(February 1st, 2013, 18:56)Ichabod Wrote: Anyway, I think I remember this guy Meiz playing a barbarian before. I think I still had my neck back then and it didn't end well.
Playing...? PLAYING??!!! Oh, 'tis not gonna end well for you this time either, I promise!
Anyways, time to get serious.
Scary to say, but I kind of like how Tasunke started the game spamming the thread, made me slightly think he'd have no quicktopic, and so would concentrate his posting in here. Minor thing, but something that makes me hesitant to vote him today.
Novice for voting Zak for not seeing his standard village play, 30 minutes after the game has started.
Actually, Azza's comments seemed perfectly within character for him, at least from my level of observation of his play from the cheap seats.
I actually thought the three quick rebuttals from Bigger, Gaius and Brick seemed more defensive. I'll give Brick a pass, since he just GM'd a game.
Personally, I think given the way the game was set up we shouldn't read too much into the roles but its probably impossible for uber to have not let a little bit of bias seep in. I don't want 40 pages of debating it though, so I'm happy to work off the assumption that the roles don't tell us too much.
Probably more pertinently that the players whose characters are from the same game have some link - i.e. the two cats in the last version of this game. So Rowain-Molach and Jkaen-Ichabod are probably associated somehow. Wouldn't be surprised to see uber give them the one good/one bad treatment. Anyway, not a lot to go on so far and still think Tasunke seems extra-jittery. Novice, I thought his comment to zakalwe was a little joke based on the fact that someone basically says that to zak every game. Meiz, I'd expect you to pick up on that.
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
(February 2nd, 2013, 01:03)Azza Wrote: For example, GlaDOs, looking just at the character, is evil.
While the homicidal robot, with her often fatal tests purportedly intended for scientific advancement, is undeniably a blight on this earth that we need to eradicate, is a creature whose only known point of existence is to locate the nearest sentient being and proceed to detonate themselves with the intent of causing possibly fatal harm to said being any better? If anything, I'd say it's worse - at least the robot has a thinly veiled excuse for what she's doing...
I can't help it that I explode every time someone comes near me. It's a serious problem
[/quote]
Quote:[size=x-small]Given that everyone presumably has a role related somewhat to their character, is it too much of a stretch to say that the scum could be determined from the characters?
Quote:Although, on further thought, I guess we can wait til we get a few lynches to try and identify a pattern there. But worth keeping in mind for the future IMO.
Azza for willful disregard of both GM statement and general common sense about balance - to the point where an attempt at deliberate misdirection appears the most likely explanation.
(though, if your proposal was actually well-intentioned, I have a nice bridge over here I'd love to sell you)
[/quote]
Why would I deliberately attempt to be misleading in such an obviously, demonstrably wrong way?
(February 2nd, 2013, 01:59)Gaspar Wrote: Novice, I thought his comment to zakalwe was a little joke based on the fact that someone basically says that to zak every game. Meiz, I'd expect you to pick up on that.
I actually wanted to see novice's response to this, but gee, thanks.
(February 2nd, 2013, 01:03)Azza Wrote: For example, GlaDOs, looking just at the character, is evil.
While the homicidal robot, with her often fatal tests purportedly intended for scientific advancement, is undeniably a blight on this earth that we need to eradicate, is a creature whose only known point of existence is to locate the nearest sentient being and proceed to detonate themselves with the intent of causing possibly fatal harm to said being any better? If anything, I'd say it's worse - at least the robot has a thinly veiled excuse for what she's doing...
I can't help it that I explode every time someone comes near me. It's a serious problem
Quote:[size=x-small]Given that everyone presumably has a role related somewhat to their character, is it too much of a stretch to say that the scum could be determined from the characters?
Quote:Although, on further thought, I guess we can wait til we get a few lynches to try and identify a pattern there. But worth keeping in mind for the future IMO.
Azza for willful disregard of both GM statement and general common sense about balance - to the point where an attempt at deliberate misdirection appears the most likely explanation.
(though, if your proposal was actually well-intentioned, I have a nice bridge over here I'd love to sell you)
[/quote]
Why would I deliberately attempt to be misleading in such an obviously, demonstrably wrong way?
[/quote]
In case that post means I'm accidentally voting for myself, Gazglum
(February 2nd, 2013, 01:59)Gaspar Wrote: Novice, I thought his comment to zakalwe was a little joke based on the fact that someone basically says that to zak every game. Meiz, I'd expect you to pick up on that.
I actually wanted to see novice's response to this, but gee, thanks.
(February 2nd, 2013, 02:54)novice Wrote: What were you expecting to hear?
Your reasoning for the vote. Just joking, trying to add pressure, something else. Mainly getting you to talk.
Well like all random votes it's meant to add some pressure and get some talk going. But yeah, it was a joke.
And yeah, all that should be apparent, really. I don't like your chastising of Gaspar here, you make it sound like he interrupted some brilliant scumhunting on your part. I've done the same as scum.
Additionally, your original statement sounded more like justification for a vote than asking for my reasoning:
Quote:Novice for voting Zak for not seeing his standard village play, 30 minutes after the game has started.
(February 2nd, 2013, 03:18)novice Wrote: Well like all random votes it's meant to add some pressure and get some talk going. But yeah, it was a joke.
And yeah, all that should be apparent, really. I don't like your chastising of Gaspar here, you make it sound like he interrupted some brilliant scumhunting on your part. I've done the same as scum.
It was not my intention. I think it's generally a good tip to let people answer to the questions / accusations by themselves. For example, if you'd answered that it was a serious suspicion (not likely, just using it as an example).
(February 2nd, 2013, 03:18)novice Wrote: Additionally, your original statement sounded more like justification for a vote than asking for my reasoning:
Quote:Novice for voting Zak for not seeing his standard village play, 30 minutes after the game has started.
Ok, I get where you're coming from. Main idea was to vote away from Tas, since I didn't see anything strange in his game compared to his standard play. I mainly wanted to apply pressure and get you to talk. It was not a serious accusation.
There's not much to go on at the moment. I'd say Gaspar and Matt are villagers, since they were unsure who we're hunting for, and it doesn't state that in town pm. Villains could not be sure if the town were told who exactly they are hunting.
