• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
This is a tough call to make. Tamius/Reis has consistently not voted for wolves. Bryan has voted them, but twice tried to switch his vote off them in the final minutes, and has only been prevented from saving wolves by incorrect formatting

If you refrain from voting, as it stands now, your sub will win.
 
pope-selection-white-smoke_65226_600x450.jpg


After reading through the thread, and causing myself an almighty headache trying to keep track, I am ready to vote. It has not been easy, as so often they have voted together, have both voted for wolves and been run up by known wolves. However, Bryan attempted to change his vote away from wolves. Votes involving Citizen and Bryan seemed co-ordinated, even when voting for each other. Therefore:

Vote unclebryan
 
Technically I am not new, having played way back when. RL usually prevents me from playing effectively, as has been amply demonstrated during this game, so I do not plan to sign up for any other WW games in the next year or so, so your prediction in this matter seem on target.

I was talking about jaypee and bentley.
 
vote count

unclebryan: tamius23 II (570) The Super Pope (606) 2 votes

tamius23 II: unclebryan (576) 1 vote
 
If you vote incorrectly, Super Pope, the villagers will lose, so why not take the sure win (for your sub) and unvote. There is nothing dishonest about it. We have learned that this game is about following the rules, so you should exploit this perfectly safe opportunity. It does not matter to me, my character will be lynched either way, (although it takes an extra helping of suspension of disbelief - beyond pretending to be believe in werewolves, to think that a two way tie among three people could phyically result in two of them getting lynched by the third - this is another reason why to make the tie, to force the GM to figure out how to write this in a believable fashion).

One survives a while in this game by not being hunted. By seeming to play along with wolves then apparently messing up my last minute vote switch, the wolves thought me to be on their side, yet my actions prevented the wolves from achiving parity the last two days. Tamius did not vote for the wolf and thus made a tie possible yesterday. Had I actually made the change, then there would have been parity and you would be dead. Tamius almost killed you yesterday. My actions prevented that. What thanks do I get for sparing your life? A vote from you! It is a good thing that karma had not yet been heard of in Ireland at this time, or else you would be about to collect a lot of the bad kind.

I assure you that I have not sent in a hunt order for tonight, nor will I. (The GM can confirm this after the game if they choose.) Villagers hunt orders get ignored. Thus, if you don't vote for me, I assure you that you will not die as a result of being hunted on my orders. Tamius will no doubt claim the same, but can you trust someone who put your life in danger yesterday?
 
If you vote incorrectly, the villagers will lose, so why not take the sure win (for your sub) and unvote. There is nothing dishonest about it. We have learned that this game is about following the rules, so you should exploit this perfectly safe opportunity. It does not matter to me, my character will be lynched either way, (although it takes an extra helping of suspension of disbelief - beyond pretending to be believe in werewolves, to think that a two way tie among three people could phyically result in two of them getting lynched by the third - this is another reason why to make the tie, to force the GM to figure out how to write this in a believable fashion).

It is dishonest, as it is breaking a rule - that which states players shall vote every day (§2A). Furthermore, the tradition that I and most GMs adhere to is that at the end of the game, a player with a missed vote who cannot carry on is autolynched. There is no reason to advocate a mass defeat, just because you cannot win.

One survives a while in this game by not being hunted. By seeming to play along with wolves then apparently messing up my last minute vote switch, the wolves thought me to be on their side, yet my actions prevented the wolves from achiving parity the last two days. Tamius did not vote for the wolf and thus made a tie possible yesterday. Had I actually made the change, then there would have been parity and you would be dead. Tamius almost killed you yesterday. My actions prevented that. What thanks do I get for sparing your life? A vote from you! It is a good thing that karma had not yet been heard of in Ireland at this time, or else you would be about to collect a lot of the bad kind.

I already said that this was nonsense, and you ignored my post stating that. The Super Pope was in no danger yesterday, certainly none from me. He received no votes.

I assure you that I have not sent in a hunt order for tonight, nor will I. (The GM can confirm this after the game if they choose.) Villagers hunt orders get ignored. Thus, if you don't vote for me, I assure you that you will not die as a result of being hunted on my orders. Tamius will no doubt claim the same, but can you trust someone who put your life in danger yesterday?

You don't need to send in a hunt order. After the lynch in this game, there will be two players left. The game cannot carry on with two players - either there is parity or no wolves left.
 
@Bryan

You can not claim a noble gesture of sacrifice when you attempted to vote to achieve parity. Its not that your actions avoided disaster, its that your votes were disqualified, preventing the course of action you sought taking place.
You don't need to send a hunt order, either I am right and we have won, or I am wrong and I've lost the game for us.

I recognise that I could hand victory to a sub, but I think that that would be very unsporting. The GM might well anounce it as a wolf victory rather than hand victory to whoever is top of the subs list, as the wolves would have achieved destruction of the village
 
I already said that this was nonsense, and you ignored my post stating that. The Super Pope was in no danger yesterday, certainly none from me. He received no votes.

One is entitled to ignore nonsense. I tried to be polite and not call attention to your shortcomings (mine are painfully obvious, but the seem to be in the keyboarding area), but as you repeat your obviously false incorrect analysis, I choose to respond.

Had my vote counted the way it appeared to vote, without the extra characters and lack of boldness, parity would have been achieved and The Super Pope would be dead. Therefore, you are wrong, as we was in extreme peril. It was only a missing "/" that saved him.
 
One is entitled to ignore nonsense. I tried to be polite and not call attention to your shortcomings (mine are painfully obvious, but the seem to be in the keyboarding area), but as you repeat your obviously false incorrect analysis, I choose to respond.

Had my vote counted the way it appeared to vote, without the extra characters and lack of boldness, parity would have been achieved and The Super Pope would be dead. Therefore, you are wrong, as we was in extreme peril. It was only a missing "/" that saved him.

You're merely admitting to being a wolf now.
 
@Bryan

You can not claim a noble gesture of sacrifice when you attempted to vote to achieve parity. Its not that your actions avoided disaster, its that your votes were disqualified, preventing the course of action you sought taking place.
You don't need to send a hunt order, either I am right and we have won, or I am wrong and I've lost the game for us.

I recognise that I could hand victory to a sub, but I think that that would be very unsporting. The GM might well anounce it as a wolf victory rather than hand victory to whoever is top of the subs list, as the wolves would have achieved destruction of the village

I can claim what I want. Whether the claim wil be accepted or not is another matter. My actions, specifically not typing the "/" before the "b" to close out the bolded section of my posts, that have twice avoided parity. Therefore I have twice saved the village. It is inappropriate to convict someone on their intentions, it is actions that matter. Besides, how can we know what someone's intentions are? My actions saved the village. Medal please
 
Deadline.

Vote is unchanged since the last count, so there's not much point in doing another.
 
Night 7

An uncertain and weary village deliberates. Who did what? What were the intentions? Are words or actions the more important thing? Is refraining from making a choice permitted? If permitted, is it ethical? Should werebeasts hunt?

It has been a week of difficult choices. In the end tamius23 II, the villager and The Super Pope, the villager correctly choose to the lynch unclebryan, the wolf. The week may have been less than cheerful at times, and memories of the experience might prove bitter. The ordeal, no matter what else, was over. The Super Pope, almost too exhausted to have made a final decision, was carried home by a thoughtful and conscientious Tamius 23 II.


unclebryan the wolf was lynched

Village Victory

Winners:

Tamius23 II (subbing for Reis91)

The Super Pope





e124054.jpg


"The people is, then, a barbarous people, literally barbarous "
Gerald of Wales
 

btw, if you type on a keyboard all you need to do to bold your text is press Ctrl and B at the same time.

Thanks for the tip, but having learned the other way, and being an 'old dog', I am not likely to learn that new trick.

Have fun in future games. I will not be around to amuse you in the short run, and as John Maynard Keynes so aptly pointed out, 'in the long run, we all are dead'. Sincere apologies to my packmates that I killed off.