I read back and I don't see where she came back to the thread after her string of voting prior to deadline.

No strong reason to vote brit, just would like to see him more engaged, if his work allows.

Is there merit in trying to suss out which roles a wolf captain or villager captain might go towards? For me, Larry Dallas stands out as one I'd really like to have as a wolf to have a chance to short-circuit the seer / BG / role that follows someone else, or at least hit a village role with a 100% guarantee whereas if they were on the village side, it would be of much less use, except maybe late in the game. A wolf captain might've wanted to deny the village a helpful role like Les Nessman also (that one would probably be high on both lists). And some of the roles have very unclear abilities, so this may not be so useful.

For the village captain out there, I'm on your side, you might want to consider what other roles you had higher than mine on your priority list as a possible bit of info whether they are good or not. Without giving yourself away of course. :)

I'll try and pop on over lunch, it's going to be another long day for me though.

So Klink, if he is out there, will know whether or not yourself of font is good or bad.

I guess the key then is to find out which side Klink is on.

Could font's behavior indicate that of Screech? Maybe someone who knows WW better gets the references of "deviant" and "easily distracted?"

So a bit of Googling:

deviant = only wins if he is killed

That correct?

I can't find details on the deviant role anywhere because I seem to be awful at googling and I don't have a boardgamegeek account in order to download one of the comprehensive lists you can find there, but from watching people play the video game on Youtube I gather that this is indeed the Deviant's purpose.

I suspect that the roles here are mostly hybrids though. Some of the descriptions in post 3 leave a lot to the imagination as well. Are they just vanilla villagers? Are there any vanilla villagers in this game?

We're gonna have to push a domino over and hope it falls in the right direction tonight.

Good morning. Catching up a bit. Will be in and out during the day.

Just caught up. I will not be voting for JAG today -- my reason for voting him yesterday is that if he's a villager I want him to become a cleared villager as soon as possible, and hopefully knowing his role will help us to do that. Gotta go read the roles now and figure out what we know.

JAG, I think it is useful to consider what roles the wolf captain might have gunned for, particularly ones that the village captain probably wouldn't have.

GOtcha

Yes

DOla cause I can't edit. There is a similar role in the game Town of Salem too that has to be lynched to win. It always puts people on edge because you never know whether they are being mean normally or with this role, and so forth. If you broadcast it too much no one votes for you and you lose. Don't know if that's what that roles does, necessarily, only that player and the GM would know for sure, but that's the idea.

My thoughts on the roles...


Larry Dallas - Typical role blocker. Probably not a high priority for wolves.

Terri Alden I'm presuming from the coloring is neutral, did EF say the neutral got to draft anyone? Could kill a wolf, so good to keep around if we can.

So Burns can scan but not reveal his scans, is that everyone's take? But can make a one-time kill. So we want to keep him alive long enough to find a wolf. Or a supposed one, since his scan isn't 100%

Natalie - I assume the night kill is her special move.

Skippy - Adds to the unreliability of scans, meaning we need to focus on other intelligence.

Klink - Might be a high target for both teams to draft.

Nessman - Not clear how much detail Les gets from following someone. Typically would just be that they had a night action. Again, an unreliable one, so not too much use.

Roz - Some type of bodyguard, high priority draft for either side really, but more likely villagers.

Harper - completely mystery. Probably not a wolf priority.

Potsie Weber seems worrisome, maybe a vigilante, with a one-time kill? Someone the wolves might try to draft.

Both Screech and Bud say "always trying to fit in", which seems important somehow. Another role blocker? But unreliable.

Not sure what Bud's writeup would mean. Unfortunately, since I was hoping we'd find a role we could use to confirm allegiance somehow.

Wayne Arnold - moves a vote I assume?

Mel Sharples - probably a duke role

Murdock - Again the phrase "loyal". Does this mean that we have a conversion mechanic at play?


If I had to guess what the wolves might have prioritized, I'd say Klink, Potsie, Mel and Wayne. In a small game controlling even one vote could be a game changer, as would an extra kill, and knowing roles would be very helpful for the wolves. Though thinking on the second level, captain might have mixed it up to throw us off the path. How many wolves do we think? Two or three? If there's a possibility of conversion, which I think is likely, probably just two.

Autumn, fontisian, I was looking at the roles last night and trying to figure out, if I was Nat, who'd I'd draft, and I think there are two ways and two strategies to do it.

1). Go for the night-win. Draft two roles you think would really help, and then go for wins with the various decisions and such

2). Go for thread-play. Grab two roles you think have little value and won't be hunted much in thread. Then try to win here.


And I suppose #3, try to balance it.

If I were Natalie the head bad, I think I'd go the thread-play route and grad weaker roles, in order to push things around, but I could see folks doing the other as well, you know?

Alright, off for work for a long while. See y'all post-work, (I'm in CST time now).l

Anyone else have a problem with the forum with the "go to new post" thing not working?

Yes, the same logic worked for both of you but he was first ;)

I have a super busy day of meetings at work so probably won't be able to contribute much until this evening, but I'll check in as I can

Yeah, though I've always had weirdness with that functionality. Definitely has been even worse the past couple of days though

With one presumed neutral and others that seem like they could potentially have win conditions of their own, I could see either two or three wolves. Although if teams were picked does that mean the villager team gets to PM? That's another wrinkle that would probably push me to think there are at least 3 wolves

Catching up now, FYI.

Just to make sure things are clear.. so you don't need a name after an "unvote"? And in post 193 fontisian did not actually put the word "vote" in front of Julio Riddols' name but you're counting it based upon assumed intention?

Even though there was no "vote" in front of my name? Just trying to clarify. My anticipation was that font didn't actually have a vote at the moment because she unvoted and then just wrote my name in bold without a "vote" in front of it.

I would think 2-3 wolves with the chance to convert at least one more, and maybe a wild card out there with no allegiance.

I've been reading up on typical roles but I think this game has some extra flavor going on.

For now, I'm gonna throw out a random vote and keep an eye on things.

It's not so much whether Font is good or bad, but what character she is. Distinguishing players, characters, roles/powers, and alignments in this game will be tricky, I feel.

Yes, quite. Lots of variables, lots of unknowns. I'm sure some of us don't even know what our capabilities truly are yet and it will take a specific event to trigger that.

There is so much to figure out I almost feel like we kind of have to just vote for someone, anyone, and hope the result is beneficial.

Funny that we learn the owner of the role that's basically a blank slate. Just for reference, Bud is "the life of the party, in his own mind"; "tries to fit in with the others but sticks to himself in reality"; and "may develop abilities depending on his alignment."

All those uncertainties aside, I agree that there's a sliver of a probabilistic edge to steer away from JAG, as he cannot possibly be Natalie, the only certain bad role.

I believe I said something last night about how learning a role but not knowing the allegiance would likely be a distraction, so I agree that just piling on JAG would not be optimal.

Then again, maybe he's a wolf and it's the fellow wolves that have been pushing this line of thought today?

We've spent some time discussing voting mechanics. JR (posts 95-99) and Font (posts 101-108) had the most interesting sequences of votes on D0. It's hard to tease apart the role that our long dormancy will play in producing errant votes from the potential misdirection that could be caused.

Now that we're in D1, JAG has also picked up on Font's game of trying to block Klink's power (with the added efficacy that JAG's role is already public). I'm not sure what Font's role is, and what would motivate her to self-sacrifice to occupy Klink. But it's interesting to note that at least two players have concluded that they see Klink's power as something likelier to be used for evil.

Remember also that the team captains put in priority lists for roles--I'm not sure it's a certainty that Klink ends up on Team Bad. There are a lot of mechanics that EF's keeping under wraps (presumably for balance and intrigue purposes). For instance, how large are the respective teams? Abe has assumed that Team Bad totals 3 in an earlier post; we've also had a question about whether our Neutral could draft.

Hi, Telle!

Not a bad proposition. Natalie would have submitted the Team Bad draft list before last night's result, but if she ended up with Bud Bundy...

Oh, and just for consistency's sake, ...

Corrected the vote totals from earlier. My eyes played tricks on me for that last one.

Right that's what I meant. If Natalie had happened to drafted Bud Bundy, then the wolves could be trying a bit of misdirection today to prevent the pile-on from happening and losing one of their number right off the bat.

Heh. I feel like I give a decent synopsis of my thoughts on the game thus far and I'm still 11th out of 13 players in post count. Yay, my D0 activity!

Looking ahead, I'll check in periodically until 5p CT, and then I'll be AFK until after deadline. Hate to break it to you guys, but date night's more important. :p

This seems like the kind of thing a villager should know.

So the next question is this: what roles would be more attractive to which teams, based on their descriptions? And what's the likelihood of them ending up on either team, based on things we don't know like the sizes of the teams? I'll say objectively that Bud could be promising for either side, though the powers of Bad players are typically greater than of Good to make up for the typical lack of strength in numbers--but does that hold here?

Mental note to circle back to Autumn's analysis of the role descriptions and maybe try to tease out what roles we might want to look for as being likely Bad recruits.

Nice catch. Cultist-type role, you wonder? It's such low-hanging fruit, and the suggestion goes against typical WW setups.

EagleFan - Can you elaborate at all on Klink's power? "The first vote against him on any day will result in him learning the role of the player who voted against him." Does that mean the first of ANY vote? Or the first vote that's still counted at the end of the game (thus not unvoted)?

Not sure what you mean, I mean I assume if there's a villager captain/team they get to PM, I was mostly saying that would push me to think there are at least 3 wolves because villagers don't usually get to PM

He means that if you're a villager you should already know if villagers get to PM and not need to be pondering it "out loud" in the game.

That post definitely got a hairy eyeball from me on reading back just now.