|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Did you like the endgame mechanic? |
| Yes I loved it and hope to see it in future games |
|
14% |
[ 1 ] |
| Yes, but it need some adjusting |
|
28% |
[ 2 ] |
| No I thought it was dumb and detracted from the game |
|
57% |
[ 4 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 7 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:48 pm Post subject: 81 |
 |
|
I think at the end of the day if you make a great sacrifice for your team and they win as a result, you can call yourself a winner. If you get knocked out early and don't really help the team win, then it's more like watching your local football club win a game than winning it yourself, but you can still be happy about it. If you survive to the end and bring the victory home yourself then you can feel really good about it.
All that Undercover Monk has really told us is that surviving or dying should matter. It's his right to say that about the game, and arguments over whether he should have said it earlier aside, I don't think it detracts from the game. I'm not going to keep quiet just to stay alive, I'm happy to do my job as a useless townie and make a bunch of noise and stupid theories. If the scum kill me because I'm onto them and it brings them down then I'll still feel good about it, dead or not.
Of course what usually happens is they kill me because I'm not onto them and then we all lose, but nevermind that... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:22 am Post subject: 82 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
| Unvote. Vote Thok. Happy? |
Feh. Your vote for me suggests to me that you are protown (as it seems consistent with your previous comments.) Otherwise I don't really care about it. (It's not like it's going to drastically change my posting habits in response to your vote.)
As for what constitutes winning or losing, I think it's clear that I'm mostly interested in getting my team to win. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:45 am Post subject: 83 |
|
|
| I am going to have to Vote Courk for voting no lynch when it seems that most of us are going against a no lynch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:54 am Post subject: 84 |
|
|
| That vote baffles me a bit. Is there something about me voting no lynch that seems suspicious, or is it that I'm not going with the crowd that's suspicious? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindrift
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:37 am Post subject: 85 |
|
|
Well first you said you didnt want to vote endgame and then did anyways.
Next you went on to say that you thought that TGC was scummy without any real reason (TGC had a point with the SK acting like a vig)
Then you vote no lynch, a odd move because we have put forth many reasons why we shouldn't vote no lynch.
That is why I voted for you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:19 am Post subject: 86 |
|
|
I have real reasons for thinking TGC is scummy. One of those reasons you've misrepresented in your post (it's my second point here).
TGC implied his role has a character name. I know mine doesn't, and I know I'm not mafia. Seems a smidge suspicious and something to keep in mind.
TGC was not saying that an SK can act like a vig, he was saying that, in a game with no mafia, a vig would be an SK:
| The Great Crep'er, in post 69 wrote: |
| Though if there's no mafia it just turns the vig into an SK. [snip] Again, I cannot say this enough, the whole point of a vig to be called one, is to be a killer that is sided with the town. And if there is no opposing side, than there is no vig, there's an SK that thinks he's a vig and therefore we do have to lynch actual people in order to win, this whole endgame trip is simply a detour. |
A vig is not an SK. By definition, a vig is pro-town. If a role has a killer not aligned with the town, the role is not that of a vig.
Your other points are valid, though I think a bit weak to be basing a vote on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:52 am Post subject: 87 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
I have real reasons for thinking TGC is scummy. One of those reasons you've misrepresented in your post (it's my second point here).
TGC implied his role has a character name. I know mine doesn't, and I know I'm not mafia. Seems a smidge suspicious and something to keep in mind. |
It's kind of metagaming though really isn't it? I mean the cat's out of the bag now and there's no going back, but it all seems a bit dirty to me. I'll wait to hear his defence in any case.
| Courk wrote: |
| TGC was not saying that an SK can act like a vig, he was saying that, in a game with no mafia, a vig would be an SK: |
I'm pretty sure his point was that a vig would be like an SK, in that he'd be killing people at random for no reason. I don't really care whether that's what he said or not, I'm pretty sure it's what he meant anyway. The only difference is that the town would win by voting end game with a vig but not with an SK. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:36 am Post subject: 88 |
|
|
The way it sounded to me was that the town would need to kill any vigilantes in order to win.
As for your first point about role names and metagaming, I don't think I understand. Isn't metagaming saying something like, "so-and-so usually does this day 1, and he didn't, so he must be scum"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:12 am Post subject: 89 |
|
|
| Courk wrote: |
The way it sounded to me was that the town would need to kill any vigilantes in order to win.
As for your first point about role names and metagaming, I don't think I understand. Isn't metagaming saying something like, "so-and-so usually does this day 1, and he didn't, so he must be scum"? |
It probably means different things to different people. In this context I mean using information from outside the game in the game. Your example kind of fits that definition, but knowing and reading people's personalities is such an important part of the game I wouldn't usually call that a problem. The same would go for the mod's personality in these unknown-rules games, technically bad maybe (a bit unrealistic maybe in terms of the supposedly 'in-character' within-game conversation) but not really a problem. Things that are a problem would be things like checking whether someone was online when the night action pms were sent (I'm not sure you can do that very effectively on this site but on another site for isntance it had a count of how many hours since you last accessed the site), and of course quoting the mod's pm.
Your argument feels a bit like quoting the mod's pm, except in reverse - he may have inadvertantly made reference to part of it (or at least that's the suggestion) and is being identified as a result. I'm not saying I think it's a problem, I just meant it felt a bit awkward. Either way, like I said before, it's out in the open now so there's no point worrying about it, I'm just explaining what I meant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 9:52 am Post subject: 90 |
|
|
The only evidence we have in this game is mistakes made by scum. I don't consider using the evidence of a misspoken lie as cheating. He should have been more careful in lying.
Not changing my vote, just contributing (?) to the discussion.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Undercover Monk
Professor Chaos
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:59 am Post subject: 91 |
|
|
First off as far as winning either the town or scum win!
But in this game the point is to figure out when it is safe to end the game. so if you keep eliminating each other when it is unecesary how is it a win. You cant just say lets go to the final two then everyone wins.
So in this game you only win if you survive to the final two or end the gamel.
In my regular games I will award the town win condition but in this game it just wont work. Because of the odd game mechanic.
Here's a vote Count...
3 Courk: The Great Crep'er, Thok, Spindrift
2 Endgame: MNOWAX, Krad Drol
2 No Lynch: Silverfire, Courk
2 MNOWAX: Irgy, Isautekisa
1 Wall-E: Dragon Pheonix
1 Thok: Wall-E
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isauteikisa
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:00 pm Post subject: 92 |
|
|
Unvote: Vote: Courk
Courk, if I'm counting right you're at L-2. Got a role you'd like to claim?
_________________
[VXCL] 075-1DR
I'm male, people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:53 pm Post subject: 93 |
|
|
| Undercover Monk wrote: |
| in this game the point is to figure out when it is safe to end the game. so if you keep eliminating each other when it is unnecessary, how is it a win? You cant just say 'lets go to the final two then everyone wins.' |
Oh but I can.
Is there some kind of points system or karma system which the moderator of a game has control of which I don't know about? In other words, is there something substantial to winning other than just the moderator saying 'X person wins'? Even if there is, I stand completely by my post at the bottom of page two.
Your paranoia mechanic will be intact even if you allow dead villagers to win with the town. Stop worrying so much about the garnish and let's eat some steak.
Courk I'd like to hear your role.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Silverfire
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: 94 |
|
|
I will be in Montreal until around next Monday, and I probably won't be able to post much. So, I'm going to unvote because I don't know who to believe right now.
I don't think Courk is scum because she mentioned that she had no rolename before anyone else had said anything to that effect. If she was mafia, and the townies had rolenames, she would have looked very suspicious.
| Courk wrote: |
| TGC implied his role has a character name. I know mine doesn't, and I know I'm not mafia. Seems a smidge suspicious and something to keep in mind. |
I think if Crep'er had said he had a rolename, that would be suspicious, but I can't find anything to that effect in his posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:15 pm Post subject: 95 |
|
|
| Silverfire wrote: |
| I don't think Courk is scum because she mentioned that she had no rolename before anyone else had said anything to that effect. If she was mafia, and the townies had rolenames, she would have looked very suspicious. |
I actually agree with this. unvote Courk
I don't necessarily agree that TGC's comment is a tell: there may be a mixture of people with generic roles and roles based on the Twilight Zone, or TGC may have mistakenly made an assumption.
Also I have an another topic of discussion. Wall-E edited his post 80. The original post discussed the "Too Townie" I brought up, but kept his vote on TGC since he had a policy of "not changing his vote." I'd like to hear Wall-E's explanation for this change. Also, if Wall-E is scum, the old post and his voting habits suggest that TGC isn't scum.
(Yes, I've also mentioned this to Undercover Monk, and he's looking into this. This post is made after UM's responded to me.)
(Also, I realize this makes my above post about Wall-E look a bit weird. I saw his first version of his post, didn't say anything then because there wasn't much to say, saw the second version of the post, responded to that, then realized that he edited the first version of the post into the second version.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:26 pm Post subject: 96 |
|
|
I was unaware of the no editing rule and apologize for not more carefully reading the rules when I signed up.
I edit posts in message boards so frequently that I honestly do not remember what the original post read, except for the meat, which was:
I had originally voted Courk, then realized that I didn't want to be the guy to put Courk at four votes giving the wolves a chance to wolfpile him.
Feel free to kill me for this mistake, but I am a townie.
In conclusion, if my original vote still counts, Unvote. Vote Thok.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject: 97 |
|
|
Actually, I take that back. I edited the post where I asked to hear Courk's role thusly.
#80 was only edited for grammar and spelling and to break up the paragraph so it was more concise.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: 98 |
|
|
This is what happens when I don't edit. I look like a tool.
Yay for learning things.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:07 pm Post subject: 99 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
| #80 was only edited for grammar and spelling and to break up the paragraph so it was more concise. |
Um, this is a flat out lie. I've specifically noted that you changed the content between some versions of your post 80 and how you changed the content.
vote Wall-E, although this may not be relevant if you are modkilled. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:01 pm Post subject: 100 |
|
|
I'm not lying. If you care to say specifically how or what changes occured, I'd be happy to agree or disagree.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:18 pm Post subject: 101 |
|
|
| Thok wrote: |
| Also I have an another topic of discussion. Wall-E edited his post 80. The original post discussed the "Too Townie" I brought up, but kept his vote on TGC since he had a policy of "not changing his vote." I'd like to hear Wall-E's explanation for this change. Also, if Wall-E is scum, the old post and his voting habits suggest that TGC isn't scum. |
See the bold part. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:27 pm Post subject: 102 |
|
|
Ok I remember that now.
I mentioned that the bit about the too townie thing was a good point.
I still maintain that anybody trying too hard to look like a townie is probably a wolf.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:40 pm Post subject: 103 |
|
|
For the record, in case I AM lynched or nightkilled, I am strongly suspicious of The Great Crep'er for previously stated reasons, and Thok for defending him so much.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:47 pm Post subject: 104 |
|
|
| The Great Crep'er, in post 68 wrote: |
| Uhhh, I beg to differ, under the condition that if Twilight Zone (a television series with a lot more notable episodes than Maple Street) mafia were based on one single episode, it would be disconnected from the supposable reputation with Monk's games. Given that he already referred to some past modships he has fulfilled wherein the only ones alive would win the game, it may very well be possible that traits for other games he's modded might overflow into this one. Take for example 'Heroes 2 Mafia', where he took characters from the entire season to make roleplayers, in order to have more material to work with, also take in consideration that he is modding a Redwall mafia*, a fictional series of yet an immensely complex universe, thus, there would be a lot of characters to work with. Working with a single episode with not that many significant characters to be roleplayers would be difficult I imagine. Charlie could be a vig perhaps. |
TGC didn't say straight-out "I have a role name" but this snippet right here seems to imply that he does. He's talking about UM games where everyone has character names and how a game based off of one episode would not have enough characters to give everyone role names. The fact that he's saying that implies that he does have a role name, otherwise he wouldn't be explaining how the game has to be based off of many episodes to have enough characters to assign everyone a character. If he didn't have a role name, this argument wouldn't make sense, he'd basically be saying "I don't have a role name, but there's not enough characters from one episode to give everyone a role name, therefore the game is based off of more than one episode" -- which wouldn't make sense.
I'm a lynch-3, yes? I won't claim at that point, but I won't be home until morning (about 15-16 hours from now), so if you still want me to claim, keep in mind it'll be a while before I'm at a computer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:05 pm Post subject: 105 |
|
|
| Silverfire wrote: |
I don't think Courk is scum because she mentioned that she had no rolename before anyone else had said anything to that effect. If she was mafia, and the townies had rolenames, she would have looked very suspicious.
|
Why on earth would the townies have role names and not the scum? If anything it would be the other way around.
I think it's perfectly possible she's scum or an sk or something, knows that nobody has role names because if anyone had a role name she would, and has just found a beautiful way to misread someone's statement to put suspicion onto them. Someone who was really hammering at her at the time as well.
All in all, to me she's been sounding far too much like someone trying to defend herself than someone trying to make genuine progress. I'm not really married to my previous vote so I think I'll put the pressure back on.
Unvote [MNOWAX's replacement?]
Vote Courk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:21 pm Post subject: 106 |
|
|
| Irgy wrote: |
| Why on earth would the townies have role names and not the scum? If anything it would be the other way around. |
Huh? Without knowing the set up, it's equally likely that any combination of scum and townies having role names or not having role names occurs. It's even possible that some townies have role names and some don't. (That would be a good way to deal with mass claim issues, for example.)
Courk's almost certainly making her comment based on the fact that her role PM doesn't have a role name. That fact is only a tell for whether or not her role PM has a role name or not, not whether or not she is scum.
(The fact that she was willing to reveal this info about her role PM is a protown sign.)
I'm astonished that people are completely ignoring the issues with Wall-E editing his posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:07 am Post subject: 107 |
|
|
| Thok wrote: |
| Irgy wrote: |
| Why on earth would the townies have role names and not the scum? If anything it would be the other way around. |
Huh? Without knowing the set up, it's equally likely that any combination of scum and townies having role names or not having role names occurs. It's even possible that some townies have role names and some don't. (That would be a good way to deal with mass claim issues, for example.)
Courk's almost certainly making her comment based on the fact that her role PM doesn't have a role name. That fact is only a tell for whether or not her role PM has a role name or not, not whether or not she is scum.
(The fact that she was willing to reveal this info about her role PM is a protown sign.)
I'm astonished that people are completely ignoring the issues with Wall-E editing his posts. |
You're right that it could be any combination, but my point still stands. I would say it is extremely unlikely that generic, faceless, powerless townies would have names while roles with powers do not.
So:
Scenario 1: Courk is pro-town. According to her, her role has no name, but she is open to the possibility that some of the scum roles do have names.
Scenario 2: Courk is anti-town, and has no name. In this case, it's safe to assume that, at the very least, faceless townies do not have a name. She sees an opportunity to heap suspicion on an enemy and takes it.
All I have said is that both scenarios are plausible. If a pro-town player wants to out themselves as having a name it would make scenario 1 more likely and Courk's argument much stronger. Otherwise we don't know, and hence this particular line that Courk is chasing is not, on it's own, particularly good evidence either for or against her innocence.
Except there's one other thing I just thought of. I would say it's not particularly likely that town power roles do not have names while scum roles do. It is possible, but it's not less likely. Given that, scenario 1 suggests that Courk is much more likely to be a generic townie.
However, Courk a few posts has also gone to great lengths to set up for a claim, asking people not to lynch her until she gets home and has a chance to make a claim. This would suggest that if she was town, she must have a role.
The contradiction here I would argue is not compelling, but is at least a piece of evidence.
Re Well-E, I'm not ignoring it so much as waiting for a comment from Undercover Monk. If he's mod-killed (and I understand it's happened before to people who just didn't know better) then that's the end of it and there's no point talking about it. If he's going to be let off, then I'll start worrying about whether the details of what happened suggest scum or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:30 am Post subject: 108 |
|
|
Hmm I need to edit my own posts now.
Sorry Wall-E, I hope you are going Well(-E) but I didn't mean to get you're name wrong.
Also, somewhere in there I say "not less likely" where I meant either "less likely" or "not likely" but not "not less likely".
I blame having a meeting to go to and clicking send before I'd checked what I wrote  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Irgy
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:31 am Post subject: 109 |
|
|
erm, "your name" not "you're name"...
If there's something wrong with the grandma or speeling in this one I'm not fixing it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:36 am Post subject: 110 |
|
|
| Irgy wrote: |
| Why on earth would the townies have role names and not the scum? If anything it would be the other way around. |
That's the wolfiest logic I've heard in a page at least.
| Thok wrote: |
| I'm astonished that people are completely ignoring the issues with Wall-E editing his posts. |
It was just an honest mistake. I don't mind you saying whatever you like about what I originally posted. I'm pro town, and if you lie about anything from post 80 I will call YOU out, Thok. So far you haven't lied.
I have another question, actually. Are players confirmed as innocent by the seer able to be contacted by the seer in ya'll's games? Are outside conversations allowed? Are they allowed to be faked? I have played werewolf on boards and in real life and have run into all the iterations of these questioned rules and didn't find anything specific about these questions in the official rules, though I might have misread or not seen something.
I would rather find out now (Undercover Monk told me that if I came clean about what I edited he would not modkill me but it seems I'm going to pay for it anyway so I might as well know for next game) than make another mistake in a later game and get killed again for a misunderstanding.
God damn it is hard for me to not edit a billion times.
Also jesus you folks talk a lot in werewolf. Some day 1s I've played were all one-word votes with no chatter.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Phoenix
Judge Doom
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:29 am Post subject: 111 |
|
|
| Undercover Monk wrote: |
1 Wall-E: Dragon Pheonix
|
If I could vote the mod, I would on principle for repeatedly misspelling my name.
I wanted to switch to Wall-E for editing the post (sorry, dude, but that is an absolute no-no, and if you don't get modkilled for it, you should be lynched), but I am already there.
_________________
My photography:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/artrock2006/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Undercover Monk
Professor Chaos
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:30 am Post subject: 112 |
|
|
Wall-E Im tempted to mod-kill you because there is conflicting reports on what was posted. This is why we dont edit posts and why I didnt want newbs in this game. However as it is your first game im giving you a warning and will leave your fate to the town.
Also my game so my rules if you dont like the rules get out. I have explained why the win condition is what it is and you dont have to play if you dont like it. I will not tolerate the bashing of a game mechanic that I have worked for several months by some upstart newb who doesnt read the rules. If you dont like it please leave and dont sign-up for any of my games.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Undercover Monk
Professor Chaos
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:33 am Post subject: 113 |
|
|
To the Town
This is what Wall-E sent me.
I corrected some spelling errors and broke up my paragraph.
I also had a vote for Courk in there but changed it to a "Tell me your role please." I didn't want to be the guy who put Courk at four votes allowing the wolves to wolfpile him to death in case he was a villager.
Feel free to revote Courk for me and I'll unvote him and apologize publicly.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:58 pm Post subject: 114 |
|
|
| Irgy wrote: |
Scenario 1: Courk is pro-town. According to her, her role has no name, but she is open to the possibility that some of the scum roles do have names.
[Snip]
If a pro-town player wants to out themselves as having a name it would make scenario 1 more likely and Courk's argument much stronger. |
What? Wouldn't that make that argument weaker?
I'm at lynch-2 or lynch-1. I'm a bit confused about whether Wall-E's vote/nonvote/whatever counts.
Anyway, onto business:
1. I'm a girl.
2. I'm the vig.
3. I have no character name.
4. Unvote, Vote: The Great Crep'er
I'm going to bed now and cannot guarantee I'll be on within the next 24 hours, though I will try to check in before I head out in... oh, about 8-9 hours. If I've not posted in 9 hours, it'll be this time tomorrow before I post again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Courk
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject: 115 |
|
|
| On to business. On to. Two words. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: 116 |
|
|
@Courk: please explain your post 53 in light of your claim. If you are a vigilante, you shouldn't be worried about whether or not a vig kill would be mistakenly be seen as a mafia kill, since you know who the vig is (there's no reason to believe there are multiple vigs), and you wouldn't have to fire at night.
-------------------
| Wall-E wrote: |
| It was just an honest mistake. I don't mind you saying whatever you like about what I originally posted. I'm pro town, and if you lie about anything from post 80 I will call YOU out, Thok. So far you haven't lied. |
Well, I hope you would call me out for lying. Lynch all liars is a fairly good policy, as it encourages protown players not to lie.
If you were simply editing your posts for spelling, I wouldn't care. But you've chosen to change your content, and didn't admit to changing the content until I repeatedly attacked you for it. (And I still think you haven't admitted to the version of the post that I originally saw.)
I realize that you are coming from a different mafia playing culture, but I have a hard time seeing where it's a good thing to hide your thoughts after you've made them public.
| Quote: |
| I have another question, actually. Are players confirmed as innocent by the seer able to be contacted by the seer in ya'll's games? |
No.
| Quote: |
| Are outside conversations allowed? |
No
| Quote: |
| Are they allowed to be faked? |
Probably not, although if you try to fake an outside conversation and don't get modkilled, you'll get lynched for lying bout an outside conversation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:24 pm Post subject: 117 |
|
|
Thanks Thok.
UCM: I think you misunderstood my post 80 in regards to the win condition to this game. No disrespect intended. I apologize for any insult you may have inferred due to poor wording.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 6:45 pm Post subject: 118 |
|
|
In regards to my editing:
Everyone makes mistakes, even villagers. In order to survive these games I choose my wording and post content very carefully. I don't mention things that are irrelevant in my opinion or too obvious to mention, because silly chatter draws attention. The fact that I am reduced to pointing out this very obvious mechanic of mafia is a side-effect of my mistake and the attention it drew onto me. I'm with you guys (most of you) and will do whatever is necessary to ensure a town victory. I will not be editing my posts anymore. That is all I have to say on the actual event.
All that having been said, in anybody else's shoes I'd be suspicious as fuck of me. It's true, so I'm not going to pretend it isn't.
In regards to the content of my edits:
I honestly and completely forget parts of what I may have edited into our out of post 80. I was probably tired when I posted the original content and I later felt it was too rambly, which is typically my reason for editing myself.
In regards to Courk's role name:
I have to agree that it was suspicious, but not any more so than the crusade against him, both of which are leading me to think there are no wolves involved, as wolves wouldn't be so vocal and attention grabbing.
Is there a name on grey labyrinth for the scenario of two players of unknown role establishing a vendetta so that the villagers are prompted to lynch both players? I almost think I saw it called WIFOY. Wolves try to diffuse WIFOY.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wall-E
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: 119 |
|
|
Still voting Thok, now because of post 82: Trying to diffuse WIFOY.
_________________
Don't read what I'm typing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thok
Oh, foe, the cursed teeth!
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:31 pm Post subject: 120 |
|
|
| Wall-E wrote: |
| Still voting Thok, now because of post 82: Trying to diffuse WIFOY. |
I assume you're referencing WIFOM with the acronym, but that really isn't what you've described with the situation. (WIFOM is the idea that because scum want to look townish, one shouldn't consider a town-like action as being 100% indicative of a person's alignment.)
Where do you normally play werewolf/mafia? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
