WW #41. New Horizons.

[BRickAstley]

My reading of the 'pairs' was that each individual has paired abilities, and when we use one of ours, another of ours vanishes. Not that someone else's copy of the same power vanishes. But it's certainly pretty ambiguous.

I can confirm with Serdoa that I asked Jabba this via PM before the game and he confirmed that the above is accurate.

[Goreripper]

I have been and will continue to be busy this cycle. I have a moment how ever.

In the meantime, who would you question, Goreripper?

Not a bad pivot. You are very natural here and have been reading a lot of games it is clear. I would also like to see substantive backing behind the Lewwyn finger of you but for now you are reading neutral.

Preview edit. I see you answered Lewwyn and fair enough but it seems like a newbie with lots of fresh reading to me.

Yes, Serdoa, I know that you play very aggressively, and particularly when you're scum.

I think that statement was shown to be wrong more than a year ago zak. I always play aggressively.

This did feel like lazy zakalwe tarring with the passive aggressive inceptions. Which can be scum zakalwe but I remember he is a poor drafted guy here too. So he rides for now.

As for Serdoa and Zak, if one of them was scum I would think it more likely to be Zak. I think it a little too flippant to not state his alignment OR place a vote on his first post. Serdoa could be going tunnel-scum, but I don't think there's a lot of evidence for it yet.

So there is that. Gazglum does seem to be on the town side a bit but hard to say day one. But coming back around.

Brick and Goreripper have offered almost nothing. I am wariest of them, alongside Zak and Rowain. Rowain said,

And if I count as villager I can as well play like one. That way I have at least the fun of searching for scum

But he hasn't done anything yet except take questions on his role. It is only half way through Day 1, but he feels to me a bit more like someone hiding behind his third-party claim, rather than mrioving on from it to play a village-aligned game.

I also find Rowain dangerous. I believe his claim to be third party but that is still dangerous to us. Also he was the fore most attacker of poor me when I was the neutral guy in the scum game. So I kind of want to kill him hard. But he was scum that game like every one else. So no thing for now but Rowain needs to start hunting. Or keep following my every vote. That works too.

I am less impressed with Novice than you seem to be Gazglum his signal to noise ratio is shall we say earthy. But worse is very uncharacteristic lurking AdrienIer

[Bacchus]

@Serdoa: I think my statement was pretty clear — I do not like how the exchange looks, no more, no less. But to reciprocate and make my thinking fully transparent:

1. I read the exchange and saw two problems: questionable internal consistency in declaring fear of duress and then voting for Zak, and an early alignment call which to me was spurious.

2. The above made you a priority target for questioning, but did not nearly place you as scum. I asked to explain, detailing what rankles with me, and parts of your explanation addressed some of my worries, reducing the lean even further.

3. I did not insinuate you are scum because I never felt that, all I felt was that there are specific problems in your statements, which I clearly outlined.

4. I have a scum lean on you still, and let no-one coming back to these posts think that I am hiding it.

5. On the balance of our exchange, getting something out of the non-contributing Goreripper feels more important than continuing our back and forth.

Lewwyn, do you think that proceeding in the way outlined above is anti-town? You are right, of course, I did put Serdoa and Zak on the spot and did then move off. Perhaps I should have made the reason for doing so clearer. Or would you say this is wrong entirely?

Cross-posted with Goreripper, and I am off for a while.

[Bacchus]

And Unvote, until I come back.

[novice]

I'm interested to see if other people have a different perspective on it.

I was looking forward to seeing the Bacchus - Zakalwe interaction after Bacchus signed up stating

I'll sign-up. I have pretty minimal WW experience, but it all seems good fun. Especially as zakalwe isn't playing — I find his post style inherently suspicious (and not helped by the fact that most games I've read with him he did turn out to be red).

So I was a bit surprised to see him effortlessly play the neutral deconstructionist role in the Zakalwe-Serdoa dispute. I don't know if you have a comment on that, Bacchus? Why didn't you, like Serdoa, find Zakalwe's wormy answers inherently scummy?

[AdrienIer]

But worse is very uncharacteristic lurking AdrienIer

Came back at 5AM last night, don't count on any insight from me today. I won't have an opinion on anything until tomorrow. Right now I want to stay on BRick but he said he'd be away most of the day so it would be pretty useless. I have kind-of good vibes on most people except for Serdoa and Zak (won't attempt to unravel it while being so sleepy) and novice.

[Jabbz]

After reading your collective interpretations of the Polygraph ability, I want to drop a little bit of clarification/thought process before we get closer to nightfall. The idea behind the duress clause is twofold. One is to break the overwhelmingly OP ability to force a mass claim of innocence and then get a free unblock-able cop scan off of it. Thus any statements about being scum or being town are inherently going to come back as undetermined, for both town and scum, so will give no information. Second is to avoid creative workarounds for the above clause. IE having someone/everyone say I don't have access to scumchat.

In addition, I want to point out, as I already did in PM to those individual(s) that have access to the ability, the polygraph is on a specific sentence/statement. I pointed it out to those individual(s) in advance so that if it was used at night, and I failed to request clarification fast enough, their ability was not wasted. Restrictions placed in that PM regarding referencing or quoting still apply. I know this is a new ability, and I've tweaked it, so I'm sorry for the confusion, but I felt it necessary to tweak it to avoid it being broken,and to clarify to avoid further game breaking confusion.



Tally as of post 86:

2 votes: novice (Rowain, AdrienIer)
2 votes: Unvote (zakalwe, Bacchus)
1 votes: BRick (novice)
1 votes: Bacchus (Lewwyn)
1 votes: Goreripper (BRickAstley)
1 votes: zakalwe (Serdoa)
1 votes: Rowain (Gazglum)
1 votes: AdrienIer (Goreripper)

Voting history:

Novice

BRick

Bacchus

Goreripper

novice

Lewwyn

zakalwe

Serdoa

BRick

Zakalwe

Unvote

Goreripper

Rowain

Bacchus

AdrienIer

Goreripper

Unvote

novice

~27h Remaining

[novice]

Each townie has 4 single use abilities.

Also Lewwyn is likely town. He stated that all villagers have 4 abilities. That's true for me as well and as no outcry happened probably for all villagers.

I agree, I noticed this immediately. I was hoping we could milk it for more town tells but then you pointed it out. Anyway, some town points to Serdoa too I think, for pointing this out, as he also takes some risk as scum by confirming that all townies have 4 abilities.

I will also claim a few town points for myself based on my post in response to Lewwyn's:

I agree with everything Lewwyn said.
Frankly this game is probably breakable in severeal different ways.

This was as clearly as I dared breadcrumb that I had noticed Lewwyn's "4 abilities" claim without ruining any fishing chances.

For the record I did agree with everything Lewwyn said in that post.

[novice]

One other player posted between Lewwyn's "4 abilities per townie" post and Serdoa pointing it out - Bacchus:

On the roles discussion: this set-up has a very "One Night" feel about it, I think a lot will come out from power use and unravelling the trail, with the added benefit that we have several nights and can plan ahead. We don't really know the role pool, and I don't think Lewwyn's idea about each ability existing in two copies is correct. I would think that the stronger ones are unique, whilst the weaker ones are more widespread.

He's read what Lewwyn wrote about abilities, but he's not acknowledging the town tell in Lewwyn's post. If anything he seems to imply that townies have a different number of abilities.

I've had a look at WW33 and WW26, town Serdoa didn't throw out alignment calls D1, nor demanded others do so, even when he had a strong read, as with Azza in 26.

Is it just me, or is this a bit tryhard? This seems more like an effort to demonstrate effort than genuine hunting for evidence, as the information scarcely seems relevant.

Anyway, my overall impression of Bacchus is positive, I'm just pointing out the negatives that I see.

I'm happy with my vote on BRick the way things currently stand. He hasn't had time to contribute and has failed to pick up any town tells so far. And Adrien, OMGUS for wanting to stay on BRick, but instead putting a sleepy vote on the only other player voting for BRick.

[novice]

As for the polygraph, there are just so many issues... I suspect Jabbz is just going to wing it.

I mean, how is he going to respond if the statement to be analyzed is

So I don't care much which side wins but as I do count as villager for scum/village VC I would prefer a town-win nonetheless.

Does he know how Rowain feels?

And how about this one:

Each townie has 4 single use abilities.

Is this a "do you have access to a quicktopic" type question? Isn't confirming or denying that it is such a question spoiler info in itself?