It is a qualitatively different matter to go âIt canât be me because as wolf I would do this insteadâ and âIt canât be me because I have no reason to have done this if I wasâ
One is using theoreticals to support facts. One of them is using logic to support facts.
Wolf slip also. yes, why WOULD i circulate your name if i thought i could pull off an apen misexe, a thing that I had been pushing for all day and that clearly had support from the guy i supposedly killed
like as a wolf i donât need to kill YOU SPECIFICALLY to win the game. In literally every world in which iâm a wolf the final 3 is me childe and apen because I had convinced one to vote the other and the game is always over when town votes town
like, materially, killing childe is the worst possible thing for me. I have laid out why YOU had no other choice but you have yet to provide an adequite answer as to why I would have wasted all of that effort to convince childe only to abandon my tool when it matterd most
i COULD have just left childe alive, pulled this exact same stunt on apen and had childe finish the job. thereâs no fucking reason for me not to have. Thatâs borderline throwing
Well I WAS certain coming into the day (hence my expectation of death) and then I decided to reconsider and found my reasoning lacking. and then I took a gamble
genuinely your entire case here is âpandora voted me and iâm town so clearly sheâs the wolfâ whereas Iâm laying out logical worlds. You canât even answer why I would kill childe aside from the vague idea of towncred when i donât NEED towncred in final 3
If I was wolf, why would I build up Apen world and then kill the person who believed Apen world and then switch my vote on a whim? I had an easy win. Why didnât I take it?