WW26: The Masquerade [Game Thread]

[Widow Edith]

Widow Edith, I would like to hear some opinions on my theory on Mary.

Dificult question. On one hand you might be right that her switch from Rob to you is strange especially as she says explicitly that she is not convinced of your guilt OTOH you did shorten/misrepresent her thoughts and overall the case didn't look very strong to me. Rereading the exchange she made the better figure in court.

Gripping hand I reserve my judgement on Sister Mary as I would really like to hear more (a lot more) from her. D1 had too many non-talkers.

[Doctor Saul]

Well, that was entertaining to read...

Fat Rose, Bert the Bard - I wanted people to vote Muriel yesterday, not Friar Andrew.  To say that I found Friar Andrew suspicious but refused to vote for him yesterday is an over-simplification.  I noted something I found scummy about him: a quick dropping off of a vote of Sir Percival.  Others expressed that was a joke; I did not see it that way, but I wasn't going to vote him over Muriel for only that reason.  So when he was being pushed late in the day, I wanted to push that Muriel was the better vote.  Maybe I didn't have enough conviction for your taste, but I did not know the Friar would flip village and the quick vote drop was still making me hesitate about him.

As for Scarlet John, if he continues to post then I am satisfied for now.  He doesn't need to move heaven and earth, but giving his insights is all we can ask.  You have done tons better than another lurker who chimed in late yesterday to promise us content, and yet has only delivered this today:

Quickest WW game ever.

Perhaps some motivation will help, Sister Anne?

[Bert The Bard]

[Bert The Bard]

Shame on you, Saul, for making me laugh out loud in public.

I doubt we'll hear more from Simple Anne. Maybe you meant to prod Sister Mary? Or we can agree on The Narrator as a compromise candidate.

[Doctor Saul]

Oh wow ...

This is quite embarrassing

[Fat Rose]

You haven't even read my post, have you?

I read your post and I disagree. Its pretty much as simple as that. I don't think John is a good lynch. You think its a wolf ploy. I do not.

If he's scum and he's still hanging around in 2 days and seems scummy lets addres it then. Honestly I'm not getting any scum vibes from him. I don't see him suspicious at all.

See Agnes, I didn't even need to wait till D3 to get prove for my point. There is already the first one to tell you that we should give him time. And I promise that attitude won't change. John will just have to post 2-3 points, probably enough to just rephrase what others stated at that point already ("now cut him some slack, he didn't have time earlier to post...") and he'll be given till it is too late.

I'm not for policy lynches. I don't like them never have. I'm not Zak. If he is still around on Day 4 when there are less people in the game then he will stand out more and at that point, yes I will be looking at him very hard. You seem pretty confident about what i WILL do in the future. No one can know what I'll do. Hell I DON'T KNOW HAT I'LL DO!

In the first part you understand that I have reasons other than policy (I don't think I even mentioned policy as a reason for the lynch ever) but in the second part you argue as if I was requesting a policy lynch. And that are quotes from the same post

Would be nice if you would also explain what you believe are such great insights.

Not every post from every player has great insights. To go to the extreme and say they are great I would not. I think they are villagery contributions though and I will follow up in my next post looking at some of them.

Would have loved to see that, but I guess you'll not deliver on that any time soon according to your last post.

He didn't say he wasn't going to do shit. He actually did shit today. More shit than you did in all your posts today. You're the one pontificating and doing jack shit.

Scarlet John because we have to, no matter what alignment you really are.

Oh yes! We have to lynch him! Who cares if he's a villager! We don't know when he'll stop contributing! Who cares if he just posted coherent and thoughtful posts! He could flake out on us at anytime, so we have to lynch him NOW!

Please cut the emotional shit. It really gets annoying Rob. If you have points to make, make them. If you just want to scream around like a toddler, do it somewhere else.

I posted my reasons clearly with my vote. But hey you don't give a shit about that right? I mean you are wolfy after all.

Yes, and then you did go on to scream around uselessly as quoted. So what was that response about, apart from calling me wolf because I don't agree with you?

Your rehash of the Mary suspicious at first glance appears valid, but then you say she's never answered why she switched from me to you, but you seem to ignore the posts leading through and after the switch. People change their minds in WW. Is that a hard concept for you to understand Muriel? I know you're slow. It'll be okay.

Mary switched from you to her, but when she did so, she still stated that she is not convinced of her guilt. That's basically saying "Let me jump on the wagon, even though I don't like the direction it is taking"... Imo that is a valid point. Even if we assume that she somehow came to the conclusion that you are not suspicious despite acting as before, just voting for someone while stating the one you vote for is probably not guilty isn't making sense.

When Mary came back she reiterated her opinion. If she was looking to jump on the bandwagon she could have jumped on the friar. She didn't.

Your response makes no sense. What Mary did after she comes back has no meaning at all for Muriel voicing suspicion of Mary because Mary was voting for her while stating in the same post that she is not convinced of her guilt. You completely ignored that in your attack on Muriel and now when I tell it to you again you ignore it yet again. First time I believe it is an oversight. If it happens a second time I assume it is deliberate.

The highlighted bit is the worst. You have a choice. But you are making it seem like we have NO choice. Your hands are tied. You wash the blood. Pontius Pilate reincarnated!

And again the emotional shit. I think Muriel explained pretty clearly why she thinks we have no choice. If that is true or not can be discussed. But to do so, you should outline why we have a choice and which choice that is. I've explained before why I don't see it as valid to just wait till D4, if you differ, explain it. If you can't, at least don't scream around.

I have explained it you haven't quoted it. Scarlet isn't voting for anyone. If he wants to be modkilled he won't vote for anyone. If he sneak votes for someone I will reopen his case. You and Muriel keep saying you have no choice. Your reasoning comes down to the idea that the village will keep lettign him have time. And you say that he'll just keep coming up with reasons not to be lynched. Fine, but that would require him to vote. He votes he's fair game, IMO. I don't want to waste the lynch. Lynching is the only power us villagers have. And you want to waste it. You want to waste an entire day sitting on a policy lynch not hunting.

No, we don't. I want to lynch him because I am certain that he is a wolf. And I explained that clearly enough already imo. You just try to project something on to me that I have never said.

One last thing, you don't quote where Muriel says she won't blame herself for the loss. I highlighted that because I feel it shows she doesn't care whether the village loses. And Ibelieve the reason for that is that she is a wolf. I think my "emotional shit" was trying to highlight that. Did you not notice? Or were you too busy trying to attack and discredit me?

Fat Rose you are my number 2 suspect. Statment of fact. Not emotional. Just for you.

You should also read that post again. I can't see where she stated that she doesn't care if the village loses. She said she won't blame herself for the loss. That's different. For the other part of your post: That's nice. Any meaning other than trying to get me to back off though?

Thank you And don't be scared to answer straight to me, even if you think I'm scum.

You are infuriating. Condecesnding. Patronizing. Self-righteous. My blood boils.

Yes i am. That might be the only fact you will ever post in this game.

I'm done for the day.

If any of you have a problem with it, and think "Oh that Rob he's openly and directly opposing the village by not posting! We have to policy lynch him!"

You can kiss my ass, kiss my ass, kiss my ass.

No. I just think you are bad mannered. But I think I told you that some games ago already and it seems nothing has changed since then.

[Young Will]

Oh my god 3 dead in 1 night including the jailer

But 1 wolf down is very good news


And ha I'm sure all those men that took advantage of her easiness thought that were only love bites

well I am glad she rejected my advances. I thought she must have been stuck-up, but this makes much more sense.

Kate, in my book, that wasn't really a last minute run, it was just a consolidation of votes from everybody who didn't want to vote for Muriel but wanted to make their vote count. Perhaps your perception is colored by the fact that you weren't around at the time.

I will wait for more opinions on Saul before taking that any further.

Young Will until he answers why he was watching Rob and me.

I also agree that Scarlet John's call for a policy lynch is sudden and seems off. It reads a bit like an attempt to redefine the case against him. (Though to be fair, the accusations did revolve mostly around activity.)

It was only a gut feeling, which is why I didn't explain it. I still don't completely trust you, tbh, although Rob has dropped off my radar. I don't know why, but I didn't find anything damning or worth voting for you in your posts.

to be honest, im somewhat in the same boat as Scarlett John. im having trouble getting tells, I'm afraid the anonymity has actually made it more difficult for me, which I did not expect. I'm also suffering from time constraints, but I will not ask for a modkill, tyvm. I'll contribute as I can. I'll try to reread (i just skimmed so far this day) and vote later.

[Lady Elizabeth]

Well, John has not defened himself so I feel the most move is to kill him using my ability. I have to move in the first 24-hours. And I feel that I have a good chance of getting killed. I also feel that there's a good chance of me getting night-killed now. I would post longer but I don't have time. I'm just checking in right before deadline.

[Muriel The Slow]

Well, John has not defened himself so I feel the most move is to kill him using my ability. I have to move in the first 24-hours. And I feel that I have a good chance of getting killed. I also feel that there's a good chance of me getting night-killed now. I would post longer but I don't have time. I'm just checking in right before deadline.

I wouldn't waste a vig kill on him.. I think there is a high chance that he will be lynched today if he doesn't get himself mod-killed.
You should just target whoever you think has the highest odds of being a wolf.

[Fat Rose]

Sir Percival & Rob

I think we know your feelings about Muriel now but since we have still 31 hours till lynch and I'm sure we have more wolves to hunt I want to ask you whom else you see as scummy and why?
I find providing scum an easy hiding place with an endless debate about Muriel unhelpful. Discussing the pro/cons of a modkill/policylynch of Scarlet ditto. So the above question goes to Muriel, Rose and Dr Saul too.

Not to mention that we have some more Lurkers I would like to hear from (Kate, Mary, Richard, Will).

Well, apart from Scarlet John, I can see Muriels argument on Sister Mary. I looked through her posts of the first day and am not really impressed:

1. Post:

I see the village gather a little earlier than my obligations to the abby could allow me. It is a beautiful morning, and may the Lord grace you with clear judgement and sharp wits.

Yes, Old Tom, I worry too about what the dusk will bring and I look forward to your insights.
Sir Percival, I feel the need to chatise you, that is noy the way a knight speaks to a lady, a friar, or a dog.

Catching up to the thread, I would not take and Courage's and Fat Rose's comments (Is it okay dear, to call you this way or would you prefer simply: Rose?) in a bad way, there are certainly worse ways to start a conversation. I did not quite grasp the argument against Muriel, but the pushers may be up to something.

Since the tiem frame for half-hearted votes may be past us, I will vote on a later post.

"I'm not getting what that about Muriel is all about, but those pushing might be right." That's not really making sense to me. If I don't understand what the argument against someone is about, how can I in the same sentence state that those pushing might be right. Do I not need to understand the argument first before I can make such a statement? That's for me more like: Can be, but also could not. What's perfectly fine if you couldn't catch up, but in that case why even mention it? Just post: I'm not sure on the case, have to reread and be done with it.

2. Post:

Sorry, hectic weekend on this end. Should be online he next hours to contribute in some semblance of a meaningful way.

Firstly, on Courage, though I really disliked his first post, for not being precisely in the spirit of the game, I read all his interventions as villagery. His irritation towards me is more than fair, so there's that. Again, sorry. Personal preferences aside. That being said, many of his contributions have been towards the reworking of his "persona" in his first post. Agree with sir Percy, the meta does not clear him.

I agree with Agnes' reasoning towards the number of scum, considering too the promises made by the narrator.

On Muriel versus the world. I fail to see the substance behind the arguments. Rob's initial attack has been justified by the perception of a "wall of text" consiting of two parragraphs. If the initial vote was some sort of joke vote, he wouldn't have pushed the case further. Though I agree with Sir Percy's assesment on Courage, his stance on Muriel eludes me.

My suspicions lean towards Rob the Filch. True, this is day one and in the week end, so not much to begin with, and the new acconts slow the meta arguments based on past performances. I find his attack suspicious, arguing absent reasoning. If he was just to gauge reactions, his persistance makes liitle sense, other, if, you know, scum.

@Courage, I know this does not make up for the absence of this sweet little nun, but, we are her now, ready to rumble!

Here now she states that she can't she the case on Muriel and votes for Rob. Also questioning his initial attack on Muriel about her "wall of text".

3. Post:

i didnt really say this but i agree with it anyway (i was talking about how a scum can accurately guess whether it is a two or three faction game based off the number of fellows they have).

Sorry, I mispoke. I was trying to add towards your original argument.

@The Narrator: Thanks for the tally.

@Sir Percy: Why do you suspect Muriel? The doctor's the Short Richard's votes came into play when it made sense to make pressure and Old Tom has just explained it.

I would leave Simple Anne to be modkilled if she doesn't show up. In the meantime, @Agnes & Edith: who do you suspect?

Questioning Sir Percy about his Muriel suspicion. Not adding anything about her own suspicions or general feelings about the game.

4. Post:

Doctor Saul, your studies have certainly made you wise. I am begginning to see the argument against Muriel. She certainly seems to have more information, but I don't necessarily label it as a scum tell just yet. On the matter of a possible connection between power roles and last names, she seems to have conflicting opinions.

I find these two statements difficult to reconcile, posted only 8 minutes apart:

Another wild goose meta chase I want to put a stop to is our profiles and our roles. They are not connected in any way, shape or form. The names are following a theme of names you could find in a small village of this era, with some humor thrown in the mix.

Lady Elizabeth Wrote:
I re-read my role-PM and the only other piece of information is that I was given a last name. Do you think this matters at all guys?

Yes, it most definitely matters. If it didn't, it would have been included in your profile name. There has to be a reason why it is hidden.

Care to elaborate, dear Muriel?

She misunderstood Muriel here or deliberately didn't grasp the difference between last names and profile names. I honestly have a hard time believing that you misunderstand that though, at least if you are not just cross-reading the posts of just one player. And before she mentioned that she does not see the case on Muriel. Did she reread AFTER stating that? This seems somehow backwards.

5. Post

Crossposted, but the question remains valid, imo.

Unimportant.

6. Post

Can you quote the part about power roles, because that doesn't talk about power roles at all. It's just speculation that if last names turn out to be a gameplay mechanic, there needs to be more information on how they work. Chances are, some of us already possess that information, else it wouldn't make much sense to have a gameplay mechanic that no-one knows how it works. You seem to think that I've at some point said that only power roles have a last name, but that is a blatant lie.

If last names are not connected to power roles, you implied they could be connected to role/alignment, right?

If so, consider the information the village posseses as of now: Courage, when LE, claimed to have a last name; Agnes, the Orphan, no last name; Short-Richard, last name. Courage, though not cleared by any means, I consider to lean village. By this logic, Agnes, with her cute orphan reasoned arguments, leaning village, would have to be scum, right? (No tell either way on Short-Richard). Still, it would make sense if the orphan girl didn't have a last name, at least from the setup.

What I mean and from what I can gather, last names must be a null tell, at least as of now.
We cannot base our lynch in such logic, or at least I considered it a sure way towards a mislynch.

Muriel, what connection, if any, you suspect lies in the existance/absence of last names.

@Rob: The narrator added the descrpition some hours ago.

I find that post insofar interesting in that Sister Mary claims that last names must be a null tell (fine with that) but at the same time she asks Muriel to explain which connection she suspects between existence/absence of last names and roles. Um, that's again one of those posts that make no sense for me. If you disregard last names as null tell, why make it a topic yet again?

7. Post

Will now that guy who I dumped my vote on showed up it's time to switch.

Now that SHE has shown up... first yourself, then Muriel too, I swear to you, girls don't bring the cooties to the playground.

Well, this nun is off to one of those parties that may or maynot involve some booze and more than loving words. I'll put my money where my mouth is, and vote Muriel the Slow for now. I am not convinced of her guilt just yet, but is too late to unvote and my suspicions of Rob have, somewhat, diminished.

When I return I'll revisit Agnes's case and any other that might pop.

And her last post before being off, and the one that ringed Muriels alarms and what I also find suspicious. Why vote for someone and state at the same time that you are not convinced of their guilt? And the explanation is that is to late to just not vote for anyone and that her suspicions of Rob have diminished. Diminished, not gone away. So basically she was equally suspicious of Rob and Muriel or what?

Honestly, that post is imo pretty bad and the others (which have content) not much better. I get the feel that most players have dismissed the case Muriel stated because of Muriel, not because the case itself is bad.

---------------------

Apart from the above suspicion on Sister Mary, I'm also suspicious of some of the really low-content posters. Your Will case would be an example. Kate, Richard I'd like to hear more. Know-Nothing Jon, Half-Nose-Harry I'm uncertain still.

I'm giving a village-lean to LE, Saul, Bert. Probably Percival and Agnes too.

Well, and then there is Rob... not sure what to think of him.