Print

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

[pacovf]

@Robz: you were originally very much in favour of sharing your house power. What is your opinion now?

@Azadin: you mentioned that you were going to do a more thorough reread. How is it coming along?

@EgorK: do you have any opinion on what has been said until now?

[EgorK]

@Robz: you were originally very much in favour of sharing your house power. What is your opinion now?

@Azadin: you mentioned that you were going to do a more thorough reread. How is it coming along?

@EgorK: do you have any opinion on what has been said until now?

Ash is ash. Otherwise a lot of setup discussion. WW mishup makes him towny, but not IC in my opinion. And I do not have any reads from QT

[silverspawn]

sorry everyone, I was somewhere where I didn't have internet, but I expected to have it, so I didn't say anything before I left (plus the game hadn't started yet.) But I'm back now, so I'll do a big reread and then probably become very active as usual.

[azadin]

@Robz: you were originally very much in favour of sharing your house power. What is your opinion now?

@Azadin: you mentioned that you were going to do a more thorough reread. How is it coming along?

@EgorK: do you have any opinion on what has been said until now?

Alright, back from being away from internet. Starting my reread now.

[azadin]

House roles are pseudo-unkillable: if you kill one, another one takes its spot.

I am kinda assuming that Stark's empowered power is Doctor, because it makes a lot of sense. Could be something else, but in the end it's still a protective role, so it doesn't really matter.

Hence, pseudo-unkillable protective role + investigative role = profit.

I'm still going through the posts, but I need to post this thought before I lose it:

I have a sneaking suspicion that Lannister's empowered power is full Cop, and the Stark's is full doctor. Not that this makes sense from a flavour view, but think about it. Stark's first power is bodyguard. Doctor is an obvious "upgrade" to this. Our (Lannister) role is like a dumbed-down investigative type thing where we choose another player and learn something about them (though now that I think about it, it's not purely investigative because we also perform the action back). Still, my original thought was that instead of blindly being able to reflect actions, an empowered condition would also reveal some information about the targeted player.

Now, for BALANCE purposes, having pseudo-unkillable doctor AND super-cop would be absolutely insane. It's my thought that the reason the Stark's bodyguard -> doctor upgrade is contingent on Lannister being dissolved is so that combination can never actually happen.

This assumes our empowered power is a cop/investigative type thing, which I'm not positive about, but does make some sense.

[azadin]

The night is dark and full of terrors.

Haha, this cracked me up for some reason.

[azadin]

Actually, never mind. I don't think we should share unless there's an overwhelming consensus. I just realized that chances are robz is town.

FYI, chances are 27% if 3-scum-team, and 36% if 4-scum-team from your point of view, assuming both you and WW are town, that there is at least one scum in Targaryen. They are reasonable, but I wouldn't say they are good enough to be worth the risk of you thinking that scum doesn't know about your power while they actually do, and keeping town in the darkness.

And of course, from the outside, the odds of scum being in Targaryen, assuming WW is town, are 50% if 3-scum-team, and 60% if 4-scum-team, which are anything but good.

What?

[silverspawn]

okay. so. lot's of things going on here.

the setup overall seems both fascinating and complex. i think (correct me if i'm wrong), if the setup is complex, it means a) scum slips (actual scum slips...) are more likely, and b) having all information is more valuable. for that reason I totally support claiming pretty much everything except conventional Player roles.

As you've already figured out, I'm Lannister. Also, I'm Oberyn Martell, and my flavor said pretty much what's show canon. This might be relevant because it proves that the setup also includes post season 2 stuff (I think the contrary has been claimed before).

The WW slip is kind of... unfortunate. Or well, it's fortunate for our chances, but it bothers me because it's an unfair advantage. I know for sure that it would bother me A LOT if i was scum. but well, mistakes happen. We should still use it. And there is an obvious opportunity for that:

Hmm I'm wondering the if we get ww to come to baratheon? If we vote him to control the power would that be better?

is there any reason why we should not do this? it seems like the perfect plan. we have an IC, we have a crazy powerful role. so... make the IC the crazy powerful role? I guess he might be NK'd, but since we don't now whether or not there are doctors out there (or do we know? we don't, right?), NK an IC seems bloody dangerous. so, please explain to me why we should not do this if you think we shouldn't.

random question: can mafia talk during the day aswell? I always thought they could, but according to a sample pm from another setup, they can't. but I also recall talking about "directed" play, which is only possible if they can.

before i say more, I'll reread the ash-pac thing, and some other things

[Voltaire]

random question: can mafia talk during the day aswell? I always thought they could, but according to a sample pm from another setup, they can't. but I also recall talking about "directed" play, which is only possible if they can.

Normally they can not. Some setups do allow daychat.

[Teproc]

This Targaryen thing is annoying. I want the game to move on to actual scumhunting, but I'd rather we get all the claiming and planning done before that, and you guys are just obstructing.

[silverspawn]

I'm not sure I understand the pacovf case correctly, but let me try to break it down. this was ash's post

pacovf made a series of posts in the QT that made it clear from the start that he was new scum.  He had some assumptions that only scum would make right off the bat.  He continued those into the thread.

You starts off with an argument that we should not actively empower our house because House Lannister also has a power.  Why House Lannister?  How would we know the Lannisters were in the game?  Why Lannister's power and not Baratheon or some other big name?  Specifically, Lannister.  Clearly, there is also scum in Lannister.

He then moves on to scum will try to get in all the houses as quickly as possible and scum will know everything we do and say in all houses.  I think that's what led to the mod's note here in the game thread about new QTs all the time.  But again, this is scum planning, not scum hunting.  This is thinking like scum, not thinking like town.

He then makes a joke that I am chatting in my scum QT.  That's a lot of self-awareness projected onto another player who was sleeping (I'm assuming he doesn't know my time zone difference is quite big).

As soon as I return, I say that I have thoughts but don't want to share them.  All of a sudden, super talkative pacovf just goes silent.  Like, completely.  Ever see crabs running around on the rocks at the beach?  As soon as they notice you, they disappear and don't come out.

That's the stuff from the QT.  I have to run, but it's a good start.  You can read his posts here and see the same trend.

let me rephrase that into points

• pacofv said they should not actively empower their house because House Lannister also has a power
  
  • he knows Lannister exists
  • he knows the special power of Lannister
• he said, lannister will try to get in all houses
  
  • he knows the empowerment condition of Lannisters
• he made a self-aware joke
• he suddenly goes afk after ash said that he had thoughts he didn't want to share
• there's a similar pattern in his posts

Teproc then said, he knew about the killing all Lannisters thing, so the case isn't really a case anymore. But I don't really get it, if they know the empowerment condition for their house, why does that excuse knowing about the special Power of Lannister? why does it excuse knowing about the lannister empowerment condition? I only see how it excuses point 1.1, which was a stupid point to begin with. ash said, it's irrelevant. well, that's how it seems to me too.

Then there's that

By the way, since it's out there, our empowerement condition is not exactly to kill all Lannisters, it is for House Lannister to have perished, which would just mean that no one is in it anymore. This means we would have to abandon the Lannister power if we wanted to get the Stark enpowered powerd, hence pacovf's comments taht ash finds scummy for some reason.

how exactly does this excuse any of the points?

I'm not trying to push a case here, I think it's rather that there's something I don't understand. someone want to elaborate?

[Witherweaver]

I'm not sure it's a valid jump to say that Pacovf knew the empowerment condition of Lannister's.  Why do you think that's the case?

[Teproc]

Ok, here is pacovf's relevant post from the QT (ash and him can confirm) :

I am against actively trying to empower our House power. Lannister House has another power, and empowering ours implies losing that other power, and we don't know which is better (empowered Stark, or non-empowered Stark + Lannister).

As you can see, this says nothing about the Lannister power itself. As for Lannister "trying to get into all houses" he said that about scum, not about Lannisters.

[pacovf]

Can we actually quote the QT!? This would have gone WAY faster if I could just post the discussion.

[Teproc]

It's impossible to prove that it's an actual quote, so yes, you can. Or at least I don't see anything in the rules against it, can't remember how previous games with similar mechanics worked in that regard but I think you could quote.

[silverspawn]

I am against actively trying to empower our House power. Lannister House has another power, and empowering ours implies losing that other power, and we don't know which is better (empowered Stark, or non-empowered Stark + Lannister).

I misunderstood what he meant by "empower" (but it should have been clear, so my bad).

Can we actually quote the QT!? This would have gone WAY faster if I could just post the discussion.

I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to. If we are, it's probably best if ash does that and then makes a new, structured case using quotes from the QT.

unless any of you minds if they are made public

[silverspawn]

mind*

[silverspawn]

If we are, it's probably best if ash does that and then makes a new, structured case using quotes from the QT.

#1.2 from my list doesn't really follow either, based on the post you quoted. but me trying to structure this, using interpretations of paraphrasing from ash seems like a bad idea, so I'll stop now. it's much better if he does it himself, if he is still serious about this case

[Witherweaver]

In the past, quoting any QT messages was explicitly disallowed.  Recall Monster's University.

[Teproc]

In the past, quoting any QT messages was explicitly disallowed.  Recall Monster's University.

It was ? Hmmm. I forgot about that entirely.

faust, what's the ruling here ?

[Witherweaver]

I do think that's a weird thing for Pacovf to say, though.

How would you actively try to empower your House?  As Town, the only way is to make people leave House Lannister.  I can't see much of a way this could be done other than simply to convince them to change houses.  This would invariably lead to a discussion on what houses had what powers, and a collective determination of which ones we want more. 

[pacovf]

Well, it was a post based on the information we had back then. Just because I didn't know Lannister's power didn't mean I couldn't start devising strategies based on likely scenarios. Plus, I didn't know what kind of game this was going to be D1, and judging from our empower condition, it seemed like maybe there were going to be mechanics that encouraged adversarial behaviour between houses, I was taking a stance against that.

I don't know, how isn't stating my opinion on whether we should dissolve Lannister not contributing to a "collective determination", anyway?

[Witherweaver]

But you said "actively empower our house". 

I guess the issue is that the only action available is killing.

[azadin]

But you said "actively empower our house". 

I guess the issue is that the only action available is killing.

"Actively empower" could also mean actively attempting to persuade Lannister to leave their house. It doesn't mean the only available action is killing.

[pacovf]

You don't have to resort to killing to empty House Lannister. Headstrong posts about how people should come to House Stark (we have cookies) work just fine, just as your posts to the effect that people joining House Targaryen are obvscum are achieving the opposite.

I am simplifying, but I think you are reading too much into it.

PPE: what azadin said, but I think WW knew it already anyway.