Fugazi Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 I didn't say there IS a vampire faction. I said that if there is a third faction, and I strongly believe there is, it might be vampires. And btw what difference does it make if your hunting mummies or vampires. I didn't include the Baron in any way in my theory. Well for your sake I hope they don't turn out to be mummies!
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Person 1 claims to be a bodyguard, as opposed to a standard protector. If I understand things correctly, that means he would be killed instead of the intended victim. This is very clever deduction on your part. This player is a bodyguard and has certain stipulations in his action similar to what you have proposed, but different.
Rufus Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 This is very clever deduction on your part. Why, thank you! Cock?
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Why, thank you! Cock? You're always keeping me stuffed with cock. Thanks Ruben. You're so thoughtful. And you have the plumpest cock!
Peanuts Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Well, if there are really no other werewolves, that would mean, that Zed was propably able to convert people. In this case there once were 3 killers and one converter, with Daniel, the swordsman and the hunter as killers, and a converter. If there are really vampires, they would neither shout nor stab people, so they will need another killer/protector, unless they have none, which would be unfair towards them. So if there was vampires, there would most propably be 3 killers and 2 comverters or 4 killers and 1 converter, which means the town loses at worst 5 men. In this case it's only three, so our chance are getting better, especially since one of them seems to be on our side. I yet don't think there were that many killers/converters, so I don't trust information saying there's vampires out there. Also Charles Synclair would be inoncent, if he was really blocked last night and isn't member of some third party. And, we shouldn't forget, that those who were in lead of the conga line against Zed, aren't cleared of being scum anymore. If the werewolves are all dead, we can only trust those who are confirmed innoncent by investigators who are confirmed innoncent themselves Which leads me to the investigator: Shouldn't he have two investigation results so far? There were two nights so far. I'm not willing to vote for Chalres Synclair today, since we have nothing against him, except for defending something who has apperantly had no fellas. Even if he was a third party, why would he try to defend someone? Third party guys are lucky about every kill, werewolf or not. And if he was no werewolf, he didn't even no Zed was a werewolf, as only person one seemed to know it.
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 I'm not willing to vote for Chalres Synclair today, since we have nothing against him, except for defending something who has apperantly had no fellas. Even if he was a third party, why would he try to defend someone? Third party guys are lucky about every kill, werewolf or not. And if he was no werewolf, he didn't even no Zed was a werewolf, as only person one seemed to know it. If there was one player who knew Zed was a werewolf, why wouldn't there be another one? There's still the possibility that Charles knew Zed was a werewolf and wanted him around. His player is too suspicious to just call him innocent. And just because someone is blocked doesn't make them innocent. The kill action can be swapped amongst scum and there are vanilla scum with no night actions. And we have a player claiming that their role is immunity to vampire bites. That would be a bit useless if there weren't vampires. I'm not sure what you're claiming we should do next, Mr. Peers, but assuming Charles is innocent and that there are no vampires seems foolishly conclusive. You are either naive or scummy.
Admiral Ron Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Well, if there are really no other werewolves, that would mean, that Zed was propably able to convert people. In this case there once were 3 killers and one converter, with Daniel, the swordsman and the hunter as killers, and a converter. I believe we agreed that the shotgun killer is a villager vigilante. And, not to mention the multiple factions. This means that, possibly, the werewolves only started with one, and the Rogues could be 1-2. To be honest though, I do kinda think that vampires could be a part of this. Just because there havent been any killings of de-blooded bodies doesnt mean they cant be converting this whole time. Unless, of course, the person claiming to have vampires in their story from God is simply lying.
Lord Arjay Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 There is almost certainly another scum faction, whether they are vampires or not doesn't really seem important. There is too much in favour of this theory so I'm going to believe it for now. If the werewolves are all dead, we can only trust those who are confirmed innoncent by investigators who are confirmed innoncent themselves Except we can't even trust those people, as there are numerous ways that an investigator can find a scum innocent. You should know this. I do not see the benefit of knowing investigation results for someone unless they are under suspicion. Charles continues to be the most suspicious (he didn't respond to Harriet's accusation against him yesterday) even with this solo-werewolf idea. He's probably the best way to test what people are saying aswell and unless Harriet has anything new to be revealed, he will be getting my vote later.
Rick Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 I yet don't think there were that many killers/converters, so I don't trust information saying there's vampires out there. Also Charles Synclair would be inoncent, if he was really blocked last night and isn't member of some third party. 1. What are we still fighting then? I haven't heard anyone announce the conclusion of this yet. 2. As pointed out, blocking doesn't cure one of their evil intentions. This means that, possibly, the werewolves only started with one, and the Rogues could be 1-2. Except this was said about the Rogue that Mr. Swordkillah killed last night: "Last night, we had two deaths. Fortunately, someone had killed Daniel O'Donnell, who was the pickax killer who took our beloved Dacius Nathans. He was a Rogue, a villain, selfish and killing for his own survival". This, I think we can all agree, means he was acting alone.
Admiral Ron Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Except this was said about the Rogue that Mr. Swordkillah killed last night: "Last night, we had two deaths. Fortunately, someone had killed Daniel O'Donnell, who was the pickax killer who took our beloved Dacius Nathans. He was a Rogue, a villain, selfish and killing for his own survival". This, I think we can all agree, means he was acting alone. I agree, and I am sorry I did not make that clear. I have been wondering if there isnt even yet ANOTHER faction. Much like the Rogues, but separate.
Rufus Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 And we have a player claiming that their role is immunity to vampire bites. That would be a bit useless if there weren't vampires. Ooh, that's news. Did I miss something? I don't recall that being mentioned before. No wonder there are so many protectors around. And as someone said, if wampire bites convert people to wampires, we could be in trouble
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Is everyone ready for the morning entertainment? Time for a play, lovelies. Goldilocks and the Big Bad Wolf Evil Scene 1 Join us back in time before this horrible ordeal began at our village's most famous hangout: the Irreverent Raucous Cafe. Goldilocks: I'm the Inventor! There's a horrible ordeal about to befall us where we'll be attacked by werewolves and I'll be the one who makes the silver bullets. Can you believe I have the best duty ever? I'm a badass! Woot! Did everybody hear me? I'm the Inventor! Dacius Nathans: Can you shut up? I don't think so many people should be hearing this, especially you-know-who. Evil: Don't worry, I won't tell a soul. Goldilocks: Oh, good. Thanks. Glad I could trust you guys. I'm a badass inventor! Dacius Nathans: Shut up! Scene 2 Gary Coleman: Hello Harriet. It appears that everyone is confiding in you, so I shall also place my trust in you. Harriet: Gary Coleman! Wait... Aren't you dead? Gary Coleman: It's a pseudonym...to protect my identity. Harriet: Say "What you talkin' bout, werewolf?" Gary Coleman: Fine. What you talkin' bout, werewolf?" Harriet: You're so adorable. My what a big cock you have. I shall rub applesauce on it while you tell me about your night action. Charles Synclair: These jokes are immature. Harriet and Gary: Shut up, vampire! Gary Coleman: I'm the investigator. Harriet: Oh, sweet! We could totally use one. What are you called? Gary Coleman: The Seer. Harriet: Sounds plausible. Gary Coleman: It worries me. "Seeing" sounds like magic, so what if my results are paranoid? Magic isn't really, so what if my investigations are false? Harriet: Don't know, but your concern about it makes me feel comfortable. I'm sure we'll be careful with your powers and your results. Scene 3 Evil: Hello Harriet. I'm the investigator. Harriet: That's redundant. My, what a big cock you have! Evil: All the better to megabluck you with, my dear. Not like that. I meant megabluck you over. Because I'm an evil liar. I'm not a pervert. Harriet: Aw, too bad. Evil romps in the hay are the best. Who did you investigate on the first night? Evil: Goldilocks. She's a villager. Harriet: Interesting. I thought you knew we tested Goldilocks by having her give Dacius Nathans silver bullets. Evil: Yes, but it's good to be doubly sure. Harriet: Sounds like a scummy move, but OK. What are you called? Evil: The Seer. Harriet: Interesting... Scene 4 Enter Harriet with Mary Poppins and Gojira. Mary Poppins: Four protectors and two investigators. What's next? Five factions? Harriet: Don't tempt fate. Mary Poppins: How can we test them. Harriet: We'll have Evil investigate Bambi. Mary Poppins: Good idea. Bambi is most likely innocent. Harriet: And we'll have Gary Coleman investigate evil. Mary Poppins: Great idea. Gojira: RAAAAWRR!!! Mary Poppins: See lizard face? We're even spelling your name right now. Scene 5 Evil: Bambi is a villager. Harriet: Thanks. Evil exits stage left. Person 3: I followed Bambi last night, he was targeted by Person 4 and Evil. Harriet: That makes sense because we asked Person 4 to protect Bambi in case Evil was a killer. Person 3 exits Gray Coleman: I investigated Evil and he's evil. Harriet: Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa? Evil enters stage right. Harriet: How'd you get over there when you left over there? Evil: I'm a demon vampire evil thing. I can do that. Harriet: Your name is Sebastien Vaughn. Evil: I know my name. Harriet: I just wanted everyone else to know your name too. It's Sebastien Vaughn. Evil: I know, it's Sebastien Vaughn. I am Sebastien Vaughn so I know my name is Sebastien Vaughn. Harriet: All right Sebastien Vaughn, you don't have to say your name, Sebastien Vaughn, so many times, Sebastien Vaughn. Furthermore, Sebastien Vaughn said he was planning on investigating Charles Synclair last night before we tested him on Bambi. I found it odd that he would offer to investigate someone who so many villagers were already suspicious of. So, this is our theory. I think voting out Sebastien Vaughn today would be the boldest move in finding out who is lying behind the scenes. I believe Gary Coleman is telling the truth. He is suspicious of his own results and wants to be certain that he is correct in his findings and not an insane person. I trust him more than Sebastien because he is obviously going for results. Sebastien chose two targets on his own that were odd choices in my opinion. He hasn't contributed much to our search and if we convict him and he turns up guilty, we know Gary Coleman is our investigator. Furthermore, we know that Gary's other investigations were correct. If Sebastien turns out to be a villager, we will know that either Gary Coleman has been lying to us, or that he's insane and his other investigations were the opposite results than what he got. Please, don't tell me there's a random investigator or a framer... There we have it. That's what info our night activity brought us. I'm pretty sure that's everything we could possibly know right now. Phew, I'm tired. I need a nap. One last tidbit. Sebastien didn't actually tell me he was our investigator. Goldilocks told me that he claimed to be the investigator and he was pissed when I called him out on it. I know who I'll be voting today when the time comes. Let me add one more detail. Gary Coleman is very specific about how his action work whereas Sebastien just says "Bambi is a villager." There are a lot of details into how God has given them their ability and Gary's story is more convincing. Is Sebastien an actual Seer? Person 3 says he targeted Bambi. With multiple factions, scum having an investigator makes sense. Or could he be covering up another night action just to make Goldilocks trust him?
Professor Flitwick Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Shame Mr. Sokern was innocent, but I suppose in a time of crisis, it's better to have an idiot dead, than have an idiot vote. Shame to see Mr. Clifton go too. I didn't know him much; I spend most of my time in this Manor, but he seemed like a good person. I don't think the Rogue is part of the third faction. I think he is an independent. I strongly believe the third faction are vampires. If anyone of you townies have heard something about vampires, please speak to me in private. Vampires, Mrs. Synclair? Doesn't it sound a bit far-fetched (yes I am aware of the irony; Werewolves aren't every day things), but why not say one faction is one of those fabled Ape-men beasts from the exotic lands, and those Black-and-White bears those explorers talk about? *SNIP* These plays are so fun! Almost makes me wish I could get a bit more time off to take in one of these. So... looks like Mr. Vaughn is on the chopping board for tonight? It would be a good wary to check Mr. Colemans results are correct; to know a few more Rogues/Werewolves/Vampires for definite in the coming days.
Walter Kovacs Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Bravo! Bravo! Encore! Not as much nudity as the previous play, but still one of the best plays yet. All that talk of Bambi made me hungry for some venison.
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 All that talk of Bambi made me hungry for some venison. Raw venison? Werwolf!
Rufus Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Another excellent play, Harriet, encore! You have made a convincing argument for Mr Vaughn indeed being Evil, although just what kind of evil remains to be seen. We should indeed vote for him. It does, however, mean that Mr Vaughn isn't our mysterious sword killer, so we still have a loose cannon on the, well, loose.
Admiral Ron Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Harriet m'dear, you are a fine actress, and this play has been your best yet! But this news about Mr Vaughn is hopeful, I know where my vote shall go later today.
Rick Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 That's quite a story yet again Harriet. However it's not conclusive evidence at all, so ultimately it's up to which of the two investigator you believe. As you point out, the choice of targets of 'Evil'/Sebastien hasn't been exactly logical. But it is kind of striking that he was seen targeting Bambi though. So he has to have a night action. But if there is indeed another faction, an investigative ability on their behalf is likely. I hope you correctly assess these other indications you have that Gary Coleman ( ) is telling you the truth. I'd say it is worth a shot conviction.
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 That's quite a story yet again Harriet. However it's not conclusive evidence at all, Of course it's not. Do we ever get conclusive evidence? That's why this is a game. We have to figure things out. Perhaps I am biased because I am finding the info, but this does appear to be our best lead. I have no desire to lead everyone astray, so I present the information and my theories to be discussed and help us solve this. By no means, should everything be believed and followed. Trust should not be given lightly in this situation. Please, point out if you think I'm wrong and then take it a step further by discussing what the info I've found could mean.
Rick Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 You're in the best position to judge how credible each of the investigators' findings are and you seem to trust 'Gary' more than 'Evil' by the way they report their findings to you. But from my experience with all kind of strange investigation results in Mr. Philips' books, I am perhaps being overly skeptical. Bottom line is, we have to trust one of these investigators' results... and the simplest explanation is probably the most likely to be true.
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 You're in the best position to judge how credible each of the investigators' findings are and you seem to trust 'Gary' more than 'Evil' by the way they report their findings to you. But from my experience with all kind of strange investigation results in Mr. Philips' books, I am perhaps being overly skeptical. Bottom line is, we have to trust one of these investigators' results... and the simplest explanation is probably the most likely to be true. Don't try to put the whole burden on me. We're all in the best position because I'm bringing all the information to everyone. My theories will always be attached, but the facts are the same. At least as told to me. This is a somewhat daunting task...
Quarryman Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Of course it's not. Do we ever get conclusive evidence? That's why this is a game. We have to figure things out. Perhaps I am biased because I am finding the info, but this does appear to be our best lead. Yes, at the moment this is probably our best lead, so I'm inclined to trust you in this. And no, the burden isn't yours alone, we're all in this together, and all your hard work in shedding light on this is much appreciated.
Peanuts Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Of course it's not. Do we ever get conclusive evidence? That's why this is a game. We have to figure things out. Perhaps I am biased because I am finding the info, but this does appear to be our best lead. I am much more comfortable with voting for Sebastien that for the other one, so I'll follow you on this. Let's hope he's really a member of some slutty-vampire-applesauce-gang. And I didn't say there were no other factions, I'm not naive enough to think we killed every non-villager, I was just going to say that I don't think vampires kill by blades. And I was aware that the gun killer claims tobe the vigilante. And I didn't say I believed the other guy (whose name I forgot ) to be innoncent, I just said I wouldn't kill him until we get more evidence against him, as most of our evidence is based on the assumption there's at least one more werewolf. And if a neutral knew about the werewolf leader, why would he defend him until short before death? Yes, he can team up with the werewolves if they get powerful, but he can tell on him on day 1 and be a hero.
Hinckley Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Yes, at the moment this is probably our best lead, so I'm inclined to trust you in this. And no, the burden isn't yours alone, we're all in this together, and all your hard work in shedding light on this is much appreciated. Thank you, Quinn. I think you'll have some extra applesauce rubbed on your cock tonight.
Quarryman Posted February 10, 2011 Posted February 10, 2011 Thank you, Quinn. I think you'll have some extra applesauce rubbed on your cock tonight. Oooh (just don't tell my mother anything, please)
Recommended Posts