Turf War - GAME ENDED

[Gnrlshrimp]

My argument is that your reasoning boils down to "He said townie ergo he's a wolf".

That's it.

I never said he isn't a wolf. I said your argument is incredibly flimsy and stinks more of an attempt to redirect suspicion onto someone else without any decent evidence to back it up.

Someone was bound to find your bold claim suspicious and target you for it. Apparently you were looking for someone to do just that so you could launch a lynch crusade against them, and it's backfired.

And now you're following up with another bold claim that you're the Accountant. One way or another, you've put a huge target on your head now.

And considering your attitude and your attempts to chase after someone without any decent reason to do so, I don't trust you to make the right call with your votes even if you are the Accountant, which I highly doubt.

[Meta]

I reckon the doctor is being a bit full of himself, but I do see the rationale.

Rei did actually call him a townie and appeared to be speaking from the perspective of a non-townie after voting for him.

I guess I would prefer a little rudeness to inaction, as I do enjoy 'playing' the game, and wolves could be sneaking quietly along. I don't feel particularly well about lynching the player pointing the most fingers before attempting to apply at least a little pressure on said recipients of the pointing. Especially after one did crack a little bit.

My reservation at the moment is that if Whooves does lynch town it might be tricky to unveil who the unsuspecting wolves were among the voters as he/she has become an 'easy' target.

[DoctorWhooves]

My argument is that your reasoning boils down to "He said townie ergo he's a wolf".

That's it.

I never said he isn't a wolf. I said your argument is incredibly flimsy and stinks more of an attempt to redirect suspicion onto someone else without any decent evidence to back it up.

Someone was bound to find your bold claim suspicious and target you for it. Apparently you were looking for someone to do just that so you could launch a lynch crusade against them, and it's backfired.

And now you're following up with another bold claim that you're the Accountant. One way or another, you've put a huge target on your head now.

And considering your attitude and your attempts to chase after someone without any decent reason to do so, I don't trust you to make the right call with your votes even if you are the Accountant, which I highly doubt.

Ok so let me explain to you my basic mindset when it comes to hunting wolves day one. Maybe that'll help.

On day one a wolf will attempt to do one of three things: 1) They will idle out and hope to hide among the chaos where nobody has any info. Maybe go so far as to lie about their whereabouts later (I had class all day, I've been sick, etc..), 2) They will jump on an "easy lynch." These lynches are identified by gaining traction quickly based on pretty much nothing but the banter of day one. Kind of like mine right now actually. That's what drew my attention to him actually. Or of course, 3) They will tunnel someone relentlessly. Usually someone nobody else cares about. This allows them to seem active without actually contributing anything.

These are all player sensitive. For instance, when I'm a wolf I tend to idle a lot of day ones.

Now when I'm looking for a wolf on day 1, I have to not only recognize the behavior, but also determine whether or not said behavior is significant. In this case, Red (I'm just gonna call him Red for now since it's easier to type than his name over and over) seemed to be committing a type 2 wolf error. So I baited him. That's how I like to wolf hunt: Bait. I make myself vulnerable and see who sticks. Of course, this only works out when I'm confident I can either 1) Argue my way out of any other attention I might draw, or 2) Confirm myself as town. I was pretty sure of #2 here today.

Red took the bait by failing to come up with a decent alternative to my thinking. He also committed a perspective slip and then left. I'd love for him to get back to me so we could talk more, because silence is the most incriminating thing a wolf can do on day one. And I'd love for him to not be a wolf. I really would. Because that means I've found a townie, which is even more valuable long-term to everyone.

Bait and release is my game, really. And I'm not releasing without good reason.

As for my accountant claim, it's totally legit and totally confirmable. If town wants to lynch me because it doesn't have either the patience to test my claim or the ability to find wolves on day one, that's hardly my fault.

[Disc Lorde]

DoctorWhoovesEither you're a wolf, or you're more trouble than you're worth as a streetman.

How? Even if he thinks he knows more than he does and is going after someone who probably isn't a wolf, he's creating discussion, which helps village. Without him I might not have noticed The Fiery Tower. Also, if he's a streetman, lynching him is a wasted lynch that could go toward wolves.

Maybe you should learn the meta around here (or for that matter the rules, I mean Sudden Death, really?) before declaring yourself to have TEH SKILLZ.Doctor Whooves.

THIS.

I'm confirmable. I'm The Accountant. Aka Emperor, Double-Voter, whatever you want to call it. I can confirm it by getting us to 2 votes away from a majority lynch and hammering.

Awesome. It looks like it's going to be a close vote, so you break the tie.

I think I'll change my vote to DoctorWhooves. His behaviour is hostile and aggressive, like that of a wolf.

No. Behavior of most wolves is to not draw much attention to yourself and not create discussion which would help town.

@DoctorWhooves: Please read the rules already!



Everyone, please vote for The Fiery Tower. The argument for him being wolf is at least as good, IMO, as for anyone else.

[DoctorWhooves]

If it comes to me living to see another day or not then I will of course be willing to go with my 2nd-best suspicion of Fiery.

When does the day end in particular? I have class tonight and if it's during that timeframe i'll have to alter my vote before then.

[Recaiden]

3) They will tunnel someone relentlessly. Usually someone nobody else cares about. This allows them to seem active without actually contributing anything.

(I shouldn't need any other defense. But...the way I phrased my post, it was meant to convey that Whooves is no more valuable than any other townie (this was before he claimed to be the Accountant, which would make him worth two votes, obviously. It also stated that he was just as valuable to the wolves if he can go off on bizarre tangents and become convinced of my becoming a wolf because I thought he 'was suspicious'.)
((And can we please read Lord Herman's post again until the humor becomes obvious to you all?))

[Disc Lorde]

The day ends 48 hours from when Wolfy posted, like he said, so in almost exactly 22 hours

Doctor, no one but you thinks that Recaiden is a wolf, so lay off him and help put a wagon on Fiery please.

[DoctorWhooves]

(I shouldn't need any other defense. But...the way I phrased my post, it was meant to convey that Whooves is no more valuable than any other townie (this was before he claimed to be the Accountant, which would make him worth two votes, obviously. It also stated that he was just as valuable to the wolves if he can go off on bizarre tangents and become convinced of my becoming a wolf because I thought he 'was suspicious'.)

Believe me, I made that post with no small sense of irony. But like I said, it's player sensitive. Some players are great at playing the same when wolves and when town. I've never been one of them. The only thing that's been capable of carrying me through games where I've been a wolf is my ability to argue out of almost any allegation.

But the honest is truth about me is this: As town I will always be 100% convinced that someone is a wolf until I'm convinced that they're not. You just can't have room for doubt in this game, you'll get nothing done.

Because I don't have doubt that you're a wolf, I'll pressure you until you either commit something more damning in everyone else's eyes or demonstrate innocence. And if that's the case you'll thank me for it later.

And if it's not you'll curse me by game's end.

[DoctorWhooves]

The day ends 48 hours from when Wolfy posted, like he said, so in almost exactly 22 hours

Doctor, no one but you thinks that Recaiden is a wolf, so lay off him and help put a wagon on Fiery please.

Why not do both?

Neither Red or Fiery have done much of anything beyond their brief interactions with me so I'd love to get more out of them before the day is through.

[DoctorWhooves]

Here's a fun exercise I love to do when I've amassed a decent "following":

People currently voting for me, what do you do tomorrow after I flip town?

Where do your suspicions turn then?

[Bunny of Faith]

Here's a fun exercise I love to do when I've amassed a decent "following":

People currently voting for me, what do you do tomorrow after I flip town?

Where do your suspicions turn then?

Murska, as I'm told he's pretty consistently evil.

As an update to the Count's post, the following people haven't voted today as far as I can tell:

C'nor, Penguinator, Yumori123, EmeraldRose, Diva De, bladescape, BitterMelonFarm, Gray Mage, DarkLightDragon.

[EmeraldRose]

((Apologies if you misinterpreted my point, but it was for Duck, continuing the pre-game silliness. ))

[Gnrlshrimp]

And now the good Doctor resorts to reasoning instead of just calling people stupid. Treat other people with a little respect and explain yourself properly and you'll get more respect, eh?

And honestly that does seem like pretty solid reasoning.

But there's problems here.

1. I looked over things and Recaiden hadn't actually done anything before you posted. So how could he have committed any sort of error without doing anything before you posted?

This leads to the conclusion that your baiting wasn't any more likely to snare a wolf than a townie because your supposed target hadn't done anything to warrant suspicion beforehand.

2. Your argument only works if I make the initial assumption that you are, indeed, not a wolf. Otherwise everything you've said about your usual behaviour as a wolf is a deliberate attempt to mislead me.

3. Your claim that you're the accountant doesn't hold much water. Yes it's easily testable, but I can see reasons for a wolf to do that early on. It may prompt a claim from the real accountant, if you're lying, giving the wolves an obvious target. Because your baiting argument doesn't hold water, it could arguably be bait to get the streetmen barking up the wrong tree early on, trying to redirect attention onto, say, someone who points at you because you're acting suspiciously. And if nothing else, if everyone wastes time protecting you today and tonight and you only get lynched tomorrow, it's already bought the rest of the wolves time to start inflicting some damage.

4. As Recaiden pointed out, your actions match up with one of the supposed actions a wolf is likely to take.

[Disc Lorde]

1. I looked over things and Recaiden hadn't actually done anything before you posted. So how could he have committed any sort of error without doing anything before you posted?

Look again. Yes he did, just a few posts before.

[Count Dingdong]

It seems you're from a different forum, where assumptions are different. From experience on this forum, first day has much randomness, which turns into bandwagons, and people start claiming things and are either believed or not. Much can be said to how people react to votes against them, and part of it is also knowing players' play styles. I don't know your play style, so I can't read much into it. That said, you seem to have exploded (comparatively) from few (again, comparatively) posts against you. Two points, and you're already claiming you're important, and further points lead not to you looking around for other suspicious people but instead to you picking a point against you and narrowing in on it as suspicious.

Are you town? Probably. You've got at least a 75% chance of being town just from numbers alone. But are you pro-town? Not overwhelmingly at this point. Essentially, what you've done today is get votes, soft-claim, get more votes, and then put blinders on and target a single person who voted you, with the reasoning that it's gotten you wolves before. Has that person done something aside from voting for you (as only you know you're town) that makes them suspicious? If so, tell me. It doesn't matter whether he believes you're town or not and is pointing at you: a bad and loud town member can be more destructive than wolves, as they bring themselves into the spotlight and stay alive with wrong decisions. Add onto that the idea that you have a double vote, and you could deal a lot of damage with wrong decisions.

That said, he's claiming a relatively harmless role. If he's the accountant (aww, I wish it were me ), then he's at least not worth lynching. If he's lying, the real accountant can come out and counter-claim and then probably be killed, but we get a wolf out of it and lose a relatively small power role. A one-to-one trade isn't bad. Unless of course he's a townie lying about his role which would be a horrible decision in any case (see Sabeki in Wind Waker and the chaos that caused (also Supagoof(?) in Batman, if I'm remembering correctly)). I say we pick someone else for now and get some more discussion out of Day 1 before lynching someone.

To answer some of your questions: there is no sudden-death, in part because not everyone can be expected to be on all the time (you noted less activity). Instead, during a tie, the standard is that the person who most recently had more votes than the other(s) gets lynched. An alternative is to have neither lynched, or to have a judge role who decides, but those alternatives are not in play here. There is also no hammer vote. If someone reaches 50% of the votes, the day does not end early, in part because of the autolynch mechanic. It also gives time for people to explain themselves when we get down to a small number of players. Thus, it would be a bit more difficult to prove your role: there would have to be a tie, where your vote is on the side of the player who normally wouldn't be lynched but ends up lynched anyway. The simple way to check is simply wait for a counter-claim, and if none pops up, consider you are who you say you are. That said, just because you are the Accountant, a power role (I have yet to see a reason why I shouldn't believe that), there is no reason that anyone should follow your points blindly without reason. A follow-the-seer (also follow-the-network/follow-the-mason/follow-the-PR) game is boring and can actually result in village loss due to lack of information many days and the town leader being constantly wrong. Sheep town is a weak town.

...but I digress. Anyway, until you're counter-claimed, I agree you shouldn't be lynched. That said, I don't agree with your reasoning that makes you insistent Recaiden is a wolf and thus won't vote with you. Let's go somewhere else (there's already pressure on Fleeing Coward and The Fiery Tower, if I remember correctly) and wait for a counter-claim or more information on a likely wolf to come up. Do I think someone on your wagon is a wolf? Most likely. Do I want to try and figure out who it is right now? No. I don't think everyone on your wagon is a wolf, though I don't object to pressuring some right now.

That's my rant/spiel for the day. I may do more posts later, but I probably shouldn't have even taken the time to write this up, considering I'm at work...

...and I've been ninja'd by a grand total of 16 posts, much of which illustrating just what I said here. But I've written this up anyway, so I'm posting it.

[Bunny of Faith]

((Apologies if you misinterpreted my point, but it was for Duck, continuing the pre-game silliness. ))

((I went from the Count's original list and just knocked off anyone who had voted afterwards, so I completely missed your Goose vote. The edit was me not noticing the Doctor had voted right after Count's post!))

[Legato Endless]

I don't actually like the FC bandwagon particularly, but being the accountant is pretty easy to test. I'd prefer we get another person like FT up in the votes. I'll check back in before day ends, but for now Fleeting Coward.

There's something rather off about this. The Fleeing Coward bandwagon currently has…absolutely nothing to recommend to it. Thus far his behavior has consisted of voting for me for bandwagoning. That's it. It's not exactly a neon sign as suspicious behavior goes. Meta sort of agrees with this…but still votes for him anyway? Why not just try starting a new chain? Especially since we've got 3 or 4 candidates being bandied about?

[DoctorWhooves]

And now the good Doctor resorts to reasoning instead of just calling people stupid. Treat other people with a little respect and explain yourself properly and you'll get more respect, eh?

And honestly that does seem like pretty solid reasoning.

But there's problems here.

1. I looked over things and Recaiden hadn't actually done anything before you posted. So how could he have committed any sort of error without doing anything before you posted?

Think of my initial post like chum. You'll notice I had, Ibelieve, four votes at the time I declared Reccy my wolf for the day. The first two were fine, and didn't draw my suspicion at all. His vote was the thing that caught my eye. He appeared to be following a string of votes which had reasons, albeit poor, random fun ones, but still reasons. He didn't produce a reason until I addressed that fact, and said reason was not good enough in my estimations to deter my suspicions.

This leads to the conclusion that your baiting wasn't any more likely to snare a wolf than a townie because your supposed target hadn't done anything to warrant suspicion beforehand.

He wasn't my target initially. Nobody was. The game was open and I was willing to entertain any and all suspicions. I was actually more likely to snag a townie than a wolf based on game distribution, but like I said, several of the votes drew no suspicion from me.

2. Your argument only works if I make the initial assumption that you are, indeed, not a wolf. Otherwise everything you've said about your usual behaviour as a wolf is a deliberate attempt to mislead me.

That is the quandary with which we must inexorably struggle, yes. However, I do have the added benefit that I can prove my role at any time we as a collective decide is necessary.

3. Your claim that you're the accountant doesn't hold much water. Yes it's easily testable, but I can see reasons for a wolf to do that early on. It may prompt a claim from the real accountant, if you're lying, giving the wolves an obvious target.

Here's the issue with that: A one-to-one trade will never benefit the wolves. There numbers are too few, and the accountant is only as good as the player who rolled it. It can be just as detrimental in the wrong hands. The day I try to trade as a wolf for a double-voter is the day I retire from games like this altogether.

Because your baiting argument doesn't hold water, it could arguably be bait to get the streetmen barking up the wrong tree early on, trying to redirect attention onto, say, someone who points at you because you're acting suspiciously. And if nothing else, if everyone wastes time protecting you today and tonight and you only get lynched tomorrow, it's already bought the rest of the wolves time to start inflicting some damage.

Let me say this: Please don't waste time protecting me tonight, anyone. It's absolutely a waste of time. If the wolves want to take me out they will do so, and you should let them. I do little more than buy us half-a-day as far as majorities go. My role is just not valuable enough to devote resources to in any fashion. Double-voter is the kind of role you use to balance a set-up where you need half of a power role to make it fair. It's powerful in smaller set-ups. In a game this big I'm basically a vanilla.

4. As Recaiden pointed out, your actions match up with one of the supposed actions a wolf is likely to take.

True. Being that I'm the one who said so, it's not like i'm unaware of this fact. The question becomes if this is how I play town or if this is how I play scum. And you've gotta reason that out for yourself, no way I can do that part for you.

[Count Dingdong]

((@EmeraldRose: I saw the post for Goose, realized it may be a vote for Duck, but wasn't sure whether narrators would count it as a legitimate vote, due to no player being named "Goose" or any variant thereof. It might be good of you to clarify with the narrators whether they count that as a vote or not.

I'll probably do an update of my vote tally some time before the 12-hours-left mark.))

[52.5 Lemons]

Think about the following things:

1) Posts made in haste have perspective slips. I believe he has made one by calling me a townie. Perspective slips are the #1 way to catch wolves.

2) Again, there are 43 people in this game and half of them have not posted. Why would I draw this much attention to myself on day one if I were a wolf? Why not just not post? So easy since it doesn't look like anybody holds your feet to the fire to be productive on day one around here.


Seriously, think for two seconds here. Don't be lazy.

(I've bolded a portion for emphasis)

I specifically remember you saying that as a wolf, you don't do the obvious things. If playing silent day one with relatively low activity to you is considered a normal thing for wolves to do, then by your given play style wouldn't you be doing anything but? Some of your statements within all of these posts seem contradictory.

Also, you mentioned that Fiery Tower was another of your big suspicions. I'd like to know why. He has made one post that, while the reasoning seems off, could just be sarcastic or badly worded. Hardly a post that I would say should make one as confident as you seem to be.

[Abhorsen]

Doctor Whooves pinged me with his not-quite-roleclaim earlier as well, since it seemed so contrary to the prevailing style of play I've seen around here. I held off on voting for him, though, since it looked to me like he was a fellow newbie. However, he's really been rubbing me the wrong way as all this has been going on, so I have a proposal: By my count, Doctor Whooves has 7 votes against, and Fleeing Coward has 5 - now 6, as soon as I cross out my previous point.

I ask that the Doctor also point at Fleeing Coward, and that everyone who has not yet pointed today to either refrain from voting, or alternate votes between Doctor and Fleeing. This will allow us to test the Doctor's claim, as he desires. If he is not the Accountant, then he will die; if he is, then Fleeing will die. As I see it, it's win-win: we either eliminate a liar, or confirm someone who can potentially form the seed of a network against the wolves.

[EmeraldRose]

((I went from the Count's original list and just knocked off anyone who had voted afterwards, so I completely missed your Goose vote. The edit was me not noticing the Doctor had voted right after Count's post!))

((@EmeraldRose: I saw the post for Goose, realized it may be a vote for Duck, but wasn't sure whether narrators would count it as a legitimate vote, due to no player being named "Goose" or any variant thereof. It might be good of you to clarify with the narrators whether they count that as a vote or not.

I'll probably do an update of my vote tally some time before the 12-hours-left mark.))

((Fixed easily enough.

Also, I know there was another RP post in there somewhere of somebody coming in to The Leaf. I will go looking for it and do another post when I'm done with work...))

[DoctorWhooves]

Left out the quote somehow...

(I've bolded a portion for emphasis)

I specifically remember you saying that as a wolf, you don't do the obvious things. If playing silent day one with relatively low activity to you is considered a normal thing for wolves to do, then by your given play style wouldn't you be doing anything but? Some of your statements within all of these posts seem contradictory.

Also, you mentioned that Fiery Tower was another of your big suspicions. I'd like to know why. He has made one post that, while the reasoning seems off, could just be sarcastic or badly worded. Hardly a post that I would say should make one as confident as you seem to be.

Sure, I avoid the obvious things as a wolf in order to win night action wars. People expect a protection one way, go another. Kill the less obvious targets. Etc. As for playstyle, let's be honest. Nobody here has anything to go on regarding my past playstyle, and I could say just about anything as long as it seems to make sense. So don't judge me by my words. Judge me by my actions. That way you all have a healthy skepticism about me for now, which will keep you more alert.

Voting someone for "causing relevant discussion" is a terrible reason, but if it's a joke I can understand it.

If said vote remains unwavering, it's no longer a joke and is instead a poor attempt at disguising a wolf vote.

He's less suspicious to me because, unlike Reccy, he has no perspective slip.

Need I remind you that Reccy's reason was "Just too suspicious," when the only thing suspicious about me was an initial post that was especially vulnerable.

In addition if they're both wolves they may have discussed it and decided to both vote me at a similar time. I don't know, I try not to speculate on what goes on behind closed doors until night comes.

[DoctorWhooves]

Doctor Whooves pinged me with his not-quite-roleclaim earlier as well, since it seemed so contrary to the prevailing style of play I've seen around here. I held off on voting for him, though, since it looked to me like he was a fellow newbie. However, he's really been rubbing me the wrong way as all this has been going on, so I have a proposal: By my count, Doctor Whooves has 7 votes against, and Fleeing Coward has 5 - now 6, as soon as I cross out my previous point.

I ask that the Doctor also point at Fleeing Coward, and that everyone who has not yet pointed today to either refrain from voting, or alternate votes between Doctor and Fleeing. This will allow us to test the Doctor's claim, as he desires. If he is not the Accountant, then he will die; if he is, then Fleeing will die. As I see it, it's win-win: we either eliminate a liar, or confirm someone who can potentially form the seed of a network against the wolves.

I'd like to see more from Fleeting first before agreeing that it has to be him. For instance, I'm not sure why Fleeting has drawn ire either really.

[Zar Peter]

Wow, that's a lot of serious talk for a first day.

@DoctorWhooves: It would be nice to read rules or older games to get in the mood of the playground. I confess that we are not very dedicated wolfhunter (there are exeptions) but it's a nice and friendly place to lynch wolves and devour villagers. Your behaviour comes by as "snootily" and is not very enjoyable to read.

Nevertheless I believe your claim. No sane wolf would cry out that way on day one. I'm not sure if one of the two you selected out of the flock is a wolf, actually I was tempted to point at you after I read your first post just out of spite, something I believe Recaiden did. But there is the off chance that you really got a wolf here and it's day one. I could point random or I cold follow someone who's actually trying to add logic on day one, although I don't really like the way this logic is served. Also it could be that the wolves are trying to divert the wagon against Recaiden if he's one of them. So, point at Recaiden.

[Legato Endless]

I'd like to see more from Fleeting first before agreeing that it has to be him. For instance, I'm not sure why Fleeting has drawn ire either really.

There isn't one in game. Fleeing Coward is a crafty player, and that makes him a tad infamous. He got what looks like a tongue in cheek vote early on, which bandwagon'ed into an actual possibility of lynch.

But none of that actually adds up to anything. Testing the validity of your claim against a complete unknown is wasteful.

[Meta]

There's something rather off about this. The Fleeing Coward bandwagon currently has…absolutely nothing to recommend to it. Thus far his behavior has consisted of voting for me for bandwagoning. That's it. It's not exactly a neon sign as suspicious behavior goes. Meta sort of agrees with this…but still votes for him anyway? Why not just try starting a new chain? Especially since we've got 3 or 4 candidates being bandied about?

I entirely agreed with it actually, I would just rather lose FC than whooves and thought the day was going to end before enough people were able to vote for FT or someone else or if things went very wrong, and I lost internet for a bit, I had a vote on someone who was in the running with Whooves at the time and thus, I might swing it. I didn't like either option, but I do believe I posted that I would come back to change to a pressure wagon I did actually approve of later.

Which is now, so Fiery Tower it is. Though honestly, it seems FC is held in esteem, so I'd still like to hear if he/she has anything to say.

In the interest of contributing more than just my voting reasoning, I actually like FC more than you at the moment and perhaps I understand his vote on you. You responded to my early playful post asking for help, which was kind, but it didn't actually contribute anything pressure or discussion wise, but did get you involved. Enough to be 'active' but nothing of merit, which seems like a decent wolfish strategy early on if the GitP meta is actually first day randomness.

Though you have contributed more since then, so my suspicion is mostly evaporated. Just something to note for the sake of the group.

[Abhorsen]

Speaking just for myself, I have no animus against Fleeing Coward either - but I also don't have anything for him, and I want to get to the bottom of Whooves' claim as soon as possible.

[Murska]

I'm going to be voting for Recaiden, because the point quoted by Whooves is a tell that I also look for - "I'd like to point at X but I'll point at Y". Why? It sounds like a person who is not just voting based on whom he thinks is suspicious, but has other reasons to vote for Y instead of X. And I want to know what those reasons are.


Whooves: I like the discussion, you're clearly capable. But you should attempt to take under consideration the werewolf culture on GitP. (I've been working on changing it in some ways, I guess, but it still has to be taken into account.) It's rather casual, with roleplaying and playing for fun without committing into overly much analysis or scumhunting. There are good players and good plays, but the game is not cut-throat like it tends to be elsewhere. And an ultra-confident or even arrogant attitude as you project is going to be taken badly and is going to draw votes on you. You are not going to be able to change the behaviours and playstyles of others, so if you really want to achieve things and win, you'll need to adapt your own style.

[Gnrlshrimp]

I checked again Disc Lorde. Unless the post is outright invisible to me for some reason, Recaiden did nothing until after Whooves claimed he's valuable.

A couple other thoughts occur to me, but after this I'm going to fall silent for a while and think things through some more.

Firstly, if Whooves is a wolf, his claim of accountant makes sense, in the short term at least. A claim of being someone that can be confirmed means people are more likely to turn away from him for the time being, as compared to a role that is much harder to confirm. And since the accountant isn't valued as highly, if we get in a scenario where his potential two votes doesn't swing things (and the wolves could pretty easily set this up), we can't confirm things one way or the other and the threads of the argument are already there for his survival if the wolves don't off him.

Secondly, claims that he's encouraging discussion and this is beneficial to villagers confuse me. I am new to this and I may well be missing something here, but this is very counter intuitive to me. Anyone can encourage discussion. And if they try and lead the group in the wrong direction and cause townfolk to get lynched, then all they've done by encouraging discussion is help the wolves to win. This argument seems...very weak to me, I really don't get it.

Finally, yes, I'm aware that as Whooves' arguments only work if one assumes he is a townie, mine are based on the initial assumption that he's a wolf and he's trying to mislead us.

Obviously, from my perspective I feel like his actions make more sense if he's a wolf. He's deliberately claimed a role immediately likely to redirect people since it's easily confirmable, and also a role for which the argument exists as to why he might survive the night. It seems like a very logical choice to me, and I maintain that there really isn't much reason to lynch Recaiden.

I'll check back in a while and see if I'm given reason to change my vote.