person (so we have another known) meaning that even if we missed on the lynch yet again the day after we'd be sitting at 7-3-3 with SIX known innocents, thus we'd have a 6/7 chance of lynching a WW. If we missed yet again we'd sit at 4-3-3 with all four innocents being KNOWN, meaning all six Werewolves would then be known. (But then who the heck knows how that would go down, since everyone would know who was guilty and yet the innocents would be outweighed overall 4-6.)

(At least I THINK I did all of that correctly. )

So, you can see that by just avoiding killing Gifteds and getting good dreams, we can still have a possible win even if we're terrible at lynching.

But back to my earlier scenario, if the Seer (or Seer & Ranger) both die in the first two cycles, then the village could be cut down very swiftly and would be lucky indeed to pull through.

I mean, wow, Kuru- this thing is mighty complicated!

[the phantom]

There Sally. Text to chew on. I even broke it into two pieces so it seems like more. (like sliders)

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by the phantom

So, you can see that by just avoiding killing Gifteds and getting good dreams, we can still have a possible win even if we're terrible at lynching.

And I think we have to assume that we are, since it'll be a while until we get any confirmation one way or the other, and even that won't be as concrete as I would feel comfortable with. I'm intrigued by your plan to tie the vote for the first Day at least. I am a little worried that we would wind up without any evidence to work off of the next Day, but we wouldn't have that solid of evidence even if we do lynch someone, right?

Then again, it seems to me that the best way to set the two packs against each other is simply to kill one wolf from either pack - then the pack which is down a member will by necessity switch its focus from the Gifteds to the other pack, since the only way for them to win would be to kill at least two members of the other pack. Whether or not the other pack switched focus, too - though I think they would soon enough - we would have a bit of a reprieve. Plus, to have two wolves actively and jointly targeting the others would be much more obvious than to have three wolves coasting in the background.

To get back to my point, I think probably we should take any chance we can to bag a wolf, since doing so would not only wittle down the pack numbers, but would also help turn the Night kills away from our Gifteds and towards the other pack. The question is, I guess, is it better statistically to have the chance to potentially turn the Night kills away from the Gifteds, or to avoid the risk that we ourselves might kill a Gifted by mistake? If we kill the Seer Day 1, we're in huge trouble, but I suppose they can still do some good in the Dead Thread. If we kill a wolf, we've gained a lot, and I might be hugely naive here, but I feel like they are less of a threat in the Dead Thread than in the Living Thread. So I would say that I personally think a Day 1 lynch is worth the risk, but that's kind of subjective, and I would definitely like to see other peoples' perspectives.

[Loslote]

Just to clarify, because in hindsight I realized I never did quote it, I was responding in my above post to this comment of the phantom's:

Originally Posted by the phantom

We purposefully tie the vote Day 1 and 2 so we don't lynch anyone.

[A Little Green]

A couple of things.

Originally Posted by phantom, underlining mine

I think #3 is the most intriguing aspect of this contest. The Baddies definitely don't want to lose the double kill each night (see my chart above for how quickly it diminishes our population), BUT they can't allow the opposing pack to equal or outweigh them, so really I think the WWs will be just as interested in lynching accurately as the rest of us. Lynching the opposition is the way to go, because it buys goodwill and they don't have to waste night kills on offing the other pack- hunting for Gifteds instead.

First, I think this is a crucial point. The wolves can (and probably will) engage in completely genuine wolf-hunting during Day phases, which means that we have to think differently than we would in a normal game; we have wolves who don't know everyone's alignment and who have a good motive to hunt bad guys too. That means they're not by default lying when they say they suspect someone, so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness as it usually is. To make things even more muddled, looking at potential pack behaviour could point to the Lovers just as well. There are still the Night kills for clues, I suppose, but I personally never trusted them much, there's too much pure guesswork involved - especially in a game where the wolf packs might have an interest in framing each other as well as the villagers. I foresee a headache.

Originally Posted by phantom

Day 3 Seer reveals himself and 4 innocent dreams and Ranger/Hunter/Lovers also reveal, giving us 9 known innocents. That night the Ranger protects the Seer and the Seer brings us two additional innocents to balance the Ranger/Lover that were offed during the Night. We would at that point have 9 known innocents in a village of 19, thus giving us a 60% chance of lynching a WW. Let's say that night the WWs kill the Seer and other Lover, but the day before the Seer could tell us exactly who he was dreaming that night and whoever he finds innocent he'll make sure the Dead Thread gives a bonus vote to that person (so we have another known) meaning that even if we missed on the lynch yet again the day after we'd be sitting at 7-3-3 with SIX known innocents, thus we'd have a 6/7 chance of lynching a WW. If we missed yet again we'd sit at 4-3-3 with all four innocents being KNOWN, meaning all six Werewolves would then be known. (But then who the heck knows how that would go down, since everyone would know who was guilty and yet the innocents would be outweighed overall 4-6.)

I see a small hitch here. How can we believe anyone's claim if no roles are revealed upon death? There's no way of checking a claim, so basically we could have Seers revealing left, right and centre with no one able to verify which one is telling the truth - or, at least, no one but a resurrected dead person, and even that ony about whoever the dead happen to have checked.


EDIT: x-ed with two Lotties! <3

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Lottie

And I think we have to assume that we are, since it'll be a while until we get any confirmation one way or the other, and even that won't be as concrete as I would feel comfortable with.

Yeah, that's going to drive me nuts.
*lynch*
Okay, so... Was that a good lynch? Guess I'll find out in a couple days...

Originally Posted by Lottie

Then again, it seems to me that the best way to set the two packs against each other is simply to kill one wolf from either pack - then the pack which is down a member will by necessity switch its focus from the Gifteds to the other pack, since the only way for them to win would be to kill at least two members of the other pack.

Yep. Yep, yep, yep. The instant a Wolf gets killed this thing completely changes. But I would tentatively say that the Seer is still probably target #1 (because of the double-dream). Maybe. I dunno...

Originally Posted by Lottie

If we kill a wolf, we've gained a lot, and I might be hugely naive here, but I feel like they are less of a threat in the Dead Thread than in the Living Thread.

We gain a lot, yeah, but as far as WWs in the Dead Thread... I'm slightly hesitant to start laying out guidelines for the Dead, because really it'll be up to the Dead to do what they want, but you realize we could choose to empower the Dead.

Basically, we purposefully tie the vote every day and let the Dead decide who gets the bonus vote (and thus who dies). It's possible that it would be a good tactic (because the Dead will always know more than the living as they have access to the roles of the Dead). So basically we just debate which two to place on the chopping block and let the Dead call the shots. I mean, simple odds certainly say that we can trust the dead since 2/3 of them will be Wolf kills (thus unlikely to be Wolves). Plus we'll probably lynch a non-Wolf today.

Anyway, I don't know if it's even realistic to do what I'm talking about. Just putting it out there. Anyone else think about that option?

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Green

The wolves can (and probably will) engage in completely genuine wolf-hunting during Day phases, which means that we have to think differently than we would in a normal game; we have wolves who don't know everyone's alignment and who have a good motive to hunt bad guys too. That means they're not by default lying when they say they suspect someone, so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness than it usually is.

Yeah, it's super weird.

Originally Posted by Green

How can we believe anyone's claim if no roles are revealed upon death? There's no way of checking a claim, so basically we could have Seers revealing left, right and centre with no one able to verify which one is telling the truth

Would a WW fake reveal in this contest? If there is a Seer counter then I guess the Ranger would have to protect both that night (ha ha, protecting a WW from the other team), but soon enough they'd both be dead (because the other pack doesn't know which is real) and thus soon enough the dead thread could tell us which Seer was real.
I simply post "Tomorrow I will cast a throwaway vote. If So-And-So was the real Seer, give me a bonus vote tomorrow", the Dead check So-And-So's true identity and then either give or don't give me the bonus vote according to what they found. Bang. We know which Seer was real and what the real Seer dreams were, not to mention the false-reveal WW is now dead which means the diminished pack has to gun for the other pack to avoid losing because they're already down one Wolf.

And if BOTH packs try a counter-reveal, even better, because we'd have a dent into both packs.

Is that right?

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Loslote

My question is, what sort of creature could cause our host and his pet dragon to hide in fear?

Me in a party dress,

That is an admission not a confession in case fervid minds get carried away on Day 1.

Oh Nilp.... Mummie is not cross, just disappointed..

Don't suppose Kuru left breakfast? This is going to be a long haul; I may need bacon aswell as caffeine.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Would a WW fake reveal in this contest? If there is a Seer counter then I guess the Ranger would have to protect both that night (ha ha, protecting a WW from the other team), but soon enough they'd both be dead (because the other pack doesn't know which is real) and thus soon enough the dead thread could tell us which Seer was real.

I think a false reveal is unlikely. But it could still buy the wolves a day or two, flush the real Seer, and maybe allow them to garner trust with the rest of the village by sacrificing one of the pack. I wouldn't write the potential off too easily.

I simply post "Tomorrow I will cast a throwaway vote. If So-And-So was the real Seer, give me a bonus vote tomorrow", the Dead check So-And-So's true identity and then either give or don't give me the bonus vote according to what they found.

I honestly had not thought of this, and it sounds really useful, but I am concerned about trusting the Dead Thread so much - what if they skew the vote? I don't think it's super likely, but all it would take is one wrong vote on the part of the Dead - maybe because of a wolf majority, maybe because of a lack of participation from the dead ordos, maybe from a misled and mistaken Dead - to deceive the whole village for, potentially, the rest of the game.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

First, I think this is a crucial point. The wolves can (and probably will) engage in completely genuine wolf-hunting during Day phases, which means that we have to think differently than we would in a normal game; we have wolves who don't know everyone's alignment and who have a good motive to hunt bad guys too. That means they're not by default lying when they say they suspect someone, so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness than it usually is.

Indeed. It's similar to the dynamic when there's a Werebear, except that in that case there's the "flag" of a player going on about bear-hunting rather than wolf-hunting.

On the plus side, the division between the wolves does at least mean they can't steer the lynch as easily as if it were one pack of six.

To make things even more muddled, looking at potential pack behaviour could point to the Lovers just as well.

Yes, but that's always the case with lovers.

Edit:x'd with Green at #24.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

This is what happens when you don't get first word in. Y'all have all but covered my essay into the three-party dynamic of this village.

Oh, hi Mum.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Lottie

I honestly had not thought of this, and it sounds really useful, but I am concerned about trusting the Dead Thread so much - what if they skew the vote? I don't think it's super likely, but all it would take is one wrong vote on the part of the Dead - maybe because of a wolf majority, maybe because of a lack of participation from the dead ordos, maybe from a misled and mistaken Dead - to deceive the whole village for, potentially, the rest of the game.

Meh, it won't deceive us for the whole game, because at some point a lover or Ranger will die and come back to the living and shed light on the Dead and what's been happening.

And if there is a majority of Baddies in the Dead Thread, then I'd say we don't need any help because that would mean we are winning handily at that point.

I mean, as long as we give the Dead good options I don't see why they wouldn't cooperate and help us. For instance, if we want to ask them to test the good/bad-ness of the last person we lynched, we just do something like this-
1) Players Y and Z agree to cast throwaway votes for two people not on the chopping block.
2) Tell Dead "If you find player X guilty give your bonus to player Y, if innocent give it to player Z. If you give it to neither of them then that is your right and we won't make assumptions."

That way if the Dead know something even more important and feel their bonus vote is needed to make the lynch go the right way they do not feel forced to follow our plan.

Has anyone else thought about this- passing messages between the Living and Dead? Any other ideas for how to do it? I think it's too useful not to consider.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I sense... death in this place. I hear foul creatures about.

But so great to be back in WW, and I must say, quite a change with this ridiculously lively and overposted thread... so let's get to it.

Originally Posted by Loslote

Then again, it seems to me that the best way to set the two packs against each other is simply to kill one wolf from either pack - then the pack which is down a member will by necessity switch its focus from the Gifteds to the other pack, since the only way for them to win would be to kill at least two members of the other pack. Whether or not the other pack switched focus, too - though I think they would soon enough - we would have a bit of a reprieve. Plus, to have two wolves actively and jointly targeting the others would be much more obvious than to have three wolves coasting in the background.

To get back to my point, I think probably we should take any chance we can to bag a wolf, since doing so would not only wittle down the pack numbers, but would also help turn the Night kills away from our Gifteds and towards the other pack. The question is, I guess, is it better statistically to have the chance to potentially turn the Night kills away from the Gifteds, or to avoid the risk that we ourselves might kill a Gifted by mistake? If we kill the Seer Day 1, we're in huge trouble, but I suppose they can still do some good in the Dead Thread. If we kill a wolf, we've gained a lot, and I might be hugely naive here, but I feel like they are less of a threat in the Dead Thread than in the Living Thread. So I would say that I personally think a Day 1 lynch is worth the risk, but that's kind of subjective, and I would definitely like to see other peoples' perspectives.

I think all in all, this game - at least before we get the hang of it - is going to be such a chaos, that accidentally lynching a Gifted when wishing to lynch a Wolf is about as probable as Wolves killing Wolves from other pack even if they are aiming for Gifted, and so on. Basically at this stage, everyone is probably freaked out equally.

But the main power, in my opinion, lies in the Dead thread. Because we know nothing of the roles upon lynching, as the phantom has so lovelily illustrated, it is hard to form opinions even in regards to whether we were right or wrong. But with the amount of Wolves around and all, we are bound to hit something, and with the amount of Night kills, everything should probably gather up speed in just a couple of Days.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

First, I think this is a crucial point. The wolves can (and probably will) engage in completely genuine wolf-hunting during Day phases, which means that we have to think differently than we would in a normal game; we have wolves who don't know everyone's alignment and who have a good motive to hunt bad guys too. That means they're not by default lying when they say they suspect someone, so a fake-looking case alone is not as strong a sign of wolfishness as it usually is. To make things even more muddled, looking at potential pack behaviour could point to the Lovers just as well. There are still the Night kills for clues, I suppose, but I personally never trusted them much, there's too much pure guesswork involved - especially in a game where the wolf packs might have an interest in framing each other as well as the villagers. I foresee a headache.

I understand where you are coming from, but I'd say, personally, that there still is a difference. Really, from my experience, whenever one is playing a Wolf, whatever the circumstances, there is a psychological difference. They may aim to more or less hunt the other pack, but they still have to stick together, avoid getting lynched themselves (of which normal Ordos usually still tend to be a bit more carefree) and so on. As for pack behavior and Lovers, agreed, even though at least the Lovers (resp one of them) come back.

But all in all, I'd say this point about "it being a headache" is not really much of a point, rather an empty complaint. We still do what we do, there are ways to catch Wolves, so I wouldn't totally negate this.

Originally Posted by Greenie

I see a small hitch here. How can we believe anyone's claim if no roles are revealed upon death? There's no way of checking a claim, so basically we could have Seers revealing left, right and centre with no one able to verify which one is telling the truth - or, at least, no one but a resurrected dead person, and even that ony about whoever the dead happen to have checked.

Originally Posted by the phantom

Would a WW fake reveal in this contest? If there is a Seer counter then I guess the Ranger would have to protect both that night (ha ha, protecting a WW from the other team), but soon enough they'd both be dead (because the other pack doesn't know which is real) and thus soon enough the dead thread could tell us which Seer was real.
I simply post "Tomorrow I will cast a throwaway vote. If So-And-So was the real Seer, give me a bonus vote tomorrow", the Dead check So-And-So's true identity and then either give or don't give me the bonus vote according to what they found. Bang. We know which Seer was real and what the real Seer dreams were, not to mention the false-reveal WW is now dead which means the diminished pack has to gun for the other pack to avoid losing because they're already down one Wolf.

And if BOTH packs try a counter-reveal, even better, because we'd have a dent into both packs.

Is that right?

That extra vote idea sounds doable, of course on the account of that you don't have the Dead thread just full of Wolves (from the same pack, who would coordinate... so it shouldn't happen, in fact). So yeah. But in any case, it shouldn't happen in the first place. I really think Seer-revealing is potentially dangerous, still. I mean, if there's suddenly a reveal of seven "Seers", everyone can lynch every single "Seer" just for good measure (and the Wolves, I am sure, would take care of some of the rest). In any case, Wolves still do not want to end up lynched. No matter that the village can't know what you are, you still don't want to be dead. Dead packs don't win, even in a game that is all about death.

Originally Posted by the phantom

Basically, we purposefully tie the vote every day and let the Dead decide who gets the bonus vote (and thus who dies). It's possible that it would be a good tactic (because the Dead will always know more than the living as they have access to the roles of the Dead). So basically we just debate which two to place on the chopping block and let the Dead call the shots. I mean, simple odds certainly say that we can trust the dead since 2/3 of them will be Wolf kills (thus unlikely to be Wolves). Plus we'll probably lynch a non-Wolf today.

Anyway, I don't know if it's even realistic to do what I'm talking about. Just putting it out there. Anyone else think about that option?

I am not sure if I am following, all the maths and statistics goes completely over my head. Besides, I am not sure if a village this big is... manageable. You might just as well end up with Wolves (either pack or rather both) manipulating the vote from inside the village itself.

(x-posted with TP)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by the phantom

I mean, as long as we give the Dead good options I don't see why they wouldn't cooperate and help us. For instance, if we want to ask them to test the good/bad-ness of the last person we lynched, we just do something like this-
1) Players Y and Z agree to cast throwaway votes for two people not on the chopping block.
2) Tell Dead "If you find player X guilty give your bonus to player Y, if innocent give it to player Z. If you give it to neither of them then that is your right and we won't make assumptions."

That way if the Dead know something even more important and feel their bonus vote is needed to make the lynch go the right way they do not feel forced to follow our plan.

Wait, let me get this straight, the mechanic seems decent, but isn't there an illogical extra step? You have the players Y and Z casting throwaway votes for no reason. You could just announce "hey Dead, today, give please your vote either to Y or Z".

Otherwise, I think the main plothole in this is that the WWs could manipulate the Dead thread (at least when there are more of them, and since they can PM between each other). Then again, it's really a problem, if you have already two Wolves of one pack among the Dead, it's not really a good situation for them. Again, once the Dead thread gets populated by, say, 6 people (probably just a couple of days), majorities and such aren't really much of an issue there.

The other problem being also, the Dead, if I got it right, do not really learn 100% the identity of someone. (Although roughly.) But also, if, using your mechanic, we are asking about the identity of a player we lynched just yesterDay, they won't yet know about the player's real identity, since they haven't revealed it yet either. So in fact, that way, we'd probably get any info "back from the grave" only in a couple of Days. Otherwise we might just get an opinion of the Dead, which isn't probably that much better than that of the Living (of course depending on circumstances).

I'd rather be in favour of the mechanic "yo Dead, give your extra vote to one of the people our village is considering, or if you have a Seer among you or somesuch who knows something, then please give an out-of-the-blue vote." Or, to formulate it differently: "Please refrain from giving a vote to a person who is not the village's candidate for lynching, except if you know that random person X should be lynched in your opinion. That way we'll notice that while the village was bickering about whether to lynch Y or Z, you suddenly randomly voted X, so we know we'd better look at X."

And then again, even that is still a bit problematic, since the Dead thread has the same DL as the Living, so the voting has to take place simultaneoustly at least a bit - I doubt everyone will be at the Dead thread voting only just at the DL. But yeah, it is probably easier to coordinate than on the Living thread, sure.

[the phantom]

Just to flesh out the Living-Dead communication thing... (and I see you're posting again on this very matter, Legate)

When someone is lynched they are then dead for the following night, meaning the Dead can check the lynch victim immediately and give us results (via the bonus vote) the following day.

Let's say we lynch Lottie and ask for the Dead to check her. The next day the leading vote receivers partway through are clearly McCaber and Legate, with Rikae, Morm, and Boro casting votes for Legate, and Nerwen, Green, and Eomer casting votes for McCaber. We can then tell the Dead thread, "If Lottie was evil give your bonus vote to Rikae or Nerwen, if she was innocent give it to Morm or Green, if you didn't check her give your bonus vote to someone else.

That way the Dead can impact the voting in any way they wish (push the lynch toward either of the two leaders) and simultaneously give us the information they gained about Lottie's role. If they give the bonus to Rikae then Lottie was evil and they wanted to lynch Legate over McCaber. If they give the bonus to Nerwen then Lottie is evil and McCaber is who they want to lynch. If they didn't check Lottie at all but want to help lynch McCaber then they give their bonus to Eomer. If they didn't check Lottie and don't want to lynch either candidate they give their bonus to someone else hinting that maybe that person's suspicions matched their own. Etc.

First and foremost I think we need to tentatively place some trust in the dead (because they will almost certainly be 50% or more innocent). Second we need to give them opportunities to pass info to us without restricting them too much (give them options), because if we reduce the Dead to being our servants and ordering them around I think that would kind of ruin the fun for them.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Personally I am loving the idea of empowering the dead! It seems like a very barrow-wightish thing to do, and perhaps it could evolve into a religion of sorts.

If we chose to tie the vote, I doubt that we would risk loosing data for us to analyze at a later stage. After all there is more to pack-behavior and whatnot than voting patterns.

Sorry for the shoret cameo, I will return again later.

[the phantom]

All this Dead bonus vote stuff aside, I mainly just don't want the Seer or Ranger to die early. The double-dream and double-protect is amazing! Just as the double-kill reduces the population quickly, the double-dreams reduces the lynchable population quickly. We need to keep our eyes on the break-points of various days (e.g. with X number of players left, if the Seer has Y number of dreams under his belt it would be efficient to reveal now).

I'm not sure what to think about the Lovers. Even if they knew who they were, would the WWs even attempt to off them with the Seer and Ranger still alive? Though the back-from-dead could be quite nice later in the game (so an early kill would negate this possibility), I think the Baddies fear the back-from-dead less than a living Seer/Ranger.

Now the Hunter... When I've been a WW I tend to avoid the Hunter like a landmine, because one shoot-from-the-hip Hunter kill can totally bring a solid Baddie squad crashing down. But in this game it's probably worth it to off the Hunter as soon as possible because odds are he'll kill an innocent. If you leave the Hunter alive a couple days the odds are probably worse for the WWs (plus he'll have more to go on), so as far as intentions go, I figure they'll attempt to kill him early or not at all (unless they're quite certain he has an incorrect pick in mind).

Anyway, it's gotten so late that it's changed into early. I need a bit of rest....

[Firefoot]

A couple thoughts before I go quiet again for most of the day. (For the record, even if you don't hear from me for a while, I will be back to vote before the deadline - can definitely be here within a half hour of it.)

I like the idea of deliberately tying the vote today, if possible. A couple thoughts:

1) It seems likely enough that for some reason we don't pull it off (wolves screw it up, accidental cross-posting, someone doesn't vote) - so we should make a deliberate choice of our possible victims.

2) In order to prevent total chaos at the end, what if we orchestrated the vote (these players vote for this person, those players vote for that). Any deviance from this strategy could also be indicative of a non-cooperative WW (or a lover, I guess).

3) What if we aimed for a three (or even four) way tie? That way even if someone doesn't vote as planned and we don't get a three-way tie, we might still get a two-way tie which is all that is actually necessary.

4) As far as victim choice - sort of a shot in the dark anyway - do we go random? Ask for volunteers (at least we don't get a gifted - but then I guess it narrows the wolves' choice for who is gifted, so maybe that's a poor strategy)? Might as well pick Nilp since he's already got a vote?

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Just to flesh out the Living-Dead communication thing... (and I see you're posting again on this very matter, Legate)

When someone is lynched they are then dead for the following night, meaning the Dead can check the lynch victim immediately and give us results (via the bonus vote) the following day.

Let's say we lynch Lottie and ask for the Dead to check her. The next day the leading vote receivers partway through are clearly McCaber and Legate, with Rikae, Morm, and Boro casting votes for Legate, and Nerwen, Green, and Eomer casting votes for McCaber. We can then tell the Dead thread, "If Lottie was evil give your bonus vote to Rikae or Nerwen, if she was innocent give it to Morm or Green, if you didn't check her give your bonus vote to someone else.

That way the Dead can impact the voting in any way they wish (push the lynch toward either of the two leaders) and simultaneously give us the information they gained about Lottie's role. If they give the bonus to Rikae then Lottie was evil and they wanted to lynch Legate over McCaber. If they give the bonus to Nerwen then Lottie is evil and McCaber is who they want to lynch. If they didn't check Lottie at all but want to help lynch McCaber then they give their bonus to Eomer. If they didn't check Lottie and don't want to lynch either candidate they give their bonus to someone else hinting that maybe that person's suspicions matched their own. Etc.

This is certainly worth considering, though it's problematic that it requires two separate lots of votes to be coordinated- it seems to me to be that a baddie on either thread might mess up the vote in an accidentally-on-purpose way. But the alternative of course is having *nothing* to go on...

I'm not sure what to think about the Lovers. Even if they knew who they were, would the WWs even attempt to off them with the Seer and Ranger still alive? Though the back-from-dead could be quite nice later in the game (so an early kill would negate this possibility), I think the Baddies fear the back-from-dead less than a living Seer/Ranger.
Now the Hunter... When I've been a WW I tend to avoid the Hunter like a landmine, because one shoot-from-the-hip Hunter kill can totally bring a solid Baddie squad crashing down. But in this game it's probably worth it to off the Hunter as soon as possible because odds are he'll kill an innocent. If you leave the Hunter alive a couple days the odds are probably worse for the WWs (plus he'll have more to go on), so as far as intentions go, I figure they'll attempt to kill him early or not at all (unless they're quite certain he has an incorrect pick in mind).

You talk as though the wolves would be able to pick and choose, tp. I mean, at this point in the game "vaguely gifted-ish" would be all they'd have to go on. (Unless the secret role changes things somehow.)
Edit:x'd with Firefoot.

[Boromir88]

First and foremost...woot! What an anniversary and to see you all back!

Reading through the thread and just going to be commenting as I go...

We purposefully tie the vote Day 1 and 2 so we don't lynch anyone.

Well, strategy-maker, I think tying our votes could be useful to attempt to coordinate and leave it in the hands of the Dead who should know more. But to do so today would mean we wouldn't get an active Dead thread until NIGHT 3. It takes 3 Dead to start it, and to have no lynch today would set the Dead thread back 1/2 day.

Granted it would guarantee we didn't lynch the Seer and gives the Seer 2 more dreams (where even if the wolves kill the Seer NIGHT 2, that puts the Seer in the dead thread with 4 dreams instead of 2...hmm, need to think about that). Since there is a delay in finding out information, the best case is to do what it takes to ensure the Seer gets as many double dreams as possible.

Ugh, I love fake reveals when you can immediately know the true from the false...it's going to be a pain with delayed information. I suppose it's too optimistic to think, a fake-reveal from one pack, would be as much of a pain to the rival pack as it is to everyone else.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I'm always cool with getting a few more votes.

Anyway, long day, scattered thoughts, many of which has already been commented upon, so I'll say my 'substantive' piece before taking a nap and hoping to wake up at a proper time.

Re the three-party dynamic's effect on gifted reveals:

With competing wolf parties, they will be unsure as to how to deal with a real gifted reveal. For example, both parties might end up wasting their kill on a single target (or less likely, end up not killing the gifted because they expected the other Pack to do so.)

Also, there is little fear of a counterreveal or a false reveal: the revealing Wolf risks giving their Pack a numbers disadvantage against the enemy Pack. And they won't have a way of timing a fake reveal when they gain a numbers advantage over their rivals, because even they won't know if a Wolf not of their Pack has already been killed. (Of course, this information gap could change with the Dead thread activities...)

Re lynch/NIGHT kill analysis:

For obvious reasons, voting analyses (my weapon of choice--or rather, the weapon I use because I have no choice) are quite useless, at least in the opening fog-of-war stage of the game.

So what about NIGHT kill analyses? According my game-theorising*, the Baddies would prioritise killing the Seer, a Wolf from the other Pack, the Ranger, the Lovers, and the Hunter, in that order. Now what do the first two targets have in common? They both possess an above-average knowledge of the alignment of the people in the Village. So posting analysis of the dead could yield information as to why they had been targetted. (Of course, now that I've said it, the Wolves would now probably go after the quiet ones. Hehe. But on a less flippant note, I do realise that making such an analysis public could influence future Wolvish behaviour.)

My scattered thoughts are petering out. I'll be back when my brain cells stop screaming at me.

_____
*As someone who has watched No Game No Life twice (even being an editor for the first two volumes of the novel's English translation), and as someone who has read the Wikipedia article on Nash equilibrium, I believe I am qualified to game-theorise.