|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2012 17:24:23 GMT -5
So, you are saying that you have no problem with me voting for Ed for the reasons I gave. Excuse me? When did I say that? Are we speaking the same language? And on a different topic: Do you have any thoughts on any other topics? Or am I that fascinating that you've been blinded to everything else that's going on around here? I'm going to make popcorn
|
|
|
Post by Dirx on Mar 5, 2012 17:25:22 GMT -5
I also think Hal's activating the Killing Joke without any prior discussion is clearly anti-town. Gadarene: Would you consider voting for Hal based solely on the fact that he did that ? Everyone : Assume that Pleonast has the role as he posted. What then does this mean for there being a bomb type role? What are the chances that Hal has that role, based on his Florida 2000 vote recount wet dream? I don't see how it has any bearing on there being a bomb role in the game, without any additional evidence to support or refute the theory. Are you seeing a connection?
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2012 17:25:57 GMT -5
I also think Hal's activating the Killing Joke without any prior discussion is clearly anti-town. Gadarene: Would you consider voting for Hal based solely on the fact that he did that ? Everyone : Assume that Pleonast has the role as he posted. What then does this mean for there being a bomb type role? What are the chances that Hal has that role, based on his Florida 2000 vote recount wet dream? You're going to be really confused when I fail to explode, won't you're.
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Mar 5, 2012 17:26:24 GMT -5
I also think Hal's activating the Killing Joke without any prior discussion is clearly anti-town. Gadarene: Would you consider voting for Hal based solely on the fact that he did that ? Everyone : Assume that Pleonast has the role as he posted. What then does this mean for there being a bomb type role? What are the chances that Hal has that role, based on his Florida 2000 vote recount wet dream? Yes, absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 5, 2012 17:27:33 GMT -5
I don't think we should be deciding Pleo's fate based upon the wording of his PM. Either he's lying about his role in general, in which case he must definitely be eliminated, or he's telling the truth, in which case be most probably needs to be eliminated anyway. Can you explain more about you're thinking in your second case "he's telling the truth, in which case be most probably needs to be eliminated anyway"? Because, as I read the win conditions, scum need to control the vote for them to win. That means each player who is not scum makes it that much harder for them to control the vote. So each non-scum who dies advances the scum win condition. So, if I'm telling the truth, eliminating me helps scum. At any point in the game. You know what...you may have a point here. If you are telling the truth, that is. But are you? We won't, and can't, know whether or not you're telling the truth until you wind up dead. So it comes down to: "how far can we afford to trust you?"...and the answer to that is "not very far". But I'm sure you knew that when you claimed.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2012 17:27:49 GMT -5
Tic tic tic tic tic tic tic tic
BOOM!!!!
<edited by Mr Special Ed to add BOOM!!!!>
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 5, 2012 17:33:21 GMT -5
Can you explain more how Chronos' acrostic is suicidal or shit-stirring? I don't see it. They've simply limited their future possible claims; I don't see anyone back-guessing the original sentence. As I said in the post that you quote, it wasn't the proposal itself, but the way it was executed (immediately and without discussion from anyone) that I found noteworthy. I referred to it as seemingly suicidal because just throwing stuff (even allegedly encrypted stuff) from your PM into the game thread on Day 1 without some form of consensus or discussion seemed like a move that would get him a lot of heat. But apparently I don't have my finger on the pulse of this particular group of players. So far only BillMc seems to have commented in an unfavorable fashion on Chronos' choice to just move forward with the plan on his own. I referred to it as seemingly shit-stirring for a similar reason. It struck me as a divisive play that would split the group into people who were either for or against the proposal, or for/against his decision to post his acrostic without feedback from anyone first. While divisiveness can be productive to Town in certain situations, I don't think the early game is one of those situations. And I can imagine all sorts of scenarios in my paranoid mind where Scum could try leverage a split mob into town-on-town suspicions and violence. But I was apparently out of sync with people's reactions on that note too, as we have not devolved into a tug of war or screaming 'Tastes Great!', 'Less Filling!' at each other. I do still think his vote for Ed was weak, though. With Pleo's claim now on the table, I think my vote is likely to move to Pleo soon, but I'm still absorbing the claim at face value and potentially hidden scummy or win-stealing butt value. I don't like the idea of keeping unwashed 3rd parties around, particularly alleged ones, and I don't really grok why he chose to claim so early. I don't need to grok it, nor do I need to worry about keeping someone alive who, best case scenario, may or may not act in such a way as to possibly advance the Town win condition and worse case scenario may undermine it.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 5, 2012 17:34:09 GMT -5
And I still don't know how the fuck to do multi-quotes here.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 5, 2012 17:34:15 GMT -5
The board doesn't show an edit on that post. I should vote you for falsely claiming to have edited your post.
But I won't, because it's an odd Monday.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2012 17:37:18 GMT -5
The board doesn't show an edit on that post. I should vote you for falsely claiming to have edited your post. But I won't, because it's an odd Monday. Well I edited it. I just didn't modify it.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Mar 5, 2012 17:40:06 GMT -5
Do we really, really want two deaths toDay? It seems to me that at the game start, when we have NO information, that we frequently end up with multiple town lynch candidates. Part of my problem with Pleo's claim was his subsequent unilateral declaration that he was going to kill someone today. Why should we go along with that and allow him to get closer to his supposed win-con? If he really is on the side of town wouldn't we want him to save that power for a time when we potentially have more information?
|
|
|
Post by Pleonast on Mar 5, 2012 17:40:19 GMT -5
Now, I don't necessarily think you're playing against the mod's wishes--anyone who allows the players to quote PMs verbatim is going to have to expect it--but I know I'd be a little sad to see players taking a fun role I designed and breaking it down to its logical machinery instead of, you know, having fun with it. Your idea of fun must be very different than mine. Can you explain more about you're thinking in your second case "he's telling the truth, in which case be most probably needs to be eliminated anyway"? Because, as I read the win conditions, scum need to control the vote for them to win. That means each player who is not scum makes it that much harder for them to control the vote. So each non-scum who dies advances the scum win condition. So, if I'm telling the truth, eliminating me helps scum. At any point in the game. You know what...you may have a point here. If you are telling the truth, that is. But are you? We won't, and can't, know whether or not you're telling the truth until you wind up dead. So it comes down to: "how far can we afford to trust you?"...and the answer to that is "not very far". But I'm sure you knew that when you claimed. Oh, I have no problem with being lynched by players who think I'm lying. That's how mafia is played. My problem is with players who believe me and yet still want to lynch me. That simply doesn't make sense--it shows either stupidity or malice on their part. And I knew I'm likely to be lynched (or killed) by players who don't trust me. But that happens every game. Claiming or not doesn't really change those odds. So I figured to play it honestly, so at least there'll be some useful information generated from my death. Note, by the way, that I do not have to alive in order to win, although being dead will make it harder.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 5, 2012 17:46:25 GMT -5
And as a point of reference, the reaction that Hal is now getting is along the lines of what I thought Chronos' play would have triggered. In hindsight, it is like comparing a candle-lit dinner to three hookers with blow and a dominatrix midget knocking on your door when it comes to foreplay.
|
|
|
Post by special on Mar 5, 2012 17:47:23 GMT -5
Now, I don't necessarily think you're playing against the mod's wishes--anyone who allows the players to quote PMs verbatim is going to have to expect it--but I know I'd be a little sad to see players taking a fun role I designed and breaking it down to its logical machinery instead of, you know, having fun with it. Your idea of fun must be very different than mine. You know what...you may have a point here. If you are telling the truth, that is. But are you? We won't, and can't, know whether or not you're telling the truth until you wind up dead. So it comes down to: "how far can we afford to trust you?"...and the answer to that is "not very far". But I'm sure you knew that when you claimed. Oh, I have no problem with being lynched by players who think I'm lying. That's how mafia is played. My problem is with players who believe me and yet still want to lynch me. That simply doesn't make sense--it shows either stupidity or malice on their part. And I knew I'm likely to be lynched (or killed) by players who don't trust me. But that happens every game. Claiming or not doesn't really change those odds. So I figured to play it honestly, so at least there'll be some useful information generated from my death. Note, by the way, that I do not have to alive in order to win, although being dead will make it harder.[/quote] can you vote or use your powers when you are dead?
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Mar 5, 2012 17:50:32 GMT -5
Busy day.
Pleo's claimed role is interesting, it reminds me a little of my role in Evil Dead II.
I'm intrigued by the ability to communicate with oldest enemy, what for? Taunting?
This power doesn't make much sense to me: "2. Paranoia: Beginning on any given Day, you may target a player of your choice with a series of tricks, pranks, and misdirectiosn designed to make your target anxious, tense, and on the verge of violence. If, at any time during the Day in question, your target receives more than one quarter of the total available votes, (s)he will fly into a paranoid rage, and kill someone (his/her choice) at Dusk. You’ll get credit for the kill." When would the power need to be used, the Night before, at Dawn exactly or anytime during the Day?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 5, 2012 17:53:44 GMT -5
<font style="font-size: 12px;">Editing out an Edited post to get to the signal I need. <font style="font-size: 12px;"> <font style="font-size: 12px;"> <font style="font-size: 12px;">
I also think Hal's activating the Killing Joke without any prior discussion is clearly anti-town.Gadarene: Would you consider voting for Hal based solely on the fact that he did that ? Everyone : Assume that Pleonast has the role as he posted. What then does this mean for there being a bomb type role? What are the chances that Hal has that role, based on his Florida 2000 vote recount wet dream? Again, you are fantasizing. You are not fascinating. ------------ You know what? Screw it. I can't really go against what Pleonast has done, as I have done Similar things in Haggle [[Ask Oredigger77 about Dragon's Hoard when you get the chance.]] I do have issues with Pleonast.... But I think that this ignores the bigger issue. But I agree with Gaderene. Hal is Blatantly Anti-town for his part. And it supports what Suburban was trying to say. Unvote SuburbanVote Hal On its own, it is Anti-town. Hal could be a Bomb, but if we have Day Kills in play, it's not worth it to me to fear everything. Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose, after all. I just got an error message from Pro-boards about an Angry Bear taking out the servers or some such. [[Wow. I think we've already made this game epic, in one sense, at least.]] That being said, sorry if this is a double post.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Mar 5, 2012 17:53:59 GMT -5
I'm not sure what you mean by "circumvent the spirit of the role". The moderator explicitly permits PM quotation. The role explicitly can win with anyone. There's no rational basis for not playing the role openly--I'm playing the role as designed, as far as I can tell. Are you part Vulcan? Or all Vulcan? Because honestly, that's what I see here. Yes, it's logical to just post your PM and say hey guys, I love you, let me win! But is it fun? No. You aren't having fun with the role by posting it as you have, you're simply playing to win. Which is, I suppose, personal preference. I play these games to have fun and enjoy myself. I didn't play sports in high school because I've always hated the "play to win, not for fun" mentality and here is no exception. You got a creative, fun, interesting role and turned it into the most boring possible outcome. The entire idea of the Joker is to cause chaos and mayhem. It's circumventing the spirit of the role because you essentially decided "Nope, I don't want to play as a Third-Party, I want to be town." Does your alignment say "Town"? No, it says Third-Party (or PFK, something that will be debated until you die) but you read it and decided to say screw it, I don't want to play as a Third-Party. I'll just reveal myself and play exactly as a townsperson would, despite my role NOT BEING TOWN. What you've done is, to me, essentially the same as somebody getting recruited to be scum, then revealing all the scum to the town and ruining the game because they didn't want to be recruited. In most Conspiracy games, it's logical for all the scum to out themselves and work together to ensure town doesn't win and one scum faction does, but they don't, do they? No, they keep their roles hidden and make the game fun. This is obviously on a lesser level because it isn't breaking the game, but it's still bothersome. (For the record, I was also extremely peeved at peeker for saying I'm a freemason woot woot let's have all the freemasons come out and break the game on Day One, and was glad that backfired.) You can say you're playing the role "as designed" but there's no way that's the truth and most everyone else knows it. Half your role powers are basically useless now. If this was how it was supposed to be played, you would still have full utility of your powers. On the other hand, eliminating players because they don't play the way you like is against the design of the game. Players should base their decisions on their win conditions and information available, rather than their own biases about the "spirit" of the game. Ah, okay, so you really really wanting to off Ed for Ed-iting is completely based on your win condition and not at all because you personally disagree with the idea of editing. Right? If I were making my voting decision based on personal feelings, I'd be voting for you right now. But I'm not. The fact is, though, that if everyone allows you to get away with this, that will set a precedent for more people playing like this. Which would make me very, very uninterested in ever playing mafia again because it would ruin the game for me. Unless you're offed before you meet your win condition, people (including yourself) will continue to use plays like this as acceptable. And I don't like this being acceptable at all.
|
|
|
Post by sinjin on Mar 5, 2012 17:55:35 GMT -5
He also could be a joker. You know, a JOKER, joker. The kind that wins when you lynch him. His move could be an attempt to provoke his own lynch. Reflexively lynching him here is the wrong move for several reasons. Now, you guys can tell me why I'm wrong about everything I believe. Go ahead... I already stated why I think two lynches on day one is not a good idea. As to the joker thing; who cares. I don't like the role of Joker and feel bad for any player who is assigned that role. To me a Joker win is a non-event. YMMV.
|
|
|
Post by Nanook on Mar 5, 2012 18:11:19 GMT -5
I don't even begin to understand the idea of letting Pleo live, if you think he's lying. Like Inner. If he doesn't have the power he claims, we'll lynch him tomorrow! Really? You really think there's even a chance he's lying about a specific, demonstrable power like a Daykill but not about his specific side? You don't make a claim like that if you aren't telling the truth about the powers in general. There might be specifics fudged, but overall it'll be accurate.
Pollux, I don't see how it's our job to worry about game balance. The original Batman had basically no balancing done to it, and was made at a time when most players were fairly inexperienced. Story did a lot of balancing as I understand it, and is very experienced. I'm quite sure he took into consideration the possibility of killing roles dying early. Furthermore, SKs are far more likely to hit Town than not, and are generally considered to be Pro-Scum in balancing. I can't imagine a situation in which lynching a SK on D1 is bad. Especially since the Town win con requires us to eliminate them one way or another.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 5, 2012 18:15:19 GMT -5
So Ed...how was the popcorn?
|
|
|
Post by Inner Stickler on Mar 5, 2012 18:16:18 GMT -5
I don't even begin to understand the idea of letting Pleo live, if you think he's lying. Like Inner. If he doesn't have the power he claims, we'll lynch him tomorrow! Really? You really think there's even a chance he's lying about a specific, demonstrable power like a Daykill but not about his specific side? You don't make a claim like that if you aren't telling the truth about the powers in general. There might be specifics fudged, but overall it'll be accurate. I don't know if he's lying or not. That's why I'd like to see what happens over the next few days.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 5, 2012 18:19:08 GMT -5
So Ed...how was the popcorn? Cough Unvote me Cough
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 5, 2012 18:23:55 GMT -5
So Ed...how was the popcorn? Cough Unvote me Cough Bit of popcorn in your throat? Why are you so concerned about my vote on you? It's not like everybody else is crawling all over each other to follow suit. It's really not all that important. Is it?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 5, 2012 18:24:04 GMT -5
Oh, I have no problem with being lynched by players who think I'm lying. That's how mafia is played. My problem is with players who believe me and yet still want to lynch me. That simply doesn't make sense--it shows either stupidity or malice on their part. My problem is with players who believe me and yet still want to lynch me. That simply doesn't make sense--it shows either stupidity or malice on their part. You don't think people should lynch you for what you have done? You don't think revealing your role as posted was stupid? You didn't act in Malice by revealing your role as posted? Can you run ALL of these by me again?
|
|
|
Post by Gadarene on Mar 5, 2012 18:25:11 GMT -5
I don't even begin to understand the idea of letting Pleo live, if you think he's lying. Like Inner. If he doesn't have the power he claims, we'll lynch him tomorrow! Really? You really think there's even a chance he's lying about a specific, demonstrable power like a Daykill but not about his specific side? You don't make a claim like that if you aren't telling the truth about the powers in general. There might be specifics fudged, but overall it'll be accurate. I don't know if he's lying or not. That's why I'd like to see what happens over the next few days. Best case scenario (i.e., him telling the complete truth) is that he's not Town and needs to kill at least one Townie to win. Unless we're genuinely just going to play chicken with the scum about what to do with him, I don't foresee a scenario where letting Pleo live past the next day or two is good for Town, even if he isn't lying about his role at all.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Mar 5, 2012 18:30:45 GMT -5
Bit of popcorn in your throat? Why are you so concerned about my vote on you? It's not like everybody else is crawling all over each other to follow suit. It's really not all that important. Is it? Why are you keeping it on me again ? Do you have a power that requires you to keep it on me? Can you freely move your vote?
|
|
|
Post by guiri on Mar 5, 2012 18:38:04 GMT -5
Please refrain from voting until I have time to make a substantive post. Well, that's why I voted you... You were reading along, posting, but nothing substantive, just fluff... ok. serious no b.s. question. if you know that you are not anti town aligned and someone votes you for whatever the crud reason[...] the underlying assumption is knowing that you yourself are not anti town. /snips, underline added. Weird wording, why not just say "If you know you're Town..." or are you claiming 3rd party? I'd rather we vote on who scum should target--that's slightly more helpful than voting on the Vig's target. Huh? Is that humor, i.e. it's a complete waste of time voting on the vig's target so may as well waste our time voting on the scum's target? If the killing joke is used ToDay, can the mask be used ToNight ? If not then ToNight might be the only Night that he is vulnerable? I didn't see a reply to your first question but you quoted the answer, only one power per Day/Night cycle. Wow, it looks as if we have a very powerful SK on our hands, especially with the Day Kill that Hal handed him on a platter. But would scum do that with the 2nd for the lynch often being scum and Pleo saying he would target said person? Of course they would! It could be a ploy to get Town to vote for Pleo because he has said that he would be pro Town and scum want him lynched. Pleo said he'd target the lynch runner-up after Hal had activated the power, not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Mar 5, 2012 18:45:17 GMT -5
Ok, face value and hidden butt value of the claim have now been absorbed. Unvote ChronosVote PleoIt may not be the lynch that provides the most insight, but it should help keep the assumed townie-mislynch that would probably happen if we didn't lynch him from happening. And I'll officially chime in with the others on the big hairy eyeball of shame for Hal. Such a pessimistic viewpoint, full of misanthropy, to posit that dead bodies are easier/better to gain information from than living, breathing players. Yeah it might be true sometimes, but it makes the game less fun. And talk about things to just up and do without talking about it first. Priming an alleged killing power pretty much takes the cake.
|
|
|
Post by Suburban Plankton on Mar 5, 2012 18:54:48 GMT -5
Bit of popcorn in your throat? Why are you so concerned about my vote on you? It's not like everybody else is crawling all over each other to follow suit. It's really not all that important. Is it? Why are you keeping it on me again ? Do you have a power that requires you to keep it on me? Can you freely move your vote? I am free to place my vote anywhere I want. I originally voted for you because I thought your vote for Ed was not supported by the statements that you had made. the fact that you have since moved your vote elsewhere changes nothing about that. I may move my vote elsewhere before the end of the Day. I'm still debating with myself about the best way to deal with Pleonast; I may conclude that it's best to lynch him right away in order to minimize his effect on the game. I'm also considering the case against Hal. I was amused by his action at the time, but as others have pointed out, it wasn't exactly a pro-Town action. But for the moment, I'm content to leave my vote where it is. If I were you, I wouldn't worry too much about it. YMMV.
|
|
|
Post by Nanook on Mar 5, 2012 18:56:38 GMT -5
Best case scenario (i.e., him telling the complete truth) is that he's not Town and needs to kill at least one Townie to win. Unless we're genuinely just going to play chicken with the scum about what to do with him, I don't foresee a scenario where letting Pleo live past the next day or two is good for Town, even if he isn't lying about his role at all. This is basically where I'm having an issue. If you think we need to kill him in the next Day or two, why are we waiting? On the off chance that he does something pro Town? It seems to me that it's far, FAR more likely he'll do something that will hurt Town than help it. And if that's the case, he should die Today and not later. Personally I think he's lying about his side if nothing else. And I'm not one to say one thing and do another so. Vote: Pleo
|
|