Fugazi Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Before Walter died he contacted a group of people (me included) and told us that he didn't think he was going to survive the night. He then claimed that he was Person Four from Harriet's plays and said he was afraid his identity had been revealed to another faction. So, it looks like Benjamin was correct that Walter did have a night action, which makes me slightly worried about how he knew. Couldn't Benjamin really have been a Peeping Tom? Walter was killed by one of his Rogue group after all. But what made Walter suspect that his identity was compromised?
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Harriet, there's still something I don't understand after replaying your otherwise excellent play in my mind. How did you know that Benjamin Shortcake was lying to you? Was it because you knew that Walter had no night action? 1. He wasn't very convincing. 2. We hadn't actually followed him. We had only investigated him, so I didn't even know he had a night action until I tricked him into telling me. 3. He said he believed Walter Knox to have a night action and could be the sword killer. It was odd he said "believed" because his night action was to find people with night actions. 4. Then he said he followed Daniel, which didn't make much sense because he said he would've believed he was the pickaxe killer just for being out of bed, if he hadn't been killed and proven to be the pickaxe killer. Why Knox would be the sword killer but he would assume Daniel had been the pickaxe killer just didn't make any sense at all. He seemed to know the pickaxe killer but really be wanting to find the sword killer. That's as good a place as any to start. Walter and Beatrice didn't have any obvious enemies, but did they have important actions? I may be wrong, but they both look to me like they were in close contact with Harriet before their death, so maybe she would know whether they could have been targeted because of their actions. Or maybe they were targeted simply because they were considered trustworthy by Harriet and thus likely Village. No. If Bob could see who had night actions and did think Walter Knox was the sword killer, it makes sense that the rogues would go after him. The sword killer has killed villagers and rogues. We'd all like to know who this sword killer is since he's an indiscriminate killer, who probably wins if we are all dead. The rogues probably targeted Knox because they thought he was the sword killer. As far as Beatrice goes, she was My Little Pony in my condename book. She had no night action and zero knowledge of any of the other players. Since she was taken out by the sword killer, I don't think there was any "leak." The sword killer must just be a serial killer bent on killing us all... Before Walter died he contacted a group of people (me included) and told us that he didn't think he was going to survive the night. He then claimed that he was Person Four from Harriet's plays and said he was afraid his identity had been revealed to another faction. So, it looks like Benjamin was correct that Walter did have a night action, which makes me slightly worried about how he knew. Yes, this is true. He was Person 4, but I think the rogues went after him because they believed him to be the sword killer. Couldn't Benjamin really have been a Peeping Tom? Walter was killed by one of his Rogue group after all. But what made Walter suspect that his identity was compromised? Yes, and I think that's how he found out Walter Knox has a night action. I believe the rogues thought he was the sword killer and took him out because of that. The sword killer has been killing Villagers and Rogues and both factions need him or her dead. Notice how I repeated the same theory four megablocking times? Maybe everybody will freakn get what I'm going at this time?
Admiral Ron Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Wait, what was your theory again?..... Anyways, your theory is sound to me, but unless I am missing something important (which is likely), I suggest going after Strawberry Shortcake.
Fugazi Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 We'd all like to know who this sword killer is since he's an indiscriminate killer, who probably wins if we are all dead. That's assuming that the Sword killer knew he was targeting a Rogue. It may have been a random stab in the dark too. Then he didn't kill on night 1 -- what was he up to then? Recruiting? Was he blocked? Obviously not by the person who blocked Adam Soker than night. Was his target protected? Every protector apparently targeted Ebenezer on night one, and so did the follower... Anyways, your theory is sound to me, but unless I am missing something important (which is likely), I suggest going after Strawberry Shortcake. Nooo! You shouldn't have said that! She's going to explode now!
Professor Flitwick Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Anyways, your theory is sound to me, but unless I am missing something important (which is likely), I suggest going after Strawberry Shortcake. Harriet: Well, it’s OK because we had Porky Pig kill Strawberry Shortcake. Goodness gracious people, is it that hard to remember the plays? Especially when they're so entertaining!
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Wait, what was your theory again?..... Anyways, your theory is sound to me, but unless I am missing something important (which is likely), I suggest going after Strawberry Shortcake. Clearly it's not sound because Strawberry Shortcake is dead. It was Benjamin...God damn it pay attention people...Since we knew Bob was lying and figured Gary Coleman was insane, we had the Hunter (Porky Pig) shoot Strawberry Shortcake. You've all seen that happen at the beginning of the day thread. That's assuming that the Sword killer knew he was targeting a Rogue. It may have been a random stab in the dark too. Then he didn't kill on night 1 -- what was he up to then? Recruiting? Was he blocked? Obviously not by the person who blocked Adam Soker than night. Was his target protected? Every protector apparently targeted Ebenezer on night one, and so did the follower... That's what I'm saying! The sword killer is indiscriminantly killing! Either he's a grossly informed Villager or another serial killer trying to kill all of us. If he was blocked on night one, he was blocked by scum, because our blocker blocked Adam Sokern. Not sure what he was doing on Night One, but he's killed every night since.
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Wow, that's strange...I've never seen someone being brought back from the dead. Not that I've ever seen people vanish or turn into werewolves... This game is mad. I'm also wondering how often the reviver can use his night action, and if it only works on the convicted. It's a very powerful night action, I must say, the town seems to be quite strong in this game...let's sum it up: Two useful investigators, four protectors, a vigilante, a watcher and a reviver. And none of them dead. And we killed the werewolf and two rogues. Am I the only one two find this a bit unbalanced? Something's gotta be foul about this. Anyway, I'm glad to see Mr. Vaughn hale and hearthy back with us, and it appears Harriet is no rogue. Not that I ever distrusted you, but you can never be sure.
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And none of them dead. How many people will not be paying full attention? If you are town and not paying attention you make it as hard for us as the scum do. One of our protectors has been killed!! However, it is more likely that they thought he was the sword killer than knew he was our protector. And it was Walter Knox. Sorry that words are so hard for some of you to read. Why am I working so hard to save these people who are pissing me off so much. Read the words, people. Read them. I love you all. A lot. For money. 'Cause I'm the town slut. Ooh! I can feel the Zombie Sebastien Baby kick!
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 How many people will not be paying full attention? If you are town and not paying attention you make it as hard for us as the scum do. One of our protectors has been killed!! However, it is more likely that they thought he was the sword killer than knew he was our protector. And it was Walter Knox. Sorry that words are so hard for some of you to read. Why am I working so hard to save these people who are pissing me off so much. Read the words, people. Read them. I love you all. A lot. For money. 'Cause I'm the town slut. Ooh! I can feel the Zombie Sebastien Baby kick! Oops...sorry
Sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 let's sum it up: Two useful investigators, four protectors, a vigilante, a watcher and a reviver. Actually, make that three protectors alive, since Walter Knox was the fourth one. But I agree with you, something doesn't measure up here. If I've followed Harriet's theories correctly - and please, do correct me if I'm wrong on this - it seems we've exhausted all the leads Harriet's play offered. I'm still not entirely convinced if "Gary Coleman" really is an insane investigator or just a lying rogue who tried to protect his accomplice, but since we don't know his true identity I can't pursue that suspicion. And I personally can't find any other leads from this mess of pseudonyms. This leads us back to square one and Day One. We uncovered a werewolf because of his own slip of the tongue. We followed that by convicting Adam Sokern on Day Two, which turned out to be a mistake, but there was another highly suspicious figure that day, and although those suspicions have dissolved somewhat since then, I find it hard to trust this man anymore. That man is none other than my own brother, Charles Synclair. There's just something in the way he has participated to the solving of this tragedy that rubs me the wrong way, and unless something more convincing comes up, I will have to force myself to vote for him.
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 If I've followed Harriet's theories correctly - and please, do correct me if I'm wrong on this - it seems we've exhausted all the leads Harriet's play offered. I'm still not entirely convinced if "Gary Coleman" really is an insane investigator or just a lying rogue who tried to protect his accomplice, but since we don't know his true identity I can't pursue that suspicion. And I personally can't find any other leads from this mess of pseudonyms. That is because the mess of pseudonyms can all be trusted. And don't worry about their real identities. If anything inconsistent comes up, I will reveal them. I gave up Strawberry Shortcake, didn't I? And uncovered Evil, even though I was wrong, when the investigation pointed towards him. But, if you have a theory of how Gary Coleman could still be suspicious, please tell us. I suppose he can't be 100% trusted yet, but tonight's results will certainly continue to tell us more. I agree that Charles Synclair should go, if for no other reason than he is no help whatsoever and can't even keep up with our findings. There is another higly suspicious person, but I'm working on finding any evidence... And then there are the quiet ones: Quinn...and Quinn...and that other Synclair... Quinn. We can certainly do without someone who speaks only once a day anyway...
Rick Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Read the fuckn play! We tested Gary, that's how we knew we should kill Benjamin. Sorry, I'm feeling a bit under the weather and all you people who don't read the information that we work so hard to put right in front of your eyes are starting to piss me off. I understand the 'megabluckn' play. It's just that you mention two seers and one of them being a fool. But I understand you trust 'Gary Coleman' is an insane investigator for now. So Sebastien is the fool? Or are you not talking about the role here? Anyway, as some have been saying already we don't have any new leads, but at least it appears that a lot has been confirmed. So, I'd like to thank Harriet for at least partly 'solving' the mess we seemed to be in yesterday. I agree we should now be looking for 'new' suspects and as we apparently have no night action results to base our suspicions on, we will have to form opinions on what people have been saying during the past days. I agree forming an opinion on the relatively silent ones is probably a good idea, but as Samuel pointed out, let's not forget our suspicions about Charles from day 1.
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I understand the 'megabluckn' play. It's just that you mention two seers and one of them being a fool. But I understand you trust 'Gary Coleman' is an insane investigator for now. So Sebastien is the fool? Or are you not talking about the role here? I know it's hard to follow the pseudonyms and I apologize if the players are seeming vague. It's so much easier to have all the details ironed out in private and sometimes I forget some of the more specific points. I guess it is not your fault since I'm protecting all the informants here, but I shall still give you a because you deserve it. A fool: an insane investigator. Gary Coleman is an insane investigator, aka a "fool." That was the original role as described by Zed's book "I'm a Werewolf and I Play One at Parties for a Small Fee." Let's get naked and have an orgy!
Rick Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Let's get naked and have an orgy! You bring the applesauce?
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 You bring the applesauce? As long as you've got the cock.
Alopex Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Let's get naked and have an orgy! I'm going to lock up in my room. I'm allergic to orgies... They're so dirty!
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I'm going to lock up in my room. I'm allergic to orgies... They're so dirty! If you'd just let that cleavage show, I bet you'd be a different woman! Let's make out.
Sandy Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Let's get naked and have an orgy! That sure is one way of getting over Beatrice. I'm in! And no, Quinn, you may not participate. Or watch. Go to your room.
Hinckley Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Or watch. Go to your room. And Quinn, if you're caught masturbating again, your father's going to confiscate that pickaxe!
Peanuts Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Let's get naked and have an orgy! No, thanks, there's 14 men and just 5 women. Not quite a vantage point for an orgy. I'll also lock up in Angela's room...if Mr. Fairfax doesn't mind I must admit, I'm also completely clueless, for the first time in my life. I don't mind to have a closer look at those who are not that active, but we shouldn't interprete too much into their lack of will to kill rogues. I think in past games...of life...the inactives weren't always scum. I'm also wondering if the reviver has contacted Harriet or Mr. Vaughn yet, if he's really town. And Quinn, if you're caught masturbating again, your father's going to confiscate that pickaxe! What?
Admiral Ron Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 After reading Harriet's play a little more throughly, I can see that we are practically back at square one. And in the center of square one is Charles Sinclair. Shall that be our decision today?
Alopex Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I'll also lock up in Angela's room...if Mr. Fairfax doesn't mind Don't you have an own room? I don't believe that inactivity means that the person is scum. Just that the person isn't very helpful...
Admiral Ron Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 I don't believe that inactivity means that the person is scum. Just that the person isn't very helpful... I believe there is a saying that goes somewhere along the lines of, "A man is truly evil when he does nothing in times of crises."
CMP Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 Yes, because voting based on the fact nobody knew 100% sure who the Werewolf was worked so well on Day 2. And Harriet, about the not knowing there were vampires thing, that could've been a lie, but apparently it wasn't. Besides being cautious on Day 1, what else have I done to draw attention to myself?
Admiral Ron Posted February 14, 2011 Posted February 14, 2011 And Harriet, about the not knowing there were vampires thing, that could've been a lie, but apparently it wasn't. Luckily, I do not think we have to worry about them anymore. God told us she was deceased, but why would He put that into this situation, I have no idea. Perhaps just to confuse us?
Recommended Posts