WW25 - Game Thread

[Rowain]

Tally

novice ( 2 ) - Brick, Lewwyn
MJW ( 2 ) - Jowy, pindicator
Rowain ( 2 ) - zakalwe, slowcheetah
slowcheetah ( 2 ) - Qg, novice
zakalwe ( 1 ) - Gazglum
Qgqqqqq ( 1 ) - Azza
Brick ( 1 ) - MJW
pindicator ( 1 ) - Rowain
Lewwyn ( 1 ) - MJW

No vote ( 3 ) - Jkaen, Mattimeo, uberfish

[Rowain]

corrected Tally

novice ( 2 ) - Brick, Lewwyn
MJW ( 2 ) - Jowy, pindicator
Rowain ( 2 ) - zakalwe, slowcheetah
slowcheetah ( 2 ) - Qg, novice
zakalwe ( 1 ) - Gazglum
Qgqqqqq ( 1 ) - Azza
Brick ( 1 ) - MJW
pindicator ( 1 ) - Rowain

No vote ( 4 ) - Jkaen, Mattimeo, uberfish, Ichabod

[Rowain]

Ok, looking again I interpret Brick's meaning as he can't talk if sanity is neutral (thumbs up, thumbs down), but can talk if it rises OR falls.

I think you are right.

I'll go with Rowain, for saying that MJW may drag us down.

Now that is a strange reasoning from you.

You realize that this is the same kind of first post reasoning that got your scumbuddy Brick into trouble last game?

And you are still happily voting with him?

zakalwe

[zakalwe]

What's strange about that reasoning, Rowain? You brought up MJW out of nowhere, here:

BTW Since the town-sanity was mentioned I wonder if we need to keep MJW alive (because he thrives on insanity) or kill him ASAP else he drags us down too fast

What's the purpose of that comment? Random chatter, perhaps -- or maybe you wanted to plant a little seed that MJW is a potential liability for town.

And you are still happily voting with him?

He is voting with me. Is it scummy that I also question people who are voting with me?

[Rowain]

What's the purpose of that comment? Random chatter

So true. And oh so different to your talk about BRicks PR

-- or maybe you wanted to plant a little seed that MJW is a potential liability for town.

I doubt that that needs any seeding at all. Just look at the Lewwyn-MJW talk. Oh and please realise that I also seeded that maybe MJW could be an asset.

He is voting with me. Is it scummy that I also question people who are voting with me?

Question them is ok but you are strongly seeding that he is scum like BRick was in the last game. To me it looks like you are lining up (mis)lynch-targets for the days to come.

[Jkaen]

Once again we start the game on a weekend unfortunately.

I believe the PR

MJW's theories are all kinds of crazy but that tells me nothing

Had a thought about my vote, but really don't know where to put it. Will come back i a bit and think again

[zakalwe]

Rowain - if you feel that I strongly implied that Slowcheetah is scum then that's on you. I just asked him a question.

In any case, I'm allowed to suspect more than one player, am I not? I often pursue several leads in parallel. Accusing me of lining up mislynches is very premature. I am quite capable of changing my mind, and it's not like I have to lynch everybody I've ever suspected.

It feels a little like you're counterattacking for tactical reasons.

[Mattimeo]

Serdoa would never try and tie sanity to the chat during the day. But he would tie it to what power roles, who dies ect.

Agreed.

Anyway I think Brick's roleclaim is BS. This is because he claims he cannot post because the town's sanity is too low. However, I think sanity is not based on the day but on other factors. This means that Brick can be locked out from ever posting words if the sanity stays too low. This would be a very unfun role and I don't think Serdoa likes unfun roles (remember him being possessed in ww2...)

And here I was under the opinion that 20 sanity was a nice high starting value, and likely to drop over time as we discover grisly murders, have to execute possibly innocent people ourselves, and who knows what else.

Ok, looking again I interpret Brick's meaning as he can't talk if sanity is neutral (thumbs up, thumbs down), but can talk if it rises OR falls.

...and that makes makes more sense than it only being able to drop.


Willing to take BRick's restriction at face value, but I'm not sure it says anything about alignment.
I follow MJW's reasoning as to why 40 could be a max, but don't necessarily agree that such a limit would be enforced by possibly game actions. If so, we're exceedingly unlikely to ever reach either extreme.

If this is correct Brick should thumb-up this post. Then we know that sanity is out of 40 or Brick is a wolf.

Really not fond of attempts to reduce things to such arbitrary binary options. MJW

You know I am rather bad at English

I have yet to see any evidence of this

[Rowain]

Rowain - if you feel that I strongly implied that Slowcheetah is scum then that's on you. I just asked him a question.

And I only hinted that MJW could be either an asset or an liability so what?

In any case, I'm allowed to suspect more than one player, am I not? I often pursue several leads in parallel. Accusing me of lining up mislynches is very premature. I am quite capable of changing my mind, and it's not like I have to lynch everybody I've ever suspected.

It feels a little like you're counterattacking for tactical reasons.

I'm allowed to suspect you am I not? I do suspect you sometimes for different reasons. I'm quite capable of changing my mind and it's not so that I ended up voting for the same at the end of the day I have voted for during the day.

It feels like you are attacking me for tactical reasons

I follow MJW's reasoning as to why 40 could be a max, but don't necessarily agree that such a limit would be enforced by possibly game actions. If so, we're exceedingly unlikely to ever reach either extreme.

Could you explain what you mean with that? Somehow I fail to grasp why we are unlikely to reach the extremes etc ?

BTW Matt is it true that you have something going on with novice's wife? I have heard she is it quite happy lately despite the fact that novice spends more time with zak then with her

[MJW (ya that one)]

Serdoa would never try and tie sanity to the chat during the day. But he would tie it to what power roles, who dies ect.

Agreed.

Anyway I think Brick's roleclaim is BS. This is because he claims he cannot post because the town's sanity is too low. However, I think sanity is not based on the day but on other factors. This means that Brick can be locked out from ever posting words if the sanity stays too low. This would be a very unfun role and I don't think Serdoa likes unfun roles (remember him being possessed in ww2...)

And here I was under the opinion that 20 sanity was a nice high starting value, and likely to drop over time as we discover grisly murders, have to execute possibly innocent people ourselves, and who knows what else.

Ok, looking again I interpret Brick's meaning as he can't talk if sanity is neutral (thumbs up, thumbs down), but can talk if it rises OR falls.

...and that makes makes more sense than it only being able to drop.


Willing to take BRick's restriction at face value, but I'm not sure it says anything about alignment.
I follow MJW's reasoning as to why 40 could be a max, but don't necessarily agree that such a limit would be enforced by possibly game actions. If so, we're exceedingly unlikely to ever reach either extreme.

If this is correct Brick should thumb-up this post. Then we know that sanity is out of 40 or Brick is a wolf.

Really not fond of attempts to reduce things to such arbitrary binary options. MJW

You know I am rather bad at English

I have yet to see any evidence of this

1. Serdoa says he is bad at English because he is not a native speaker.
2. If brick says that 20 is in the middle (indirectly). I cannot see how zero and 40 are not the extremes. Unless Brick lied for some reason and I think the only reason to lie would be a fake wolf role-claim. It would be easy to enforce the extreme's by just adding a cap to sainty. It could be possible that there is no middle and the sainty just goes up and down.
3. It would be very easy to rise sainty. For example we kill cthulhu, a source of insanity, or something stupid.

Anyway I'm going to sleep now.