Mini Theme 2162: Wherewolf [Game over | Village win]

WeyounsLastClone · Post Post #50 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 9:44 am

Sorry, had a busy weekend. At first reading the rules and the roles it felt to me claiming would be quite beneficial (especially finding out who would be corrupt but not werewolf). But with not all roles in the game, and as far as I understood with no reveal upon death, it might be better to wait at first to get some more nights of information. Also it seems like the wolfs cannot really discuss, so that should help us as well.

Especially with the jester, I feel we need to be careful.

And although I know we don't necessarily have to speak the truth when we lists our votes here, wouldn't it just be best to put forward who we find most suspicious and aim to vote for? And keep a tally? Might trigger some discussions and analysis.

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #51 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 10:41 am

A50
the priest claims
the clairvoyant targets the priest
since we have an inkeeper we will know via innkeepers if the claim priest corrupt

any questions

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #52 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 10:48 am

this of course assumes we have a priest which I am doubting atm

Almost50 · Post Post #53 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 10:54 am

Everybody has already posted (except for Spicer). We have a claimed Sinner and no Seducer. I don't believe anyone else should claim, but if someone wants to argue otherwise they're welcome to provide their reasoning.

As for votes; I am neither for nor against announcing it on this stage, but I think it is more important to announce them in the next stage (the ballot), as we could catch some discrepancies.

P-edit: NOW I get it. Thanks.

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #54 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 11:15 am

IMHO

claim
corrupt/no corrupt

No claim
roles
mystic/non mystic

thinking about it.... we should maybe decide who the clairvoyaant should investiagate....This way we are able check if that player is corrupt via Innkeeper. If we have a bard then even beter but I think we can win with an inn keeper and clairvoyant, What do you think Alamost?

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #55 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 11:18 am

the reason to claim corupt/non corrupt today is it keeps wolves from fake claiming later on. It also gives a way to figure out how to check their claim if there is no priest. What do you think A50

Almost50 · Post Post #56 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 11:24 am

Generally speaking I do not fancy dictating actions on TPRs. I'd let them decide on their own. That said, if the majority is in favour of this I don't have the authority to veto it.

Also, the Clairvoyant probably checked the claimed Sinner by the looks of it. No one else claimed Corrupt, and I think the Clairvoyant would have claimed a guilty if they didn't check brighteningskies is specific. Do you agree??

Almost50 · Post Post #57 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 11:26 am

I am NC, btw.

Tayl0r Swift · Post Post #58 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:23 pm

not corrupt

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #59 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 1:30 pm

A50
Normally I agree with you but given that only the person who died will be revealed and not the role or alignment ( if I understand right) this seems like our best option.
I am open to any better ideas though.

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #60 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 1:36 pm

I not going to make ani assumption, it possible the clairvoyant might be waiting to catch both ww before claiming,,,,atleast thats what I hope they are doing

I like to hear from others about my plan, ideas and who they think might be scum

Galron · Post Post #61 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 2:12 pm

I"m nad idiot. I missed post 5. I was looking for purple mod color and was drawn to post 6, thus missing 5. Have to reread in that context now.

Galron · Post Post #62 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 2:13 pm

I'm non corrupt.

brighteningskies · Post Post #63 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 2:51 pm

In post 51, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:A50
the priest claims
the clairvoyant targets the priest
since we have an inkeeper we will know via innkeepers if the claim priest corrupt

any questions

yeaah but the priest claimer could be defector even if they're NC
I mean I'm for the priest claiming but I'd understand if they didn't because its not really definitive info

brighteningskies · Post Post #64 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 2:52 pm

In post 56, Almost50 wrote:Generally speaking I do not fancy dictating actions on TPRs. I'd let them decide on their own. That said, if the majority is in favour of this I don't have the authority to veto it.

Also, the Clairvoyant probably checked the claimed Sinner by the looks of it. No one else claimed Corrupt, and I think the Clairvoyant would have claimed a guilty if they didn't check brighteningskies is specific. Do you agree??

That makes sense. Unless they're waiting until they find another corrupt before claiming maybe

Tayl0r Swift · Post Post #65 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 3:37 pm

i mean... no one should be claiming guilties yet.

brighteningskies · Post Post #66 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 3:53 pm

In post 65, Tayl0r Swift wrote:i mean... no one should be claiming guilties yet.

what do you mean? I mean not claiming guilties yet is probably wise yeah?

Tayl0r Swift · Post Post #67 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:55 pm

In post 66, brighteningskies wrote:
In post 65, Tayl0r Swift wrote:i mean... no one should be claiming guilties yet.
what do you mean? I mean not claiming guilties yet is probably wise yeah?

you sounded like you were pondering. i was coming down firmyl on the side of dont claim until you have all the guilties.

Elements · Post Post #68 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 10:25 pm

In post 54, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:IMHO

claim
corrupt/no corrupt

I don't think this helps at all, but I don't think it doesn't help. Especially given we already have a sinner claim.
It's just a moot point rlly.
NC

thinking about it.... we should maybe decide who the clairvoyaant should investiagate....This way we are able check if that player is corrupt via Innkeeper. If we have a bard then even beter but I think we can win with an inn keeper and clairvoyant, What do you think Alamost?

I had thought about this, but then surely the wws just kill whoever the clairvoyant targets?
Unless there's a witch who can stop the kills I don't see how that's particularly helpful

WeyounsLastClone · Post Post #69 (ISO) » Sun Sep 06, 2020 10:56 pm

In post 32, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:@Skies -I never claimed the clairvoyant should investigate you... I am not sure how you got that.
Reread the Roles, If there is a Priest in the game they need to claim today. There is no reason for them not to claim today imho

In post 29, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:Waiting for Spicer and WLC to post
Priest should not claim until the sinner and or (seducer if claimed) are checked. The Inn keeper and (Bard if they exsist ) prob should claim either.

I am claiming NC Town aligned... if the cop invesigate me I should come up as NC ,if they get anything else I need to be executed

I understood it the same as Skies with your post 29 that you wanted the sinner to be checked. Or did you just mean check-in in the thread?

Tayl0r Swift · Post Post #70 (ISO) » Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:13 am

In post 68, Elements wrote:
In post 54, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:IMHO

claim
corrupt/no corrupt
I don't think this helps at all, but I don't think it doesn't help. Especially given we already have a sinner claim.
It's just a moot point rlly.
NC

thinking about it.... we should maybe decide who the clairvoyaant should investiagate....This way we are able check if that player is corrupt via Innkeeper. If we have a bard then even beter but I think we can win with an inn keeper and clairvoyant, What do you think Alamost?
I had thought about this, but then surely the wws just kill whoever the clairvoyant targets?
Unless there's a witch who can stop the kills I don't see how that's particularly helpful

unless the clairvoyant is targeting scum right? that seems win-win tho. either we force scum to kill who we want, or we get a guilty anyway.

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #71 (ISO) » Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:28 am

In post 70, Tayl0r Swift wrote:
In post 68, Elements wrote:
In post 54, TheFuzzylogic99 wrote:IMHO

claim
corrupt/no corrupt
I don't think this helps at all, but I don't think it doesn't help. Especially given we already have a sinner claim.
It's just a moot point rlly.
NC

thinking about it.... we should maybe decide who the clairvoyaant should investiagate....This way we are able check if that player is corrupt via Innkeeper. If we have a bard then even beter but I think we can win with an inn keeper and clairvoyant, What do you think Alamost?
I had thought about this, but then surely the wws just kill whoever the clairvoyant targets?
Unless there's a witch who can stop the kills I don't see how that's particularly helpful
unless the clairvoyant is targeting scum right? that seems win-win tho. either we force scum to kill who we want, or we get a guilty anyway.

Exactly-

This is a good post

Elements · Post Post #72 (ISO) » Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:20 am

hmm, yes
in that case i'd like wmc to be copped atm

TheFuzzylogic99 · Post Post #73 (ISO) » Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:27 am

I doubt the ww will target the investigation target. I would think they would likely role hunt. This is why we should not claim roles or any power.
Unless anyone claim corrupt , we need to asume that the everyone besides the Skies are non corrupt.

brighteningskies · Post Post #74 (ISO) » Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:39 am

In post 72, Elements wrote:hmm, yes
in that case i'd like wmc to be copped atm

You mean you want WeyounsLastClone to be checked?
I'm inclined to suggest you be checked because you were first to suggest someone else to be checked.

It would help the clairvoyant if we agreed on someone though so please everyone else lemme know what you think.

And yeah I do think suggesting someone to be checked is a very good idea as then we can know who the news will be about.