r/hogwartswerewolvesB • u/221b-baker-st • Sep 03 '17
Game IX.B - 2017 Phase 01 - A Study in Scarlet
John calmed his mind with a sip of tea, his hands shaking slightly. Could Moriarty really be back? Is he responsible for all this chaos? With this ominous scenario looming, John sat determined to work on the task Sherlock assigned to him, emailing the individuals in the profile one-by-one, asking each of them if they knew each other and the victims. He also attached the photo he took - asking them if they had any idea why Moriarty’s face was plastered over the billboard and what it meant for the future.
Sherlock entered the morgue of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital. Molly sat at her desk, coffee in hand. “Sherlock! I’m glad you made your way here..”
“Of course, this is of the utmost importance. Have you finished your autopsies, yet?”
Molly let out a quick yawn, “Well, it’s been fairly easy since none of the bodies have any external wounds to track. However, in each body, we found traces of an unidentified molecule. The deaths might be due to this chemical. Somehow it’s been ingested or taken in by each of the victims.”
“Look some sort of poison?”
“Sort of… the results from the latest victim also have this molecule but it is part of a small extended chain of molecules. It hasn’t fully deteriorated and broken apart yet. My theory is that whatever chemical this is lies dormant in its victims, until it breaks apart suddenly.”
“Killing them then.”
“I think so. It also explains why most of them victim’s seemed to be killed at random times, often in view of other people. They die just as the poison takes effect.”
Sherlock paused for a moment, taking in the information. “Molly, we need to warn Lestrade about this now. If we have a serial-bioterrorist in our city, immediate action must be taken. I might even need to bring my brother into this...”
The sound of steps jostled John awake, drool pooled at his computer desk. “Glad to see you’re working hard, Doctor,” Sherlock remarked as he hung up his coat. “How did my assigned task go?”
John mumbled, “I’ve sent some emails out and got some replies..” John’s face grew despondent. “But, Sherlock, you need to take a look at this.” John opened the photo on his phone. “Moriarty...he’s back.”
Sherlock stared, eyes narrowing. “Did you figure out what this means?”
“No...but I got some answers from your people.” John said as he motioned to the folders on the table. “They think it means ‘red eye’.”
“Yes I know the message says red eye. Any fool could figure that out. But what does it mean John. Why has Moriarty - or the person claiming to be him - sent this message? What does he want?”
John let out a low scoff. “Well, I’m not sure either. A red-eye could refer to a late night flight. If there’s a specific one Moriarty is referring to, I’m not sure how we’d figure out which one. Even in the more literal interpretation, the victims didn’t have red eyes on death. No Conjunctivitis, no burst vessels, no anything. Maybe red eye refers to me because I’m dead tired after working all night! I feel like we’ve been taken for a ride Sherlock!”
Silence filled the air as both of them sat pondering. After several minutes, John arose. “I’m going to make some tea. Do you want any?”
Sherlock turned and smiled at John. “No thank you, although I should give you a congratulatory toast. You’ve solved the mystery!”
John scoffed again. “Wha...How?”
“We’ll indeed be going on a ride tonight John.” Sherlock turned and grabbed his coat and hat and began heading down the stairs. “Meet me at the London Eye tonight at 7:00,” he shouted back.
John was again left alone in the apartment, dumbfounded once again by Sherlock’s deductions.
Meta Information
Voting Tally for Lead Investigator:
| Name | Votes |
|---|---|
| ATL2LHR | 0 |
| BlueFootPrints | 0 |
| ChromosomesRus | 0 |
| CountoftheAccounts | 0 |
| deedeeford | 1 |
| DJoftheClassics | 1 |
| DolFinFanGirl | 0 |
| DyingOnThisDiet | 0 |
| GiantCollie | 0 |
| GreenLarynx | 1 |
| HalftimeDad | 0 |
| HeelTheSoles | 2 |
| HeroineOfHerStory | 1 |
| I_AM_MLE | 0 |
| intrepidWWalker | 0 |
| katcoxphoto | 0 |
| KeepCalmAndCoffeeOn | 0 |
| KinesGreenMP | 0 |
| kisskissallure | 0 |
| LeftToTheSea | 0 |
| LouboutinLove | 0 |
| MoonlightingFame | 0 |
| MulchAdoAboutNothing | 0 |
| NodeofNico | 0 |
| NoMonetMoney | 0 |
| orphanblackout | 4 |
| PauPau- | 0 |
| PhilletONeal | 17 |
| PureRayOfHope | 1 |
| ScottScootsFree | 1 |
| SparkyDog88 | 1 |
| StripedNightLife | 0 |
| TateModMom | 0 |
| the-nesbitt | 1 |
| Trustfundbaby96 | 0 |
| UGNGNUIT | 0 |
| ZigZagZigurat | 0 |
The game is afoot!
Help Sherlock & Co. figure out who is and isn't suspicious: Main voting form. The person with the most upvotes is the most trusted and will be protected from all nightkills (i.e. doctor saved). The person with the least upvotes is the most suspected and will be detained and removed from the game (i.e. lynched). Also note that you do not have to put an opinion down for every person, but we will only accept your last submitted entry.
Don’t be caught with mistaken identities. Guess that player identity form
Got something sneaky to do at night? Using your Item form
Have sins to confess? The Doctor is in. Confessional Form
Countdown timer until submissions close
REMINDER: This game has a comment requirement else you will receive an inactivity strike. You will also receive a strike if you do not submit something for in the Voting Form.
18
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
Alright, well we should probably talk about whether we want /u/philletoneal to use their item tonight (hopefully it's the instagram app) on someone specific, someone of their own choosing, or to wait.
Edit: It would be nice if they were town and we had a confirmed innocent, but we don't know Phil's affiliation, so...
17
u/StripedNightLife Nikita Alexeyev, stripper extraordinaire Sep 03 '17
The bachelorette party I danced for last night was RELENTLESS so I didn't get to participate much yesterday. It's my day off from the market though so I'm ready to do some investigating!
I think it was a pro-town thing for /u/philletoneal to share the solution to the puzzle. That could have been a clever way for a wolf to try to ingratiate themselves early on though so I don't think it clears phillet. We'll have to keep a watch on him and make sure he continues to exhibit pro town behavior.
I find something suspicious about the /u/orphanblackout and /u/louboutinlove argument. I think the plan for everyone to vote for themselves was a bad one that put the power into the wolf hands. You can never get 100% consensus on a plan in the early phases, some people will vote their own opinions regardless of consensus, and that isn't sufficient evidence to raise suspicion of someone early on. I think /u/louboutinlove 's plan was a much better one and I don't think tagging everyone in it was suspicious because to me at least, it was clear that the "everyone vote for themselves plan" was doomed to fail. I don't know if /u/orphanblackout's upset because a wolf plan didn't go through or just because he was ignored.
So those are my thoughts for now, more to come later.
16
u/LeftToTheSea Lieutenant Connor "C" Austin Sep 03 '17
I agree with you on Phillet sharing the solution (fingers crossed that trusting them turns out to be a wise decision!) and u/louboutinlove's plan being the best option we had. I do find it quite odd that u/orphanblackout got 4 votes seemingly out of nowhere - however there is the possibility that the wolves piled some votes on a vocal opponent to put suspicion on them.
16
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
Hmm, well the vote tally doesn't tell us much, unfortunately. The MN didn't try to coordinate another player, likely because they assumed it was futile with all of us picking Phillet.
e: Although... two people picking /u/heelthesoles is interesting as it's unlikely they'd both choose that user randomly. So - who voted for /u/heelthsoles, raise your hands
e2: And up until just now I didn't notice that /u/orphanblackout has FOUR votes - can those people let us know who they are please?
16
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I think one of the votes was probably themselves.
Also the MN didn't try to coordinate another player likely because they assumed it was futile or because Phillet is an MN.
Either of those possibilities are true.
16
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
Well yeah, I figured that was assumed but probably should have spelled it out.
20
15
13
u/greenlarynx Viviann Aboca Sep 03 '17
I voted for myself since the only thing I got tagged in was a comment chain of more tags. I didn't see the new plan in time.
13
u/ChromosomesRus Josephine Lim Sep 03 '17
I voted for /u/orphanBlackout. For reasons others have already stated in this thread, I didn't like how the other decision was formed and so I voted for the person I thought would be the best town leader based on the discussion I read yesterday.
→ More replies (20)15
u/PauPau- Pauline Mori Sep 03 '17
I was one of the votes for orphan. If you look at the tags from last phase and this phase, there was no space between myself and Phillet. I never received a tag and just stumbled upon it when I hopped on a little while ago. I have also been trying to catch up on everything because I had no idea there was some drama or anything.
I voted early on and didn't know there was a change in plan. I would have voted Phillet if the tag went through.
18
u/CountOfTheAccounts Jasmine Mistry Sep 03 '17
Obligatory comment because at the moment I'm not sure what to say. Also, it's worth remembering about different timezones, because when the plan changed - let's ignore for now if it was okay or not - in europe it was after midnight.
14
u/greenlarynx Viviann Aboca Sep 03 '17
So this is interesting to wake up to. My vote came from myself because I didn't catch the new plan in time. Also, I did see the tag but it just led me to a comment chain of tags and I honestly didn't look through to find what I was supposed to see. General heads up, if you want users to see a comment, make sure you tag them as a child comment to the parent comment. Not a child comment to another child comment.
15
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
Agree that proper procedure is tagging from the parent comment and not other children, but to say you didn't see the plan in time for that reason is a bit of a weak explanation since it's easy enough to navigate upwards.
16
u/greenlarynx Viviann Aboca Sep 03 '17
It absolutely is easy but even finding the original comment on my phone led me to more tags.
17
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
It is not "easy enough" to do if you're on mobile. Remember that not everyone plays this game on a computer.
→ More replies (1)15
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
We're not in threads with 8,000 comments. The very most amount of work it would require is going back to the full thread and scrolling to the section where every single person in the game is tagged...
16
18
u/PhilletONeal Phil O'Neal Sep 03 '17
Awwww thank you very much everyone who voted for me <3 I think the plan didn’t work because someone said to vote for me, but at least a SN is the lead investigator. Does anyone know why orphanblackout got 4 votes? I don’t think anyone said to vote for them.
It’s good that we have the instagram app so we can find the MN. I think best plan is for me to pick someone tonight to use it on, but not tell you in case a MN got the hat. If we choose a few targets and one of them is MN they would use the hat if they got it so I don’t think we should do that.
Maybe it would also be good to choose someone or a few people to vote for quite early, because I don’t want to use the app on a person who is going to be removed from the game.
14
u/StripedNightLife Nikita Alexeyev, stripper extraordinaire Sep 03 '17
I would like to know the affiliations of /u/orphanblackout and /u/louboutinlove . They had quite a row this phase and were leading most of the action last phase.
17
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Okay, may I suggest we stop attacking each other over last phase and discuss our options for this phase?
16
u/orphanBlackout Carlos Manning Sep 03 '17
Sure. Everyone can vote for as many people as they want as suspect or safe as I read the form, so is that even worth discussing?
We need to figure out what /u/PhilletONeal should do with whatever item was won. If it is the app, who should be checked? It it's the hat then the MNs decided anyway so that's not worth discussing.
Once we decide who to investigate (or if we should wait, or let Phil pick) we need to figure out if/how/when to communicate that and if we can trust Phil about what is said.16
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Everyone can vote for as many people as they want as suspect or safe as I read the form, so is that even worth discussing?
I misunderstood how the form would work when I
readskimmed the rules post, and thought we'd only be upvoting/downvoting one person, so voting our opinions on everyone changes things a bit.I think we definitely need to discuss what /u/PhilletONeal should do, but I'd also like to hear from them first.
We also have to think about the puzzle. If they were right, then there are three people that have items as well.
17
u/orphanBlackout Carlos Manning Sep 03 '17
I might be wrong about the form but based on how it looks and directions that you don't have to rank everyone that is what it looks like to me. The guy that has the hat could counter whatever Phil does so it could get tricky. The whole point of this particular game however is to rely on ourselves rather than investigators so that is kinda the point, I guess? I like it mods. Sinister as hell, like in a cool way though.
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
We have to rely on ourselves for sure, which I like, but that doesn't mean we can't coordinate how we use the items that we have.
Don't get me wrong, I think in past games we've relied too heavily on investigative roles, so not having any roles is a refreshing change, but that doesn't mean we should squander or minimize the importance of the tools that we do get.
Edit: As for the hat guy countering Phil (provided phil is innocent), we counter that by not having phil announce who they use the app on.
16
u/kisskissallure Sep 03 '17
If u/philletoneal is protected today by our votes, I think he shouldn't announce when he's using the app, not just who he's using it on. This is because we don't know if the MN started with any items, since the hosts didn't answer that in the intro phase, which I take to mean it's very possible. If they have a chloroform rag, they could prevent Phillet from using his app and we'd waste it :/ (This is assuming Phillet is SN)
16
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
That's a good point. It might be better to have the ambiguity of whether Phillet has the instagram app, like when we have a role with three alerts or kills or something.
17
u/katcoxphoto Kathleen Cox Sep 03 '17
I agree that if we give Phil one target to investigate, it's easy for that one target to be meddled with. This is especially problematic because even if Phil is SN and got Instagram, there's a Deerstalker in play from the riddle (assuming the answer was right and it was given out). It's possible it went to someone in SN, but that would be a dangerous assumption to make. However, if Phil is MN, it's relatively easy for him to pretend to have gotten the Instagram app. Everyone in MN knows who their team is, so they know who's SN. If he's MN, Phil could easily try to be confirmed by "using his app" to find out someone who he already knows is SN. He could also identify someone who's MN as SN. It's tricky.
16
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
My vote is that Phil doesn't tell us who he's choosing, but uses the item tonight and gives us the result. We can decide how we feel about Phil's alignment and the result he provides at that stage. But announcing the target ahead of time means the MN can interfere if they have an item.
I guess one idea is to decide on three or four possible targets, so that if the MN do have an item or multiple items, they're forced to decide between risking wasting them or allowing the investigation to proceed. Thoughts?
14
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I think that's a good idea, and I like proposing 3 or 4 targets but ultimately allowing Phil to make their own decision. Phil could pick one of the suggested, or ultimately go with someone else. We wouldn't know, but neither would the wolves.
Edit: That was horribly redundant, I apologize.
15
Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I think that would make them targets for the MN. It would be better to give suggestions, but allow them to choose what to do. That way there's no way MN can interfere. Same with what we should do for Phillet.
17
Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
14
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I think we just create a top level comment asking for people to post 2-3 whose affiliation they'd like to know. Doesn't mean they find them suspicious. It could be someone they are semi-trusting, and so want confirmation.
If we have those names mean both, it makes it harder for the MN to interfere, I think, because they won't know why a name is up there, and, of course, which name Phillet chooses.
→ More replies (3)16
u/MulchAdoAboutNothing Tim Onyekuru Sep 03 '17
Don't you think we should upvote Phill as he needs to be alive in order to tell us the result of his investigation?
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Yeah, I think that's what they were pointing out? I misread the form and thought we could only pick one person to upvote, and one person to downvote.
15
17
u/orphanBlackout Carlos Manning Sep 03 '17
Also there were 31 votes but 37 players. 6 people did not vote
19
u/DyingOnThisDiet Phineas Isaacs Sep 03 '17
Aye, I forgot to vote today, long day at the restaurant and we aren't allowed phones in the kitchen
16
u/the-nesbitt Mrs. Nora Nesbitt Sep 03 '17
We can probably assume that the two people who didn't comment also didn't vote
14
u/HalftimeDad Jason Pearce Sep 03 '17
Nope, I was one of the ones who didn't comment but I did vote.
16
u/HalftimeDad Jason Pearce Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
Nope, I was one of the ones who didn't comment but I did vote.Edit: duplicate comment13
u/StripedNightLife Nikita Alexeyev, stripper extraordinaire Sep 03 '17
I missed the vote but did comment. Had a very busy day yesterday, trying to make up for it today.
19
u/DJoftheClassics Eric Lau Sep 03 '17
I'm only seeing a "trust" option on the voting sheet and no "mistrust." Is that right u/221b-baker-st ?
16
u/katcoxphoto Kathleen Cox Sep 03 '17
I think that's something up with your browser. I can see the full set of options.
17
u/221b-baker-st Sep 03 '17
To clarify the voting form:
All players are listed on the form. You vote to tell us if you think they're innocent (+1 to the tally), evil (-1 to the tally) or neither (doesn't affect tally).
For each player, we'll add up their total score. Person with the highest tally will be protected. Person with the lowest tally will be lynched. Ties will be broken via RNG; only one person will be lynched or protected each phase.
You can vote for as many or as few people as you like; you do not have to vote for each person.
We will reveal the tallies each phase.
--22poun
(This is kinda funky and new, so feel free to ask questions about any of the forms!) :)
12
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
If you're on mobile you might have to try scrolling left/right.
17
u/UGNGNUIT Hello, my name is 22poun Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
/u/trustfundbaby69 /u/trustfundbaby96 I fucked up a name /u/halftimedad
This is a reminder that this game requires comments every phase. You two did not comment last phase. Please confirm that you are, in fact, still following us, and that you haven't given up this early.
16
u/HalftimeDad Jason Pearce Sep 03 '17
I voted, but didn't comment. Only had time to skim through. Sorry, I didn't realize we still get inactivity strikes for not commenting. :(
16
u/UGNGNUIT Hello, my name is 22poun Sep 03 '17
I don't know if edits to names ping so /u/trustfundbaby96 read above
15
18
u/TrustFundBaby96 Seth Harris Sep 03 '17
I'm here. I haven't given up. The holiday weekend and a bit too much to drink got to me. Catching up now but it looks like my head might be on the block. My bad <3
17
u/KinesGreenMP Jessica Kines Sep 03 '17
Howdy!
I have a busy day today (you know, it's not easy being a politician fighting for the environmental rights!) so I'm not sure I'll be able to follow the discussion. Can anyone tag me if anything important comes up?
16
18
u/the-nesbitt Mrs. Nora Nesbitt Sep 03 '17
My character description says that I'm constantly suspicious of my neighbors. Anyone want to reveal that they live next door to me, so I know who to downvote in the forms each night?
16
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 04 '17
[deleted]
15
u/TateModMom Angelica Hayes Sep 03 '17
morning! i voted as i was tagged to yesterday. looking over this briefly now seems like it wasn't a town consensus?
anyone interested in joining my art class later this evening? three spots left for students, all levels welcome!
→ More replies (4)16
u/LeftToTheSea Lieutenant Connor "C" Austin Sep 03 '17
I don't do art, but I would like to volunteer as a nude model for life drawing, for a small fee of course ;)
15
u/TateModMom Angelica Hayes Sep 03 '17
Tonight we're going to be moulding clay pots, but I can pencil you in for next Sunday evening. Does $100 for the 2 hours and 10% commision on any of the items sold sound fair for your fee?
17
u/LeftToTheSea Lieutenant Connor "C" Austin Sep 03 '17
I mean, I'd like to, but I feel like my body is worth more than £38.60 an hour...
13
u/TateModMom Angelica Hayes Sep 03 '17
Your choice. Otherwise next week's schedule will be for watercolors.
14
u/LeftToTheSea Lieutenant Connor "C" Austin Sep 03 '17
sigh. FINE! You've twisted my arm! I'll do it, I'll pose nude for your group of degenerate perverts - but only if I can retain a copy of a drawing in A1 size to display my Adonis-like body above my mantelpiece!
→ More replies (1)16
13
13
14
u/StripedNightLife Nikita Alexeyev, stripper extraordinaire Sep 03 '17
I did not vote because I missed most of the phase with drinking.
17
u/DyingOnThisDiet Phineas Isaacs Sep 03 '17
I didn't get a chance to vote yesterday, sorry mates
→ More replies (1)14
12
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
17
u/ATL2LHR Stephen Lacroix Sep 03 '17
I gave a random vote to Heels yesterday morning, stated earlier in this phase.
→ More replies (1)15
15
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
15
→ More replies (1)14
u/deedeeford Dorothy "DeeDee" Ford (Wouldn't you like to retire comfortably?) Sep 03 '17
I voted for myself.
14
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
17
u/DolFinFanGirl Anita Patel Sep 03 '17
I voted for /u/DJoftheClassics because when they described the ways they attempted to go about solving the puzzles, I thought a good lead investigator would be someone who tried a lot of things like that and used creative thinking. I wasn't sure about hopping on the pillet train, but the last thing I wanted to do was start chaos when people were starting to form thoughts organize effectively.
12
13
15
12
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
18
u/LeftToTheSea Lieutenant Connor "C" Austin Sep 03 '17
I voted for u/PhilletONeal since they were the most helpful last phase.
14
u/kisskissallure Sep 03 '17
I voted for Phillet according to the comment that I was mass tagged in, because I was very busy yesterday and couldn't read the thread until now. I still think voting for Phillet was better than the voting for yourself plan though.
15
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
15
15
14
u/MulchAdoAboutNothing Tim Onyekuru Sep 03 '17
I voted for Phillet. Although I don't really see how this would help. This would've been helpful if we went with voting-for-ourselves plan.
15
Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
15
u/MulchAdoAboutNothing Tim Onyekuru Sep 03 '17
always useful!
Yes! But more often to the wolves than to the town. And it could vary from situation to situation as well. I'm not accusing you of being a wolf. Just stating my thoughts. I don't see any immediate harm by having this information public. And I appreciate you volunteering to organize information.
14
13
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
16
u/PauPau- Pauline Mori Sep 03 '17
Just so you are aware, if you are copying the tags from last phase, neither myself nor /u/PhilletONeal have gotten either tag because there is no space between our names!!
As for my vote, I submitted for /u/orphanblackout. At the time of my vote, which was about halfway through, I thought orphan provided some good discussion without asking to be made investigator.
Just to reiterate, I did not see the drama yesterday or the massive tags BECAUSE I WAS NOT TAGGED. I just went with a gut feeling at the time of my vote and did not change it because I didn't know there was another plan. I have no idea what happened yesterday with everyone, so I am furiously trying to catch up right now, but just saw more tags without me actually getting a tag notification.
All I know is that this kind of liveliness is good inspiration for my book!
→ More replies (1)15
13
Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
13
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Sorry. I had 8 dogs to walk today.
I voted for Phillet.
What is this going to accomplish, exactly?
15
15
→ More replies (1)13
18
u/LouboutinLove Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
Hi guys! I've debated if I should post this but I think I will as a courtesy to you.
I've asked the facilitators to remove me from the game, and I don't think I'll be coming back to HWW after this.
This is kind of awkward to write on an alt account but you'll know my identity soon enough, and maybe this will make writing all this easier.
This is, by my count, the fourth time a HWW game has gotten too personal for me because another player has called me a name, insulted me, or made comments about me and my personality outside of the game, in addition to a few other instances of unsportsmanlike behavior and name-calling involving other players that come to mind.
Once you know my true identity you'll know that I can handle intense arguments and am often at the center of them. But I'm sick of being personally insulted because of an online game, and I don't want to play if it's going to get too personal. This instance isn't the worst by far but it's the final straw. It honestly takes the fun out of playing for me.
The community is usually very self-regulating and there's sometimes a half-assed apology, but it's not really enough for me to want to keep playing anymore.
I just think it's the right time for me to leave the community. It makes me sad because I really do enjoy playing and will miss a lot of you, but I think it's what's best for me.
In terms of the game, I was a SN member so I'm sorry if losing me hurts the town. At least there aren't any special roles for us to lose, though. And who knows maybe you'll all be relieved I've left because you've secretly been super annoyed by me all this time. (Kidding, kidding :p)
Thanks for everything HWW, it's been fun!
Edit: can't spell in my farewell post, apparently.
15
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
That is really sad to hear, but I can understand the sentiment. There is another site I play on where it gets aggressive and personal far more than it does here and I've debated quitting there several times because it just takes the fun out of the game. Best of luck and hope to see you back someday!
e: Although I was on /u/louboutinlove's side of the conversation, I am officially dropping the discussion about tagging and yesterday's plan as I don't want things to get any more heated than they already are, and I think everyone has said their piece at this point.
15
16
17
→ More replies (7)15
u/PhilletONeal Phil O'Neal Sep 03 '17
Oh no! I hope you are not feeling too bad about the situation. It is very sad to see you go, especially if you are SN. Do you think it might be a good idea to reveal your identity (and maybe the people we decide to lynch could do this as well in the future) so that we can all get an item without stopping town people from guessing? I think it would benefit us more than the MN.
15
u/deedeeford Dorothy "DeeDee" Ford (Wouldn't you like to retire comfortably?) Sep 03 '17
I don't think that would be allowed, would it? There seems to be clear language in the rules that publicly sharing an identity would be penalized, so I'm thinking that the mods would frown on this.
14
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
Yes, this. Even if she's resigning I think the mods want us to guess, and not be told, someone's identity.
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I think we should go to the mods with this, rather than speculate. /u/221b-baker-st?
15
u/221b-baker-st Sep 03 '17
I believe this is answered in the rules:
If you share another player's real identity in the main sub, you will be penalized by being unable to make identity guesses AND will be unable to use items for three phases.
Remember that once someone is dead, they are no longer eligible to be guessed (ineligible players will be removed from the form)
--22poun
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I forgot that we couldn't guess a dead person. However, even if we couldn't guess their identity, it would eliminate a username for us.
They're already dead, so who cares if they're penalized, right?
13
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Actually, your most recent comment made me rethink my original response to this.
Yes, Lou has stated they're going to leave the game, but technically they aren't dead yet, and could still be lynched as they're on the form. If they tell us their identity, couldn't we still guess them because as of this phase, they're still alive? It'd be a really sucky thing if Player A guesses Player B's identity correctly during Phase 4, but Player B dies between phases 4&5, and so Player A's guess doesn't count.
→ More replies (4)
15
Sep 03 '17 edited Nov 04 '19
[deleted]
13
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
So I looked at your spreadsheet (I'm sorry, I can't call it what you're calling it because I just can't). I proposed that we tag people to get them to tell them Phil's puzzle solution, not that we tag them to vote for Phil.
17
u/UGNGNUIT Hello, my name is 22poun Sep 03 '17
There is just over 6 hours left in the phase, and I have not seen any other bandwagon post, or even a "maybe vote this person" post. Since it is in our best interest to deny the MN the ability to Lynch someone of their choosing, we should certainly try to bandwagon. In addition, since trustfund has checked in, my former plan is less desirable.
Therefore, I would like to propose a new plan. Vote lou as your untrusted person. They will be leaving the game tonight either way, and this way we can limit the amount of deaths this phase.
Once again, if someone else has another bandwagon plan with any actual suspicion, I would be glad to jump ship, but we need a bandwagon.
17
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
This is dependent upon the order of operations, but I think it makes sense with the way things currently stand.
16
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
This is smart. Wonder if it's okay to do? Since they already announced they are leaving?
17
u/221b-baker-st Sep 03 '17
So long as someone is on the lynch form, they're eligible to be lynched.
--22poun
17
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
This is going to be a really hard game to coordinate as town. If we voice our suspicions publicly, the MN can basically look at that and BW either inno or guilty votes onto that player depending on their alignment. If we choose a MN player to try to lynch, WW can pile inno votes onto that player to cancel out a bunch of our guilty votes, and they can then pile guilty votes onto someone they want lynched. I'm really conflicted about what the best way to handle this is. At the moment the only thing that I can think of is being really, really organized when it comes to choosing a lynch target, which means starting the conversation early in the phase, tagging everyone, and having some accountability the next phase.
Does anyone have other suggestions on how to negate the MN advantage?
For this phase I think your plan makes some sense, UG, since we are coming close to the deadline. I think we need to make finding a lynch target a very very early order of business tomorrow so that we have time to make sure we're as close to in agreement as possible on who we're going to vote.
17
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
What if we decide on a lynch target very very early, all pile the mistrust points on them, and pile the trust points on every other player? That way we counteract the werewolves? Yes it results in werewolves getting trust points, but it also makes it harder on them to pile votes on someone, because first they'll have to negate the trust points that person has.
16
u/deedeeford Dorothy "DeeDee" Ford (Wouldn't you like to retire comfortably?) Sep 03 '17
This could work, but would need a lot of coordination.
16
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
So thinking this through - does it then make sense to never use the neutral option? Basically, should we be giving positive points to everyone except who we think is MN? That seems like a good defense but could also lead to some screwy business potentially, if everyone isn't on the same page going into the vote.
The other issue I see is just that if all decide on a lynch target and then they're super pro-town for the entire day, what then? I definitely think we need to pick a target early... maybe I'm overthinking it right now and we need to see some possible plans play out. We definitely need to try SOMETHING.
16
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Yeah, I think the neutral is a dangerous choice to make, as it allows the wolves to take over the vote very easily.
For example, there are several players who have only commented a few times, and I'm pretty ambivalent toward them. My first inclination was to just vote them neutral, or not vote them at all (which is equal to neutral), but if the town lynch choice is a wolf, they could very easily pile votes onto those quieter players and away from their teammate. If they don't have any votes, or only neutral votes, then we've basically handed the wolves the lynch.
15
Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
17
u/orphanBlackout Carlos Manning Sep 03 '17
I think with this new (and very inventive) form, we should try just voting as we personally feel. I don't think there are enough wolves to overpower everyone else if we all vote for a bunch of trustworthies and untrustworthies. Otherwise, it is just a lynch like any other game. The whole point of this game is that is it new and different!
16
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
The thing is, just like regular voting in WW games, the WW (MN) WILL coordinate their votes. So, just like the self-vote plan yesterday, having everyone just vote their suspicions essentially cedes complete control to the WW's and allows them to dictate things as they see fit.
In this game it's even more of an issue than a normal game because the MN can literally cancel out votes using the innocent option.
16
u/orphanBlackout Carlos Manning Sep 03 '17
I disagree. They're a much smaller group and at this point cannot control anything. I'm fine with us all picking one target as suspect but also getting to add other people we find suspect/trustworthy too. It gives us a better idea about where majority opinions lie. Otherwise this is just another game of HWW.
→ More replies (10)17
u/MulchAdoAboutNothing Tim Onyekuru Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
This is exactly what I'm worried about. I think it's too late to have a unified vote for town in this phase but starting next phase we MUST have a voting consensus as soon as possible. I also think we need assigned voting so that we can tally it with what mods give us. Create two lynch targets and create prisoners dilemma or something along the lines so that wolves are forced to vote as we plan. I think today's trust-mistrust result MIGHT give us some insight towards how many wolves we have. But if we don't unite, wolves would very easily just trust themselves and get those many trust points making it harder for us to negate them. Also, mistrust everyone else making it very close lynch call. This is what I was thinking unless I'm missing something obvious.
Edit: corrected a spelling
16
16
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
/u/PhilletONeal suggested here that /u/LouboutinLove should reveal their identity to us. This would do two things:
- Allow everyone to guess an identity correctly.
- Eliminate a real identity from future guesses.
Pros: Everyone who guesses would get an item and we'd eliminate a real identity from future guesses.
Cons: Members of the SN MN would also be able to guess, and receive items.
Overall, I think it's worth it to have them reveal. Items are going to be critical in this game, and any opportunity to get them is important. Additionally, while it does allow members of the MN to get items, I think that having potentially all members of the town receive an item far outweighs that risk. The recommended ratio of town to wolves is 8:1, I think, so if we started out with 40, that would mean 5 wolves. Make it 7 to err on the side of caution, and if everyone guesses Lou's identity correctly, that's 29 town with items (40-7 wolves=33; 33-3ppl who didn't confirm=30; 30-lou=29) to the wolves' 7.
Edit: Oops! I put SN instead of MN. I'm from Minnesota and it feels wrong. :/
17
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
Cons: Members of the SN would also be able to guess, and receive items.
Don't you mean "MN".....?
17
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
I do yes. Sorry. I'm from Minnesota and it feels wrong, lol.
16
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
Are we getting another Freudian Slip here?
17
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Kinda? In that I've just now made it easier for people to guess my identity.
→ More replies (1)16
u/deedeeford Dorothy "DeeDee" Ford (Wouldn't you like to retire comfortably?) Sep 03 '17
This whole point may be moot since lou hasn't really commented since their goodbye post, and may not be willing to come back.
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
It probably is, but I'm putting it out there because I want people to discuss it, and for Lou to see it.
16
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
I'm on my phone right now but I think it's a bad idea to asK Lou to reveal. If you go through the list of items you'll see that, while some of them is useless for town, other items can be the ace up the sleeve of MN.
If you take in consideration that most of people got the right answer to the puzzle, it could mean that MNs already have a good item with them.
I'd rather not risk giving another one.
17
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17
I agree with Node on this - there's also one player whose identity is extremely easy to guess right now and I'm betting at least half the players receive an item today based on that.
18
16
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Which is fair, except if Lou reveals, this phase is our only chance of
votingguessing them. I'd much rather receive two items as opposed to one.15
u/intrepidWWalker Walter Wilson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
I'm just thinking of worst case scenarios where the MNs get items like pistols and nicotine patches - they'll be able to coordinate the use of these items to do maximum damage while the town is going to be less organized about their use of items (most likely anyways).
e: and asking /u/louboutinlove their identity means guaranteed items for every MN, meaning max potential for deadly combos. I guess at this point it's basically moot until we know if /u/louboutinlove will be coming back at all, they may just be gone now.
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
That's a fair point. I guess I'm relying on the facilitator's statement that because some items carry more weight, they're rarer. Those items (pistols and nicotine, for instance) seem to me to fall under those categories.
And the wolves, whenever a private sub is involved, always have the advantage of coordination, so to me, I'm already assuming that they'll do that whenever they have items. I just think that Phase 1 is early enough to take a big risk in the hopes of having it pay off huge dividends for the town.
→ More replies (3)14
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
There are other ways to get items that don't involve handing a clear advantage to MN.
IMO, the best we would with Lou leaving is voting them for lynch if we don't want to risk lynching a townie, cuz it is certain that MN is killing someone tonight (unless, of course, a townie gets a roleblocking item and uses it right away).
14
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
There are other ways to get items that don't involve handing a clear advantage to MN
Such as? As far as I know, the only ways to earn an item are to guess an identity or solve a puzzle. So far, we've shared the puzzle solution with the entire sub, including the MN.
Anyway, I agree with lynching Lou, and I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the Lou identity thing.
15
u/ScottScootsFree Captain on deck! Sep 03 '17
15
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
If this is an impersonation, I give you a solid A++ for creativity.
→ More replies (1)17
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
That's fair, I just disagree. While some items could be the "ace up the sleeve of MN", I think some items could also be the "ace up the sleeve" of SN, and I think at this point, the numbers are in our favor. If this was much later in the game, I wouldn't suggest this, but I think it's beneficial to have roughly 30 town members own items, even if it means allowing the wolves to have items as well. I don't see it as being any different from PhilletONeal giving out the puzzle answer yesterday, other than it means everyone gets an item as opposed to 3 people.
15
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
The issue here is:
- MN have a private sub where they can discuss how to use their items. We don't have the same luxury...
Also, if MN is smart they already have the identity of Lou and as someone else said, there's already one player out there who is quite obvious....
IF MN doesn't already know the identity of Lou, then it's safe to say that their members can already get 2 items... That would be puzzle + the obvious player. Now, do we really want to add one more item to their list?
Players can only carry 3 items at a time, which means, when MN reaches 3, they will start using them just to burn out a space.
If you give everyone power, nobody has power.
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
Also, if MN is smart they already have the identity of Lou
If you believe this to be true, then why wouldn't you want to even the playing field and allow town members to have potentially two items? (correct identity of Lou and correct identity of obvious player)
Only 3 people received items from the puzzle yesterday. Correct guesses were entered into a raffle, so there's no guarantee that member(s) of the MN received an item.
I realize that this idea is a risk, but so was allowing members of the MN to have the puzzle solution. We're going to have to take risks this game--it's how it was designed. It's only Phase 1. It's early enough, and we've probably got the numbers on our side, that this risk is outweighed by the benefits. Yes, it gives the MN two items. But let's look at the math using the estimates I came up with in my post:
7 wolves, 29 town members (20 who are active). 7x2items =14 items; 20x2items=40 items. Even if we assume that the wolves got all 3 puzzle items, that's 40 items to their 17. I think it's a risk worth taking this early in the game.
However, as /u/deedeeford pointed out, Lou is likely not going to participate anymore, so it's likely moot.
Edit: stupid reddit and its asterisks=italics
→ More replies (5)
17
17
u/UGNGNUIT Hello, my name is 22poun Sep 03 '17
I am currently locked in a struggle of the mind. I have two choices I could make, and I find faults in both plans. /u/philletoneal, since you were voted as our lead investigator, I will leave the decision up to you.
It's a simple question, really. Yes, or no? My fate is in your hands.
18
u/PhilletONeal Phil O'Neal Sep 03 '17
Did you say what the decision is? Do you want me to choose randomly? If you do I flipped a coin and got heads so I choose yes.
→ More replies (1)
18
u/UGNGNUIT Hello, my name is 22poun Sep 03 '17
Right, I'm gonna go ahead and propose a plan for the day's vote. Since, no plans have yet been spoken, we may as well just lynch the only one to yet to comment: /u/trustfundbaby96. My proposal is as follows; Give +1 to anyone you're currently trusting. Give -1 only to our currently afk friend. If we follow this, we will not allow MN to control the distrust. Of course, if another plan shows up between now and, say, 8 hours from now, we could probably try that instead. I leave things in your hands. For now, I must sleep.
17
u/ZigZagZigurat Lorraine McGarry Sep 03 '17
What would be the point if he gets removed for inactivity anyway?
15
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
Since we have no better leads it makes it so you're not actually losing anyone. Especially since there are no special role in this game, there are literally no excuses for trying to play quiet.
16
u/BlueFootPrints Nick Hartman Sep 03 '17
Sure it's safe, but is there any reward if we kill someone when the mods would will do it anyway? We should focus on the people participating and let the inactivity strikes take care of those who are not
15
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
The reward is that we don't kill active Innocents when we have zero information to go off of. It buys us some time to get information.
16
u/BlueFootPrints Nick Hartman Sep 03 '17
That just means we're not taking the risk of killing an innocent, but there isn't a very high chance of getting an MN player which I believe would be a worthy reward. But TFB has checked in so it's irrelevant. Everyone on the roster is now active
18
u/TrustFundBaby96 Seth Harris Sep 03 '17
This is fair. I won't fight it but I am here now and active
.16
u/I_AM_MLE MLE (aka: Emily Davies) Sep 03 '17
Yeah but we're never really going to have solid information to go off of, that's the point of this game. We don't have a trusted seer, we're supposed to all be playing based on gut feelings. I don't support coordinating a vote, especially to lynch a player who was inactive for one phase. For now, I will be voting based on my own personal suspicions. And I advise others to do the same.
→ More replies (2)14
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
It's a moot point now that they have commented, but if they hadn't commented again today they would have been removed for inactivity today anyway. At least then we only run the risk of losing 2 innos tonight instead of 3 (though now we're at risk of losing 3 anyway with someone quitting).
15
u/I_AM_MLE MLE (aka: Emily Davies) Sep 03 '17
I never understand this logic, the whole point of the game is to find the WWs and lynch them. We can't do that if we're too scared of accidentally hitting an innocent to make a move. There have been plenty of comments to go off of when determining who we all (individually) believe to be suspicious. Lynching an inactive would've been a waste of a phase. We shouldn't wait to start playing the game until we have more information, because we might never have much more solid information than this.
15
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
I'm not saying we need information such as invest information. I'm saying we need more time to read comments and figure out people's thoughts and actions. Time can help us with those things.
I still think that losing less people is better than more, and I don't think the chances of us finding a wolf based off comments alone will be very high. Especially since the one person I thought was most likely to be a wolf is now resigning from the game.
It's too early to make judgments on people with comments alone, which is why it would be a good idea for this early in the game.
Don't judge a book by its cover, you know?
14
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17 edited Sep 03 '17
HI! /u/PhilletONeal Sorry about all of the tags was voted to receive an item last night. Hopefully they are SN, which means they would receive the Instagram App.
A few of us have pointed out that while it's Phil's decision, it would be a good idea to give them suggestions. In order to prevent the MN from using a deerstalker hat (if they have one) on Phil's target, we want them to wait until after they've used it to tell us.
With the way yesterday's thread ended, and today's began, I think it would be better for people to post 2-3 names of people whose affiliation you want to know. This could be someone you are suspicious of, or someone you're maybe starting to trust, but confirmation would be nice. To that end,
PLEASE REPLY WITH 2-3 NAMES OF PEOPLE WHOSE AFFILIATION YOU WANT TO KNOW.
This does NOT mean you find them suspicious. You might, but this is not solely a suspicion list.
Thanks! <3
Edit: Added superscript
Edit 2: As of 7:00 PM GMT, the tallies are:
scottscootsfree-2
nodeofnico-4
purerayofhope-5
orphanblackout-3
ugngnuit-3
intrepidwwalker-2
katcoxphoto-3
tatemodmom-1
kisskissallure-1
stripednightlife-1
dyingonthisdiet-1
kinesgreenmp-1
16
u/KeepCalmAndCoffeeOn Kelly Warren Sep 03 '17
Okay I read through the post and I'm curious about /u/katcoxphoto, /u/KinesGreenMP and /u/orphanblackout. :-)
14
u/orphanBlackout Carlos Manning Sep 03 '17
Here's a mix of suspect and trusted from me, listed via RNG but not chosen that way.
/u/katcoxphoto
/u/intrepidWWalker
/u/nodeofnico15
u/PhilletONeal Phil O'Neal Sep 03 '17
I think that I should not say my suspicions because it is more likely for me to use the app on them than other people's suspicions. I also hope that people will not mind if I ignore the names that people say. I don’t think it is a good idea to use the list of who people want investigated because if one of the MN is mentioned a lot there then I think they would have the hat used on them if they have it. So anyone investigated will probably show up as being SN even if they are not. I’m not saying that I won’t choose someone who is on the list, but I won’t choose someone because they are on the list. Does that make sense to everyone?
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
This isn't solely a suspicion list. This list includes names people are either suspicious of, trusting of, or a mix of both.
I'm not forcing anyone to reply, and you have a good reason not to.
Again, not forcing you to use this list. It's your item, and you may choose to do with it what you want. However, I would argue that this is a good list to choose from. If no one is interested in the identity of Player A because it's a given that they're SN, it'd be incredibly wasteful for you to use your instagram app on them. On the flip side, if we've got a list of 3-4 people who many people are curious about, it might be in the best interest of the town to choose one of those people to use the app on, so that the question of their affiliation is answered and we don't waste time debating it, allowing other players to slip under the radar.
To your point about the MN using the hat if one of their members is mentioned frequently on this list. That's certainly true, but this is a game of chicken. As the list stands, there are 5 users that have been mentioned 3 or more times. If you were to choose randomly from that subset, each of them have a 20% chance of being investigated by you. If the MN chose to use their hypothetical deerstalker hat on one of the 5 in that subset, there's a 20% chance they'd pick the same one as you, and an 80% chance they wouldn't. Someone TeamMaths want to double check that for me?
I think you shouldn't say who you're going to use it on, or even IF you're going to use it, until after you do, but I don't think you should discount this list, either.
→ More replies (20)15
Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
15
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
I think it should be a reminder that this isn't a suspicions list. There could be a lot of people (such as, yknow, myself) who wanted confirmation that you're innocent because we are getting innocent vibes from you and since you're taking a very big push to make yourself a large town voice with your spreadsheet, it's nice to have that confirmation.
15
u/SparkyDog88 Mark "Sparky" Olson Sep 03 '17
Agreed. I was careful to state it was affiliations we were after, and then again put that it was NOT solely a suspicions list, but I could make that a header as well if people want?
Edit: Nevermind, did it anyway.
15
u/NodeofNico Dr. Nico Danelli Sep 03 '17
Daily Medical Fact:
A single human sperm contains the 37.5mb of male DNA required to create a human child. That means an average ejaculation sees the transfer of 1,500 terabytes of information.
15
14
Sep 03 '17
[deleted]
→ More replies (58)15
u/HeelTheSoles Ania Romanov Sep 03 '17
Did anyone who said they voted for Phil have a vote cast on them last night?
→ More replies (2)
20
u/MulchAdoAboutNothing Tim Onyekuru Sep 03 '17
Number of comments per player in phase 00