[Werewolf] Werewolf: Black Death - Daybreak Day 6 - Crypto-flagellants win!

Should I close the day with the votes that we had at the deadline (10PM), or leave it open for a few

  • Be strict, rules are rules, they had their chance. Close it.

    Votes: 8 66.7%

  • Leave it open until midnight (two hours extra)

    Votes: 1 8.3%

  • Leave it open until next morning when you wake up.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Leave it open and close it as soon as a majority is reached.

    Votes: 3 25.0%
  • Total voters
    12

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
@Llandy

Ultra-brief rundown of people I've not really talked about yet. With the family for Christmas and on a phone so not going into much depth.

Locke - most of his finger-pointing is 'X seems wolfy' X: 'why are you calling me wolfy?' L: 'OMG so defensive! COME AND SEE THE VIOLENCE INHERENT IN THE SYSTEM'. All Freud, no solidity but he pursues things as though there's more evidence than people being angry. Could just be playing style but I find it frustrating and unhelpful if not entirely wolfy.

AWdeV - prepared to take the knife reveal at face value, and your reasons for thinking him innocent (doesn't like decisions, etc) as true. Don't like it, though, feels wrong for someone to be so intent on 'guys? Guys is this okay guys?' and so unprepared to take a stance otherwise. Just post-jumped me with a big post full of speculation that seems to show him getting a bit more confident/involved but my general point remains the same.

Ejnomad - Mr Flippant, isn't attracting as much attention for his (br/l)evity as I'd've expected but isn't throwing out particularly wolfy vibes to me. Probably innocent but I'm not prepared to drop him in the green camp.

Eternal - don't really see what all the fuss is about tbh. Without going back over all the posts, haven't seen anything that makes me think wolf, expresses opinions on stuff w/o prompting, feels like Locke baiting (maybe? Lost track of who started the Eternal stuff tbh) has caused most of the flap to me. Gets quite angry and confrontational, but I don't have a problem with that as long as it's not everyone's tactic.

Regendur - not posting enough, mostly just commentary and too much buddying up to people. Auto-orange.

Moose! - hardly posting recently, can't remember if he gave a reason in advance. Auto-orange.

Moss - lots of WoT, too much gameplay stuff and not enough on people other than Llandy. Help-me-I'm-a-noob act convincing though, feels like a genuine reason for odd behaviour.

Orj - who? Gave reasons ahead of time for not contributing, though, so no reason to be suspicious.

Reverend L. Lamb - conspicuously lurking but individual contributions have been snappy and to-the-point inasmuch as they've been serious. Vibes are lazy innocent atm.

Shatari - not sure. Contributed a bit but was a bit noncommittal for me. Has given reasons for not posting.

Snoopy-91 - decent insight, not committing too much but keeping us in the loop w/ thought processes. Not sure whether I like that, could be too much conspicious openness but doesn't sway me too much either way atm.

The Wolf - didn't like the stirring method particularly but it's thrown up stuff for other people to look at with more analytical eyes at least. Not expecting posts for a while so not much to go on, gut says dickish but innocent.

Xardob - found early contributions weird and boastful, went quiet after that, but seems to have settled into a good posting pattern, rational and analytical. I grudgingly change from dislike to approval.



Note: this is where I'm at with the people I consider myself to have left out of my analysis so far. Anyone not on that list, I think it's already clear where my opinion is. If you think I've let someone slip through the gaps, just say and I'll go over them quickly.
 
AWdeV said:
While I realise you weren't asking me; you interrupted my posting so I'll reply anyway. I shall not lurker vote anyone besides actual lurkers. Wanting it just seems perverse.
Click to expand...

Fine, fine. I shall shed light on the topic. If I am the watch or the lurker for several nights then I can't be scum because I am a known role blocked individual and since I can't do anything I can't be the bad guy. It certainly means I can't be a converter because that's would be about the dumbest way forward.

More importantly, if I'm wrong as you and Eternal suggested about the wolves killing method. Then the Watch and the Lurker have their own private rooms. I don't see being unkillable by scum as exactly a negative if anything I think giving the lurker spot to a  lurker might just reward them by making sure they show up the next day. These two roles are pretty much why I believe no room is safe, because then lurkers are always safe and how's a watcher supposed to watch anything if all the action takes place inside the houses? In any case I don't see anything wrong with playing it safe for myself.

And getting the sniffles doesn't really scare me. In short what Adaham set out to do to punish people strikes me as a possible reward.

So will you reconsider your vote?
 
ejnomad said:
Well then how about your Lurker vote then Llandy? You didn't mention that.  :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Sorry dude. Words cannot express how much lurkers piss me off. Or if they could express it, they would be expressed by my Panda Confession.

I'm not sticking ANYBODY in that pillory unless they're an actual and genuine lurker. My votes on Lamb at the moment because he's contributed least, but if he becomes a little more active then I'll lurker-vote nobody. Don't forget, being out in that pillory involves some sort of health-related penalty.

AWdeV said:
BUT Llandy has said several times, and I'm inclined to believe it, that the key was not an actual item.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify: I believe what I said is that if the key IS/WAS an item, then it was NEVER in my possession. Ie, if it was stolen, then it was stolen from somebody other than me. And since nobody's come forward and said "hey guys, I had this mansion key that got stolen from me :sad:" since it happened, I'm assuming here that keys to rooms are not actual items which can be stolen by an actual thief, but this is simply how Adaham narrates it.

Maybe we don't have a thief who can steal items.

Maybe we don't have a thief who can steal items, but like Soot said in his analysis of Whoopin's case on me, maybe the role of the thief IS to simply steal keys to rooms whilst nobody is looking as a way of closing rooms off.

I note from the narrative of the key-stealing that Adaham says the room is closed "for the day" and that it will take 24 hours for the blacksmith to make a new key. Therefore I'm assuming we'll be able to re-use the Mansion tomorrow.

I did actually have another thought. Today/tonight and tomorrow are the only days which we have in which to treat Snoopy if we want her to live. I was on my own in the Mansion making a LOT of noise about needing to be here alone to test a theory. Possibly the scum thought I had something going on in there that could harm or expose one of them. No big deal... until I invited Snoopy to stay with me.

Perhaps this is a way for the wolves to try and flush out a healer (if we have one). Maybe they figure that by preventing Snoopy from being in a 'wolf-free' room with me, they'll maybe make the healer (if we have one) think about trying to treat her tonight. That they prevent me from testing out any theories I have could also be a contributing factor, or perhaps entirely coincidental.

And before anybody says it, yes, I KNOW this is highly speculative and probably complete bollocks, but before this game even started, Adaham was reading along with the Panda Baddies thread and said he liked the way I looked at things ^__^ So I figure maybe he invited me to the game so I can continue looking at things in different ways. At least he gets some small entertainment from seeing people guess about what sort of new and inventive methods he's using for challenging us to use our brains.

Turns out this is becoming quite a big post. A quick note before I go out for a bottle of wine and a bottle of toilet duck (not to be confused);

I'm beginning to trust Llandy again. This is disconcerting.
Click to expand...

I agree :sad:

[me=Pharaoh X Llandy]nicks AW's bottle of wine [/me]

*yoink*
 
Room: Stable

There you go Llandy. Get Lep out of the room and you can test your theory in the Doctor's office by your lonesome. Spreading 20 people over 6 rooms isn't much different in volume than spreading 18 people over 5 rooms. So I say let's do it.
 
@AWdeV

Please dont stab me, maybe just Watch vote me or Lurker me and wait until day 2!  :roll:

See how lame that looks, somehow Llandy and ejnomad got away with it.

You havent provided a reason why Im your most suspicious target nor really asked me questions to clarify or convince you otherwise.

To be honest it would be a major bummer to get kicked out of the game so early and sit in the silent sidelines watching the game that was inspired by my ideas instead of getting to play it.
 
ejnomad said:
There you go Llandy. Get Lep out of the room and you can test your theory in the Doctor's office by your lonesome.
Click to expand...

No, I can't.

Nice try though :razz:

I'm not lurker-voting anyone who's not a lurker, and that's final. Even if I didn't feel so strongly about lurkers, Adaham's warning implies DIRE CONSEQUENCES for abusing the lurker vote.

Accept it, move on.

Alternatively, ask AW for the knife, and use it to stab scum. If you kill a baddie I will vote you for Watch. But you'll have to convince AW, and then have a slap-fight with Xardob over who actually gets to stab someone, and I'm not sure you'll even get that far.
 
Whoopin said:
@AWdeV

Please dont stab me, maybe just Watch vote me or Lurker me and wait until day 2!  :roll:

See how lame that looks, somehow Llandy and ejnomad got away with it.
Click to expand...

Except no, because last I checked we lynch scum. At least I try to. DO YOU? So voting someone you feel is most scummy as our watchmen seems like a rather silly sort of thing.

Pharaoh X Llandy said:
I'm not lurker-voting anyone who's not a lurker, and that's final. Even if I didn't feel so strongly about lurkers, Adaham's warning implies DIRE CONSEQUENCES for abusing the lurker vote.
Click to expand...

Except not, because I don't think he planned anyone to want the role and secondly, he sort of ruined the scariness of it when snoopy got sick and has shown to be treatable.

But I guess if I have to lurk to "earn" the lurker role that's certainly less work convincing everyone and saves my hands from carpal tunnel.
 
ejnomad said:
But I guess if I have to lurk to "earn" the lurker role that's certainly less work convincing everyone and saves my hands from carpal tunnel.
Click to expand...

I'm also not going to lurker vote you for intentionally lurking to try and 'earn' the role.

First and foremost, I've already been strongly warned about breaking the game (although I still maintain that I didn't "break" Aust's game, I made it x10 more fun and gave everybody something new and exciting to talk about :roll:) -- using the lurker role to "cheat" protect a potential innocent feels too much like 'breaking the game' and I'm not ready to be mod-killed (yet :wink:)

Second, now that I know that you want it so bad, it delights me to keep it from you.

Third, the nature of any "cure" for Snoopy may be completely unrelated to the health penalties imposed by those in the lurker pillory.
 
Pharaoh X Llandy said:
First and foremost, I've already been strongly warned about breaking the game (although I still maintain that I didn't "break" Aust's game, I made it x10 more fun and gave everybody something new and exciting to talk about :roll:) -- using the lurker role to "cheat" protect a potential innocent feels too much like 'breaking the game' and I'm not ready to be mod-killed (yet :wink:)
Click to expand...

I call bull****. If you were an innocent first and foremost your first interest would be to protect as many villagers are you can. The fact you don't want to protect them suggests to me you're just more likely to be a wolf not looking to protect people. Using the mod as a scapegoat is just wolfish if if he felt it was an abuse of power he's just refuse to put me in the pillory, and the pillory only has a chance to get your sick while the rooms have a chance to get you killed. Call me an apprentice in RISK vs REWARD but I see which way luck leans.
 
Now you are just being ****ing annoying, Ej. As far as I'm concerned your first concern as a player should be playing the game in a way that is fun.  Hell, you may not agree that using the lurker vote in that kind of a way would make it less fun, but that doesn't void her concern about the matter.
 
Whatever you say, dude.

I remain unconvinced by your arguments. Not abusing the lurker vote is one of my principles, and I'm sticking by them. Hastily-flung accusations about how I'm wolfish for being concerned about being mod-killed aren't going to change my mind, because my mind will not be changed on this matter.

I don't even see why you care about my vote, all you need is four lurker votes and you already have three, you don't even need a majority. Just go annoy one other player until they give in and vote for you :roll:
 
Twinkle

Rundown & commentary

First post, joke vote on Wolf-boy, Watch vote on me. Joke about hot female bartender.

Joke, then big defensive post of me. Questions Wolf-boy’s arguments against me, agrees that I’m fighting a bit too hard for the Watch role, says my former wolfy tricksyness is not a valid reason to keep me from having the Watch in this game as past games have no bearing on my alignment now, further calls Wolf-boy out for admitting not having “strong arguments” against me but continuing attack anyway. Says if I was a wolf, more of my diabolical little buddies would be supporting me (implicating himself as potential diabolical little buddy here) then points out Whoopin’s getting a lot of Watch votes. Sticking by his Watch vote as he wants me to have it since so many people want to keep it from me.

When questioned by me about any thoughts/suspicions he might have, mentions Lep for taking a stance yet not making a racket (?), also for supporting Whoopin for Watch, and for throwing a vote on someone who had no votes so he could slip by without appearing to jump on a bandwagon — Note that at this point, Lep’s vote on Xardob was a LURKER vote and not a LYNCH vote, so Twinkle’s point kinda moot?? Unsure if Twinkle was aware of this distinction.

!! A whole lot of back-and-forth in HUGE posts, paraphrased/summarised and with salient points picked out !!

Twinkle: Lep is dancing in grey areas/not taking a stance/not getting into conflicts/not contributing
Lep/(some Phoney): You are not really contributing either
Twinkle: I contributed about Llandy and Whoopin and Lep
Lep/Phone: But only when prompted, you really haven’t offered anything new nor been taking firm stances
Twinkle: I took a firm stance on the arguments about Llandy
Lep/Phone: But you haven’t taken a firm stance on people, just the logic they used

*Some thoughts @Locke about Wolf-boy, some thoughts @Shatari about the likeliness of wolves ‘buddying up’ asking Shatari if he’s not suspicious about all the support Whoopin had*

*More discussion about grey-areas, Twinkle hoped people would see that whether they think he is a wolf or not, his arguments against the people attacking me are correct)*

Nipple asks “So you have an idea of whether everyone else is innocent or evil? Care to share that?”
Twinkle replies, “I'm not sure I understand the question, but I will try and answer it to the best of my ability anyway. I have very few other suspicions, but none as deep as the suspicion for Lep.” — (Don’t think he’s actually shared any points on other people yet???)

Whoopin accuses Twinkle of ignoring Xardob. Twinkle says he’s “ignored” a lot of players and provides thoughts on Xardob. Whoopin says he knew Twinkle would say that and that Twinkle should already have a case on Xardob (????), says this could be Twinkle showing packie behaviour with Xardob, Twinkle counters to say that Whoopin could be a packmate with anybody he’s likewise “ignored” ad infinitum, Twinkle waits for a further response from Whoopin.

Gets pissed @Locke, says Locke’s arguments are pathetic, bull****, etc. Seems genuine frustration.

A little more back & forth with Lep/Nipple but the trio seem to have reached an impasse and the discussions are cooling down.

Very good response to Eternal’s LoS which involves odd Llandy/Twinkle possibly scum/definitely blue dynamic. Points out obvious flaw in LoS entry on me/Eternal, best post I’ve seem from Twinkle all game as he addresses the dichotomy logically. Same post, disagrees with Eternal’s Lurker vote on Locke as although he’s arguing with Locke he feels Locke has been contributing (although not as much as he would like).

Also disagrees with Eternal’s analysis of Phoney. Says that he finds Phoney’s arguments to be well reasoned and his contributions to be good. Again, his defence of even those he’s been arguing with gives me a good feeling about Twinkle, shows that he doesn’t bear grudges against the people he debates with and will point out if he thinks something is unfair even if it’s against someone he’s currently opposing.

More angry @Locke, calls his arguments biased lying crap, lots of rhetoric and anger/frustration, (if both wolves, most elaborate distancing act I’ve ever seen???) and then votes Locke after Locke suggests AW using knife on Twinkle. (VERY elaborate distancing act???)

Asks Nipple about his feelings for on Lep.

Apology posts x2.

Final post, one or two iffy things. Nipple lists him as “mostly attacks the people who find him suspicious.” Twinkle counters by saying he attacked the people who argued against me in the beginning (true, but he mostly attacked their arguments, and then transferred his ‘attack’ from Wolf-boy to Locke when Locke questioned Twinkle and showed approval for Wolf-boy’s methods), that he named Whoopin long before Whoopin went after him (also true, but naming is all he did, and Whoopin wasn’t the direct subject of that post, it was all the people had who Watch-Wagoned Whoopin… but Twinkle doesn’t follow this up at all with any suspicion on those people??) and by saying he ‘went after Lep even though he said nothing about me’ which is also technically true but admits earlier in his posts that he DID bring up Lep as a direct response to being asked by me for his feelings/suspicions about people.

Asks some good questions @Xardob about knife usage and what use we’ll get out of it.

More anger @Locke, excitement at prospect of my LoS on him.

My thoughts:

Twinkle isn’t easy for me to place. On the one hand, his arguments are sound and I do get the feeling that he’s genuinely angry/frustrated about a lot of them, particularly the exchanges he’s been having with Locke. He also makes some excellent observations about Eternal’s LoS and his debates with others (Lep, Nipple, Whoopin) have been fairly restrained and mostly logical. He does defend himself well.

However. As others have pointed out, Twinkle has done very little else except defend himself and answer questions/posts aimed at him. He commented on very little else to date (exception being his recent questioning of Xardob’s knife campaign, and pointing out some bits of Eternal’s LoS which were rather iffy). I’ve found that when Twinkle does comment on things, he does offer some good insights and it helps me get a feel for where he’s coming from with his observations.

Unfortunately, his lack of commenting on much else/defending himself too much has had a rather detrimental effect on my view of him. In a way he’s a sort of tabula rasa analysis for me, because he’s not only new to WW’ing (and WW’ing with me) but also pretty new to the forum and unlike a lot of the veteran (speaking of longevity, not WW experience) players who I know personally, or the players who I’ve been in WW games with more recently, I have absolutely no experience of Twinkle, his personality, habits, or any meta to call upon. But I don’t feel that this is the play of somebody who says he’s played “maybe fifty” games of something that is “very similar” to Werewolf.

Although I can see Twinkle as an offended innocent, due to the vehemence of his arguments with Locke, I can’t rule out that this could be a “newbie” wolf play. Because NOBODY here has any experience of how Twinkle plays WW, he can basically play however he likes and nobody will come along and say “Hey, Twinkle never plays like this when he’s innocent!” or “Twinkle always plays like this as an innocent!”

Furthermore, he’s given an example of a game he plays, in which he and his other packmates banded together whilst he went on the offensive, and they had such a good game that all four of them survived to the end, presumably through clever use of WIFOM, strategy and deception. He comments on Whoopin having “a potential Watch bandwagon” (which would fit with his “we did this because it was obvious and nodbody was expecting the obvious” game in which he and his buddies won) but then uses “I can’t be a wolf because I’m doing this, and a wolf wouldn’t do this because it’s too obvious” type of excuses when accused by others of defending me.

I’m listing Twinkle as orange right now, simply because of his heavily defensive style. I’m not saying defending yourself is a bad thing, especially since I do it a lot too, and so do others. It’s just that right now there’s TOO much defending and not enough commenting on other things. I’d rather take a “wait and see” approach with Twinkle, because he might just be an innocent having a bad first game with us, so for the moment I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt. Now that he’s caught up with the thread I want to see a wider range of contributions for him.

I also find his posts hard to read, as he replies to many people in one long post but doesn’t make it clear with quotes which posts he’s referring to. Twinkle, when you read this, please consider just replying to one or two people at a time. We’d rather see five or six shorter posts from you (don’t worry about multi-posting, it’s fine here and in fact sometimes preferred) than one long post with different numbered points ignored/addressed with with non-linkable quotes.
 
I meant to add this to the bottom of my Twinkle post but I accidentally over-wrote it with a typo-edited version from my Scrivener....

Now, I have to go make a tapas and drink copious amounts of raki. You may take this opportunity to discuss other subjects such as how much you'll miss me, how much you want to lynch me, how annoying you think ejnomad is on a scale of 1-10, whether you think Xardob should stab Velmu or Shatari or whether AW should use the knife himself or keep it, and so forth.
 
ejnomad said:
Whoopin said:
@AWdeV

Please dont stab me, maybe just Watch vote me or Lurker me and wait until day 2!  :roll:

See how lame that looks, somehow Llandy and ejnomad got away with it.
Click to expand...

Except no, because last I checked we lynch scum. At least I try to. DO YOU? So voting someone you feel is most scummy as our watchmen seems like a rather silly sort of thing.
Click to expand...
ejnomad said:
@Eternal

I assume you don't trust me still so let's make a compromise. You continue your case against me but as a favor to us both you vote me lurker. This way if you can't make your case I end up blocked for the night anyway. Should be a major win or minor win for you right?
Click to expand...

I was referencing this post and I wasnt stretching the logic either. You just asked Eternal who thinks you should be lynched and just lurker you in the meantime cause youll be blocked anyway.

Pharaoh X Llandy said:
I meant to add this to the bottom of my Twinkle post but I accidentally over-wrote it with a typo-edited version from my Scrivener....

Now, I have to go make a tapas and drink copious amounts of raki. You may take this opportunity to discuss other subjects such as how much you'll miss me, how much you want to lynch me, how annoying you think ejnomad is on a scale of 1-10, whether you think Xardob should stab Velmu or Shatari or whether AW should use the knife himself or keep it, and so forth.
Click to expand...
Ugh so many things about this post makes me cringe. Its like your sittin on your wolfy pedestal just waiting for the village to make the mistakes you influenced with all your WoTs. Would really be nice to know for sure if your perspective is good or evil.
 
Whoopin said:
@AWdeV
You havent provided a reason why Im your most suspicious target nor really asked me questions to clarify or convince you otherwise.
Click to expand...

True, and I apologise for that. It's mostly based on observation both by myself and by others. I shall ask you a few questions in this post just to get a better idea about you. I did give a reason some time ago and that is that I found you fairly similar to the Deathfondle game. I've been second-guessing myself on that but I honestly don't really want to re-read 65 pages in this thread and certainly not 127 in the other.

Maybe a bit of an odd question, but what do you think. Have you been playing like the other game?

Whoopin said:
To be honest it would be a major bummer to get kicked out of the game so early and sit in the silent sidelines watching the game that was inspired by my ideas instead of getting to play it.
Click to expand...

Well obviously, but nobody wants to get stabbed. The only one who does seem to want it is Seff and that's just because he doesn't like the game. I want to nail a villain however and I don't think he is one. Although maybe it would be nice to put him out of his misery instead. Regardless, an OOC sob story is a low blow. :wink:

Anyway.

If you had the knife, what would you do with it? Who would you stab with it? Do you think you could replicate your vaunted feat in which you stabbed a wolf on the first day? Would you give the knife to Xardob? If so, why? If not, why not?

I can't quite tell if you ever responded to Llandy's large assessment of your play so far. Could you reiterate your thoughts on it? What are your objections to it, what do you think she's got wrong? If you hadn't responded to it yet, why not?

 
Whoopin said:
Since I detect no wolf hunting and no deception hes earned Gray (the same place where I need more data from a player).
Click to expand...

What about his dodginess towards questions?


AWdeV said:
Which should, technically, make me safe at this moment as I'm the only one in the room and I'm not a wolf.
Click to expand...

Except chances are people are going to end up in that room so that we have a good spread of people and no clusters.


ejnomad said:
Fine, fine. I shall shed light on the topic. If I am the watch or the lurker for several nights then I can't be scum because I am a known role blocked individual and since I can't do anything I can't be the bad guy. It certainly means I can't be a converter because that's would be about the dumbest way forward.
Click to expand...

The problem with this is you'd die after being lurker voted twice (from my understanding), and the reasoning said here can apply to anyone (even scum) - depending on how the wolf mechanics work, it could be beneficial for a wolf to want watch in order to try and "clear" themselves. Would make less sense as a converter, but it isn't like you'd be able to tell from a difference in night activity who a converter would be.

ejnomad said:
If you were an innocent first and foremost your first interest would be to protect as many villagers are you can.
Click to expand...

Says mister "innocents should not try to defend people, even if they think they are innocent." Yes, that is different that protection during the night, but the whole purpose of the Lurker vote seems to be *exactly* what the name suggests. Her view doesn't rule out protecting an innocent though - could always Lurker a lurker who is believed to be innocent.


Pharaoh X Llandy said:
Pft, don't believe everything you're told. But we'll talk about it after the game.
Click to expand...

What, did Adaham not live up to some promise he made to you?  :razz:
 
Leprechaun said:
AWdeV. Don't like it, though, feels wrong for someone to be so intent on 'guys? Guys is this okay guys?' and so unprepared to take a stance otherwise
Click to expand...

It's because I'm chronically second-guessing myself. I'm trying not to but that's easier said than done.

 
AWdeV said:
If you had the knife, what would you do with it? Who would you stab with it? Do you think you could replicate your vaunted feat in which you stabbed a wolf on the first day? Would you give the knife to Xardob? If so, why? If not, why not?

I can't quite tell if you ever responded to Llandy's large assessment of your play so far. Could you reiterate your thoughts on it? What are your objections to it, what do you think she's got wrong? If you hadn't responded to it yet, why not?
Click to expand...
If I had the knife I would definitely take out Llandy cause Im convinced shes a wolf, and second its also very possible she could actually be the room locker version which is a high priority, third the odds she will make it through the whole game unlynched is very high. In Adahams game I stabbed Naridill who was a Vampire so I nailed the most dangerous "wolf" immediately before any conversions could happen.

Xardob with a knife is an odd scenario because that means we wont get any definitive results before our final decision on day 1 lynch because he wants to keep it overnight for protection which is actually a good play from his position. That helps Xardob himself more than the whole village than getting a result for day 1 lynch discussion.

Also Xardob is still in my suspect list with Llandy and ejnomad and his latest post about confidently labeling me as an innocent makes me think he knows better cause hes a wolf himself.

I actually wasnt asked any questions in Llandys WoT on me, it was observations and a final thoughts with her opinion on those observations. I can give you my opinion on her thoughts, no problem:

Pharaoh X Llandy said:
My thoughts:

Should be obvious from my commentary. Although Whoopin does throw some suspicion around, he starts off with:

• 2 previously successful wolves (The Wolf / Me)
• Jumps on Twinkle for defending me (an ‘easy’ case… similar to his comments on Xardob’s Seff vote)
• Switches focus to Xardob for reasons which do not stand up to scrutiny
• Accuses Soot of being biased for not agreeing with his case (minor OMGUS)
• Casts some aspersions on Eternal
• Briefly mentions Moss and quotes Shatari but does nothing with it as he’s “skipped” it (presumably to prove a point to Xardob)

I don’t find Whoopin’s ‘hunting’ to be helpful, nor his cases particularly sound. He does raise some good/interesting points but when he does they’re either small, unimportant (related to technique/style or are too snipey to see genuine) and seems dismissive of those (Twinkle, Soot) who don’t immediately agree with his cases.

Very suspicious for me so far, as he appears to be as deceptive as he accuses Xardob of being.
Click to expand...

• I dont think is incriminating nor know why it was included because it doesnt even support the other suspicions
• had nothing to do with him defending Llandy cause I was curious if Twinkle was Xardobs packmate.
• has some merit because I wasnt able to convince others that Xardob was deceptive or contradicting cause they said I was targetting his jokes
• that is true, Sootshade is biased towards Whoopin its not a secret, also know that I will OMGUS whoever anytime I want and do so without being concerned how its interpreted
• I found it odd that Eternal happend to omit the one and only guy that I considered deceptive. He explained later that he intended to have a whole section devoted to Xardob but it turned out to be a flop.
• cant remember what I mentioned about Moss and I skipped Shatari to deliver a :Xardobface: to make it clear that Xardob wasnt helping the hunt suggesting we skip posts.

Now the final paragraph is telling, I am "very suspicious" for unhelpful hunting, and not having sound cases , while raising good/interesting points that are small - and Im dismissive.

OK its really just more observations instead of identifying where I could be deceptive or trying to trick villagers. I could be suspicious... but very suspicious? I dont think so and if I am, why hasnt she voted for me and chooses Moss?

I havent tried to trick anyone and Ive been looking for suspects the way I see it and I dont use the common techniques, I also look for innocents instead of wolves... so I narrow down my selection and whats left is a pool of deceptive players that would be a better bet for lynching, I termed it anti-suspicion hunting.

Heres my priority for knifing:

Llandy
ejnomad
Xardob
 
Finally about receiving intel on one of their deaths which is actually the primary goal to use the knife on day one.

If they are wolves:
We will learn ALOT from Llandys revelation.
We will get some from Xardob because he finally delivered a insight to his hunting.
We will get very little from a dead ejnomad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

In Progress Unplayable Dark Graphics for Sea Raider Hideout Attacks (and Towns at Night)
Replies
1
Views
37
MArdA TaleWorlds
MArdA TaleWorlds
Is there a Money Cap?
Replies
2
Views
102
fedeita
fedeita
Alehei
Need More Info Enormously large Scouting bonus
Replies
6
Views
77
Alehei
Alehei
Back
Top Bottom