Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Swowl]

I think there may be some confusion about what it means to change your alignment.

Some would consider a role like this alignment changing: You win when you are the only player left alive. When you hammer 3 people, you will instead win when you are alive at the end of the game.

I don't think that's alignment changing; all your paths to victory are clearly laid out to you at the start of the game, and you can play towards them.

A true alignment change for me would be to get a win condition that you previously did not have, and were not aware that you could get.

I know some mods would disagree on that definition. It seems that MiX believes alignment changes can only be roles of the former category. Which is a notion that I also disagree with.

I do not believe this is as arguable as you are making it? I could be wrong, but like "alignment change" means you... change your alignment yeah? If your alignment changes, so much your win con. right?

[MiX]

I believe a no stealing pact would be very good for scum for the reasons GHS outlined, ergo I doubt GHS would outline those reasons. But I acknowledge that given that everyone had already more or less ruled out a no-stealing pact, he might have done it for towncred.

I disagree with the logic behind this post. Scum wouldn't push a no stealing pact if it's pro-scum, scum doesn't need to push a no stealing pact openly, and no one looked at that post to read GHS other than yourself so how can he get any towncred?

PPE: He read you as scum because you were scummmmmmmmyyyyyyy.

Just because you do something for towncred doesn’t mean you get towncred. Outcome vs. intent.

If I was scum looking for towncred, I wouldn't post original ideas about the setup. I don't know, maybe that's just me. Well, at least not after everyone's done with that topic.

I don't think GHS was thinking of pushing for a no stealing pact, but then thought that not doing so was townier, so he did the opposite. I think that clarifies my thoughts on the subject.

[MiX]

I think there may be some confusion about what it means to change your alignment.

Some would consider a role like this alignment changing: You win when you are the only player left alive. When you hammer 3 people, you will instead win when you are alive at the end of the game.

I don't think that's alignment changing; all your paths to victory are clearly laid out to you at the start of the game, and you can play towards them.

A true alignment change for me would be to get a win condition that you previously did not have, and were not aware that you could get.

I know some mods would disagree on that definition. It seems that MiX believes alignment changes can only be roles of the former category. Which is a notion that I also disagree with.

I do not believe this is as arguable as you are making it? I could be wrong, but like "alignment change" means you... change your alignment yeah? If your alignment changes, so much your win con. right?

I have literally no idea what you are trying to say here.

[Glooble]

I believe a no stealing pact would be very good for scum for the reasons GHS outlined, ergo I doubt GHS would outline those reasons. But I acknowledge that given that everyone had already more or less ruled out a no-stealing pact, he might have done it for towncred.

I disagree with the logic behind this post. Scum wouldn't push a no stealing pact if it's pro-scum, scum doesn't need to push a no stealing pact openly, and no one looked at that post to read GHS other than yourself so how can he get any towncred?

PPE: He read you as scum because you were scummmmmmmmyyyyyyy.

Just because you do something for towncred doesn’t mean you get towncred. Outcome vs. intent.

If I was scum looking for towncred, I wouldn't post original ideas about the setup. I don't know, maybe that's just me. Well, at least not after everyone's done with that topic.

I don't think GHS was thinking of pushing for a no stealing pact, but then thought that not doing so was townier, so he did the opposite. I think that clarifies my thoughts on the subject.

Agree to disagree. Seeing as neither of us are now voting for GHS, this conversation has outlived it’s usefulness.

[Swowl]

I think there may be some confusion about what it means to change your alignment.

Some would consider a role like this alignment changing: You win when you are the only player left alive. When you hammer 3 people, you will instead win when you are alive at the end of the game.

I don't think that's alignment changing; all your paths to victory are clearly laid out to you at the start of the game, and you can play towards them.

A true alignment change for me would be to get a win condition that you previously did not have, and were not aware that you could get.

I know some mods would disagree on that definition. It seems that MiX believes alignment changes can only be roles of the former category. Which is a notion that I also disagree with.

I do not believe this is as arguable as you are making it? I could be wrong, but like "alignment change" means you... change your alignment yeah? If your alignment changes, so much your win con. right?

I have literally no idea what you are trying to say here.

Not trying to say anything - legit clarifying that I have the defn of Alignment Changing correct in my head.

[Swowl]

Either way, I don't think associative reads are the same thing as confirmation bias. After all, I'm out here changing my reads on people, which you've already called me out for!

So it's an issue for you when I change my townreads on people, and you also accuse me of confirmation bias... Kinda sounds like a double bind, no?

I mean "associative reads" = Town and conf!bias = skum

If you are town in the situation of linking players together it is an associative read, if you are skum there is is nothing "associative" about it. You know who is town and who is skum, so you are choosing to link town players together - i.e. conf!bias.

[Swowl]

I believe a no stealing pact would be very good for scum for the reasons GHS outlined, ergo I doubt GHS would outline those reasons. But I acknowledge that given that everyone had already more or less ruled out a no-stealing pact, he might have done it for towncred.

I mean even before people ruled it out it is what most skum would do. Especially in a game like this, with so many players. To have a pact to this extent there would have to be essentially 100% agreement, which skum (or anyone) can assume just isn't gonna happen on Day 1. So, taking the towny approach to the situation is def how I would assume skum to approach it... since it probably ain't gonna happen anyway.

[MiX]

Either way, I don't think associative reads are the same thing as confirmation bias. After all, I'm out here changing my reads on people, which you've already called me out for!

So it's an issue for you when I change my townreads on people, and you also accuse me of confirmation bias... Kinda sounds like a double bind, no?

I mean "associative reads" = Town and conf!bias = skum

If you are town in the situation of linking players together it is an associative read, if you are skum there is is nothing "associative" about it. You know who is town and who is skum, so you are choosing to link town players together - i.e. conf!bias.

Town can confirmation bias as well, it's called tunneling and then getting associative reads out of that. It's confirmation bias when you go for the person you're tunneling BECAUSE of the associative reads, which is usually a bad play unless it's LyLo or something.

[Swowl]

Either way, I don't think associative reads are the same thing as confirmation bias. After all, I'm out here changing my reads on people, which you've already called me out for!

So it's an issue for you when I change my townreads on people, and you also accuse me of confirmation bias... Kinda sounds like a double bind, no?

I mean "associative reads" = Town and conf!bias = skum

If you are town in the situation of linking players together it is an associative read, if you are skum there is is nothing "associative" about it. You know who is town and who is skum, so you are choosing to link town players together - i.e. conf!bias.

Town can confirmation bias as well, it's called tunneling and then getting associative reads out of that. It's confirmation bias when you go for the person you're tunneling BECAUSE of the associative reads, which is usually a bad play unless it's LyLo or something.

maybe different defn of the terms here - conf!bias to me literally means "Player X knows Player Y is Town, because Player Y is not their skum buddy"

[cayvie]

PPE: He read you as scum because you were scummmmmmmmyyyyyyy.

Nevermind I misinterpreted what you said, withdrawn.

But you were scummmmmmmyyyyyyyyyyyyy, no idea what faust thought.

Mix it's well established that you beat me 1-1 pretty much every time lol

[MiX]

PPE: He read you as scum because you were scummmmmmmmyyyyyyy.

Nevermind I misinterpreted what you said, withdrawn.

But you were scummmmmmmyyyyyyyyyyyyy, no idea what faust thought.

Mix it's well established that you beat me 1-1 pretty much every time lol

No idea what that means but cool!

[hypercube]

Rereading hypercube!

Hi everyone! Good to be back in a game again. For those I haven't played with before, I use he/him pronouns and you can call me cube or hyper or xyrix or whatever variations you like.

Let's start with a vote: Dylan for PR hunting.

I don't see a pressing reason to no lynch now. We could have protective roles, a vig, etc. to change the player parity.

Dylan wasn't really PR hunting at all when hypercube made this post. Dylan calls cube out, cube just backs off immediately, doesn't respond to the call-out.

I didn't think it was incredibly likely Dylan was PR hunting (it was the start of the game); but it was something to go off of. Dylan's explanation of his reasoning seemed towny to me, so I didn't see a need to press it.

“Perhaps I should be more clear. I think people should regularly partake of Quiet Times, (hereby referred to as ‘QTs’) for the sake of gaining information that they did not have previously.”

Vote: Eddie for claiming Cult Leader.

We've been over this. But this post is two minutes after Eddie's Quiet times post, so to me it looks like a gut reaction. Two minutes is not really enough time for cube to reread the setup and form an opinion about the likelyhood of a cult mechanic. On the other hand, is that the first place your mind goes when you think about QTs? A neighborizer is a thing, at least as common as a cult. I don't know I legit don't know what to make of this.

The cult came to mind since my last game was dominated by them; I had noticed the way the setup was worded seems to allow them before the game had started. I was pretty convinced by the aftermath of that interaction with Eddie that he's town, so that turned out well as well.

You're right that I haven't done as much scumhunting as I'd like - the cult discussion was distracting today, that's mostly my fault. I should have time tomorrow to do a reread and get into it more.

[chairs]

Truth be told, I've been watching these posts with interest but not had a lot of time to post. I find it laughable that I have even a nugget of suspicion laid upon me for congratulating cayvie on an excellent question and for assigning cayvie townpoints for it. I'm not expecting townpoints myself, but to call me scum based on "Oh man, I hadn't thought to ask that question that Town REALLY NEEDS AN ANSWER TO" being a reason (that is, in my mind, entirely logical) for townpoints is kind of silly.


In any case, I thought I ought to produce a quick scum to chum:

Scum
13. Uncleeurope
3. faust
8. Swowl
18. Jimmmmm
17. Glooble
7. WestCoastDidds
6. scolapasta
12. EFHW
14. Galzria
5. hypercube
9. Rhand
1. Dylan32
4. MiX
2. LaLight
15. GreatHallScout
10. cayvie
11. jotheonah
Chum

Note that it's D1 so a lot of these are neutral and I don't have any particularly -strong- scum/town reads.

That said, vote: uncleeurope

[Dylan32]

--snip--
I was pretty convinced by the aftermath of that interaction with Eddie that he's town, so that turned out well as well.
--snip--

He's not.

--snip--
In any case, I thought I ought to produce a quick scum to chum:

Scum
13. Uncleeurope
--snip--

That said, vote: uncleeurope

He's not that either.

Not yet anyway.

[Dylan32]

I debated talking about this yet with myself, but I'm going to. Eddie's some sort of 3rd party with a neighborizer ability. He said in so many words that upon receiving a full claim from a player, their wincon would then be his wincon. I did not full claim to him, largely because the strange old man character he's playing reminded me of every story ever where a stranger offers you a deal does give what was offered but comes with unforeseen negative consequences, and I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity. That's the vibe I got.

[Dylan32]

His description of his wincon becoming that of someone who fullclaims to him was in response to me asking if his wincon aligned completely with town's, since I personally still thought he was probably 3rd party after all the earlier conversations.

[Dylan32]

I mean, to me, that role seems to have pretty high potential to end up anti-town, but I'm not sure if it's worth a lynch as long as there are other potential avenues for dealing with it or figuring out where he stands later.

[MiX]

I debated talking about this yet with myself, but I'm going to. Eddie's some sort of 3rd party with a neighborizer ability. He said in so many words that upon receiving a full claim from a player, their wincon would then be his wincon. I did not full claim to him, largely because the strange old man character he's playing reminded me of every story ever where a stranger offers you a deal does give what was offered but comes with unforeseen negative consequences, and I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity. That's the vibe I got.

Why didn't you make him town? Seems like an odd thing to not do. Someone has to, right?

Anyway, this seems to make sense.

I mean, to me, that role seems to have pretty high potential to end up anti-town, but I'm not sure if it's worth a lynch as long as there are other potential avenues for dealing with it or figuring out where he stands later.

We should lynch scum first, and Uncle's reads are good enough that I'd rather keep him alive for now.

[Dylan32]

I debated talking about this yet with myself, but I'm going to. Eddie's some sort of 3rd party with a neighborizer ability. He said in so many words that upon receiving a full claim from a player, their wincon would then be his wincon. I did not full claim to him, largely because the strange old man character he's playing reminded me of every story ever where a stranger offers you a deal does give what was offered but comes with unforeseen negative consequences, and I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity. That's the vibe I got.

Why didn't you make him town? Seems like an odd thing to not do. Someone has to, right?

Anyway, this seems to make sense.

I mean, to me, that role seems to have pretty high potential to end up anti-town, but I'm not sure if it's worth a lynch as long as there are other potential avenues for dealing with it or figuring out where he stands later.

We should lynch scum first, and Uncle's reads are good enough that I'd rather keep him alive for now.

Re your question: Did you miss the, "I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity."

[MiX]

I debated talking about this yet with myself, but I'm going to. Eddie's some sort of 3rd party with a neighborizer ability. He said in so many words that upon receiving a full claim from a player, their wincon would then be his wincon. I did not full claim to him, largely because the strange old man character he's playing reminded me of every story ever where a stranger offers you a deal does give what was offered but comes with unforeseen negative consequences, and I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity. That's the vibe I got.

Why didn't you make him town? Seems like an odd thing to not do. Someone has to, right?

Anyway, this seems to make sense.

I mean, to me, that role seems to have pretty high potential to end up anti-town, but I'm not sure if it's worth a lynch as long as there are other potential avenues for dealing with it or figuring out where he stands later.

We should lynch scum first, and Uncle's reads are good enough that I'd rather keep him alive for now.

Re your question: Did you miss the, "I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity."

Yeah even then it's pro-town to do it. Net effect is 1 third-party is dayvigged. You spent stormlight anyway. Of course no one wants to make that decision but still...

Also if they die, wouldn't everyone know what alignment he is? That seems like a meh ability. I think Uncle's making it look weirder and shadier than it is.

[Jimmmmm]

Yes YES the tiger is out!
EFHW: Lean scum. Mostly gut at this point. I’ve never seen town EFHW, but she feels the same as she did in Ashersky’s game.
faust: Lean scum. He started out strong. However, he’s been throwing really persistent shade in my direction lately. No suspicion, per se, just trying to imply that my reads and play are not to be trusted. (see the end of #325, then it ramped up in #526, #582). What’s the change? I think it’s my case on GHS. I suspect faust is doing the “defend one buddy while attacking another buddy” tactic, and GHS is the buddy he is defending. (Who’s he attacking? EFHW). I also think he is a little more derisive toward people in general this game than I’ve seen him be; using his charisma to create an acidic atmosphere that is non-conducive to town finding each other and trusting each other.
GreatHallScout: Scum. That readlist, man.

How seriously are you calling out a 3-man team here?

[Swowl]

I debated talking about this yet with myself, but I'm going to. Eddie's some sort of 3rd party with a neighborizer ability. He said in so many words that upon receiving a full claim from a player, their wincon would then be his wincon. I did not full claim to him, largely because the strange old man character he's playing reminded me of every story ever where a stranger offers you a deal does give what was offered but comes with unforeseen negative consequences, and I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity. That's the vibe I got.

Why didn't you make him town? Seems like an odd thing to not do. Someone has to, right?

Anyway, this seems to make sense.

I mean, to me, that role seems to have pretty high potential to end up anti-town, but I'm not sure if it's worth a lynch as long as there are other potential avenues for dealing with it or figuring out where he stands later.

We should lynch scum first, and Uncle's reads are good enough that I'd rather keep him alive for now.

Re your question: Did you miss the, "I wondered if it would involve him killing the person who full-claimed and assuming their identity."

Yeah even then it's pro-town to do it. Net effect is 1 third-party is dayvigged. You spent stormlight anyway. Of course no one wants to make that decision but still...

Also if they die, wouldn't everyone know what alignment he is? That seems like a meh ability. I think Uncle's making it look weirder and shadier than it is.

I mean Eddie doesn't normally interact in all that many sentences early days... or even when they get into they still paraphrase. I don't think they are over doing it here. I think they have a posting restriction forcing them into it.

[Jimmmmm]

PPE: No, he has like 30 posts, but those were the two I thought were scummy.

Did you find any you thought were Towny and decided to leave them out?

[Dylan32]

There was also nothing that indicated his alignment wouldn't change again if someone else claimed to him afterwards. I've never heard of a role like this, so I have no idea what to expect or what "normal" limitations or rules that role would have.

ppe 2

[MiX]

There was also nothing that indicated his alignment wouldn't change again if someone else claimed to him afterwards. I've never heard of a role like this, so I have no idea what to expect or what "normal" limitations or rules that role would have.

ppe 2

I still don't know why you wouldn't just...do it. I mean, do you need to keep your role a secret? You already claimed everything! What are you losing with this?

From what I've seen, Uncle offered to be part of your team, and you refused out of fear. That seems anti-town, although somewhat null. Scum would be more afraid, whereas town is just irrational.