Valentine's Werewolf

Amber Chou Wilson said:
I'm really hoping that was the fool D:
Yes me too omg ugh!
 
Oi. Not a good start, no. The first day is always hard though, so I don't want to point fingers at anyone yet either xD
 
The Seer is dead?! A bad start indeed.
 
Hopefully the Seer/Fool is active and can work to figure out which one they are.

Day 1 is always tricky.
 

Yowza! I'm with Daphne on this one, but that really does make it all the more interesting. I guess there really is no indication whatsoever that differentiates the fool and the seer. o_O
 
Why does the seer always die xD
 
Oh man whoever the remaining seer/fool is, I was in exactly your position last game. Don't waste a bunch of time like I did, try to figure out which role you have asap and keep checking people every night to gather as much info as possible one way or another. It's an awful situation, best of luck!

Also, how do these wolves keep getting so lucky so early?!?!
 
Ainsley Lynch said:
Oh man whoever the remaining seer/fool is, I was in exactly your position last game. Don't waste a bunch of time like I did, try to figure out which role you have asap and keep checking people every night to gather as much info as possible one way or another. It's an awful situation, best of luck!

Also, how do these wolves keep getting so lucky so early?!?!


Animal instinct.

Sorry, I couldn't resist the urge to crack that one. :p Oh, well. So this thing with seers/fools dying is a regular occurrence?



 
Not regular per se, but almost the exact same thing happened last game. The fool died really early on and I was the seer but through some hilariously bad luck I managed to convince myself I was the fool until near the end of the game. It'd be pretty much impossible to play that role worse than I did :lol:
 
I'm still sorry about that ahahahah
 
Zennon Baros said:
I'm still sorry about that ahahahah
I can only imagine how frustrating and/or hilarious my messages must have been from a perspective of knowing everyone's roles :lol:
 
All of the above mostly xD
 
Okay, so people who usually throw the first stone are the one's who get lynched, so I can see why no one wants to do so, also hard when we have zero proof of anything haha.
So I'm just gonna bite the bullet and say that I vote Teigan because I am anGERY
 
Donna! You can't lynch me coz you're mad at me!
 
Lol xD we basing our votes now through emotions ... nice. But I have to go for the random number generator and I got 11: Ainsley Lynch (Rowan)

I vote to lynch Ainsley Lynch
 
If there's any evidence for wolves here, I won't see it until later in the game annoyingly xD
I don't like voting without a clear direction, so I won't during the first day as usual.
 
I have learned my lesson over the past few games and have to agree, voting this randomly this early on seems unwise to me. I get the impulse to make something happen, but I think we're way too likely to get a villager or another good role D:
 
For sure, the chances of us getting an innocent person over a wolf are significantly higher this early on, but inaction doesn't always work out (Esp if there's a random vote anyway, though I'm not sure how this instance of the game is working on not-voting, if it'd be randomised or just nothing would happen) At least randomly voting for someone gives us at least some small chance of managing to get a wolf as opposed to not, because when nothing really happens, there's less to go off of later in the game, which kind of played a big part in the last win - no one really had a clue because I don't think anyone was really willing to do anything.
 
Geovanna Volt said:
If no clear decision has been made as to who will be lynched at the end of each day, or if there is a tie in the votes, no one will be lynched by the villagers.
This time there's no random element to it, which I think supports not-voting at least for today. It's true that the village largely lost last time because no one really wanted to do anything, but I think the fact that not lynching turned into random deaths too also worked against the village in that game. This time we simply have more room to figure things out without people dropping dead from random chance.
 
Yeah, while I agree that nobody being willing to be the one to make a decision was a major factor in our loss last time I think that especially without the random lynchings it's reasonable to wait out the first day and see how things go. We're going to lose people slower so there's more time to be observant and look for patterns. Choosing at random right now just puts people at risk with nothing really to be gained from it. (eg; I have nothing to say to Alex voting for me because she has nothing to accuse me of so I have nothing to defend myself against. None of us have any data in any direction and there aren't any useful discussions to be had yet. Though, for the record, I'm a boring villager this time, thank god.)
 
I always used to support inaction during the first day or two days, but in the most recent games I've become a supporter of just voting. OK, our chances of lynching a townie *are* much higher than a wolf, but if we don't vote then on day 2 we'll have just as little to go on than we did day 1. This was the village downfall before, I think xD

That said, I don't know about anyone else, but I'm scared to vote in case I lynch off a villager and that later makes me look like a wolf x_x (especially because there's a chance Kathy is tracking all our conversations in a diary :r )
 
A chance? xD I'd stake my life on it.

It seems like our strategies have changed in opposite directions through the last few games, that's interesting xD

But I feel last time the wolves sort of used inactivity against the village because people were dying anyway so they didn't need to spur us into lynching as much, this time that won't happen so they may be more likely to get us to lynch. (Though, I don't think anyone voting right now is automatically suspicious)
 
I feel like there's pros and cons either way, and I think it's been helpful either way in the past, sometimes not voting was beneficial for the villagers, sometimes it was beneficial for the wolves.
I think it this instance, its possibly not be the best idea, especially on the chance we could have just lost our major investigative role, which otherwise would have been our best bet of figuring out who the wolves were without losing too many innocents. ITs harder to look for motive or suspicious behaviour when not a lot happens during the day. That being said, we might still have the real seer, so at this point, there's not really any telling just how good either decision is.

Its hard to say. Either way, I don't see both votes being rescinded in time to play a no-vote strategy, at least not tonight.

Also Claire I'm 100% in the same boat. Part of me wants to extend the vote three ways to make it even more random, but then there's always the chance of lynching a villager, or being accused of wanting to give a wolf buddy a better chance by not being happy with a 50/50 split. im dumbAnything has the potential to be regarded as suspicious so its hard to make the "right" decision :p
 
Rowan- "have nothing to say to Alex voting for me because she has nothing to accuse me of so I have nothing to defend myself against" ; declares a role. xD

Strategy depends on the group playing, which makes sense. Different personalities in the mix.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top