It right there in the rules...
Randy says otherwise, and I assumed that by getting only a wolf contact that I wasn't into the pack, otherwise why not just tell me all the wolves's names?
It right there in the rules...
Randy says otherwise, and I assumed that by getting only a wolf contact that I wasn't into the pack, otherwise why not just tell me all the wolves's names?
That's a funny thing. I thought Boris and Jens were attached, since the pack PM I got basically said so, like EL's did. But during the last day the_hdk suddenly notified me that they still had to be formally attached.
Had I known that earlier (and reading the rules regarding this would have helped, I'd say ) I'd have asked Boris and Jens/slinky to formally attach themselves sooner. Now there was this last-second mad scramble to get them to do so.
I was referring to this...
He didn't need to be certain what you were, he needed you to be certain that you would be brutalised, because that forces you to be on his side if you are the sorcerer. If you are something else it doesn't make any difference to him, but it makes the difference between winning and losing if you are someone that can switch between packs.
Its a bad rule. Just because the people who had it didn't use it effectively doesn't mean that it wouldn't have been horribly unbalancing in other hands.
If you were good you wouldn't have contacted me because, amongst other reasons, you would have been dead.
You were better off not reading them. That way you don't get upset at the end of the game when you find out the GM has conned you.
As a ghost? Really? Who dies first, the pack with the hunt order in on you, or the pack if you go after them when you are not turned?
You were going to die sooner or later. It was just a matter of time. Parity is going to come sooner or later. It was just a matter of time and not very much time at all by then.
It wasn't that Hearth had to die before parity, it was that Hearth had to die before you even at the cost of giving a tiny extra chance to the goodies and Fatimids.
You brought it up.My hypothetical situation had me alive but good. In your world apparently death is the only alternative. But really, the whole discussion about contacting you or not contacting you would be impossible in that case so why even bring it up?
Its what happened in the game, not a hypotheses. They hunted you before you could get around to outing them in the thread. Or are you saying you expected you were cursed all along and if you hadn't known that you would have acted differently?My hypothetical situation had me alive but good. In your world apparently death is the only alternative. But really, the whole discussion about contacting you or not contacting you would be impossible in that case so why even bring it up?
...
Can we have a bit less straw-man argumenting please? First you say I was more effective as a baddie killing baddies than as a goodie, then when I try to argue against that by telling you what I would do in such a case you suddenly say I'd be dead in that case. Which obviously isn't what the whole argument was about in the first place.
I simply wasn't going to let that happen. I told people we were better off cutting him loose at that stage, and I meant it. He had his chance to make himself look innocent by voting Rendap, and he didn't take it. The consequence was what it was. He was a festering limb, and trying to save it would have compromised the rest of the body.
Call that ruthless, if you will. But it wasn't just about me.
You brought it up.
Its what happened in the game, not a hypotheses. They hunted you before you could get around to outing them in the thread.
Or are you saying you expected you were cursed all along and if you hadn't known that you would have acted differently?
I am saying that in the game just completed, you were a goodie trying to survive as a goodie which you managed for 3 days and then failed. What you would have done as a goodie after that is irrelevant because your goodie strategy failed on night 4.
On night 4 you lose as a goodie because a pack has decided its time for you to die.
No doubt you had plans for what to do as a goodie if your strategy had continued to work, but it failed. Since it was already a failed strategy, its continuation is obviously also a failed strategy. This isn't a hypothetical straw man, its what actually happened in the game.
The GM has decided that if you fail to a wolf attack you get a second chance as a wolf.
Your strategy now changes. You are now a baddie trying to win as a baddie. Your baddie strategy is a success.
I observe that your failed goodie strategy killed no wolves and your successful baddie strategy killed 2 packmates. 2 is larger than 0. This is fact. You failed to convince the village to lynch any wolves while you were good, and you successfully persuaded your pack to sacrifice 2 wolves while you were bad.
I give as my opinion based on my analysis of what happened in the game and what I know now about what you knew of the setup at the time, that Rendap would have had a much better chance of a win if he had refused to be sacrificed, but at a small detriment to the chance of a Byz win and a rather larger detriment to the chance of you winning. However if Rendap couldn't see a way for the Byz to win unless he died, that's werewolf and he deserves his loss. I think he had options and lots of them were good.
I give as my opinion based on my analysis of what happened in the game and what I now now you knew of the setup at the time, that you would have had a slightly better chance of a win, and so would the Byz, if you hadn't outed Hearth. The only qualification is that I don't know what you and the Fatimids thought about one another at the time, and its possible that if a Byz wolf didn't die you would have had a much worse chance of victory because you would have been hunted.
Hearth might or might not have got lynched if you had done nothing. If he gets lynched, you don't need to save him but you have a small chance at parity that night and a very good one at parity the next and a virtual certainty the one after. Its endgame time. You can actually afford to save him, unless another Byz dying in that lynch is what you need to happen to keep the Fatimids from hunting you. What you do by sacrificing him and putting Tamius at risk the following day opened up the possibility that all the wolves die and even though the other baddies are a majority, its a goodie win.
So my opinion is that you badly miscalculated with Hearth if you did it to save the Byz from the village, but not if you did it to save yourself from the Fatimids. 4-5 goodies piling on him from the word go is complete fantasy.
There were enough goodies that could have been put into the picture and lynched instead to get you easily to parity without the need to lose any other baddie. Day 2 with 10 days still to survive and a competent Seer on the lookout is one thing. Giving up an immediate chance to win while you have the JL completely under your thumb is another. You push parity back a day by lynching a packmate rather than a goodie and you only have a day or two to go! Its absolutely crazy for a pack to kill one of their own wolves in the situation you were in.
I think there were only 4 people that it would have been immediately suspicious to make a case against. You could have had the goodies fighting over which of their number to lynch with Hearth in 3rd place. You could have saved Hearth and lynched the Seer on parity day if you wanted to.
I wasn't that certain of how much time we had. The fatamids were a complete unknown, and I'm not even sure we had our sorcerer contact yet by that point.
You may be right that given the benefit of hindsight we shouldn't have done this, but at that time it wasn't so clear at all.