Print

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

[pacovf]

Ok, if your defense to posting without actually having any content is that you do it so that you don't appear to be lurking, you are failing to convince me of your towniness.

Try to give me some content. Surely you must have opinions by now?

[Voltaire]

I am somewhat against dissolving it, because more QTs is bad for mafia, I think?

I actually haven't posted a single thing in the Lannister QT. the problem is, the mafia/player ratio isn't any lower there than it is here. why should QT's even be beneficial for us?

Liar! You posted a "hello" (not an actual quote!)-style message. It was very, very brief. Reasonable enough that you would forget you did this.

[pingpongsam]

Vote: Voltaire

PPE 3 where now it looks like omgus

Hell, I agree then, Vote: pps

Then kill volt, please.

[Voltaire]

Vote: Voltaire

PPE 3 where now it looks like omgus

Hell, I agree then, Vote: pps

Then kill volt, please.

This implies you wanted to vote for me before you saw my comment that I would enjoy your lynch. Would you please elaborate?

[pacovf]

The reason I want Baratheon not empowered/gone is, why the hell do we want a non-100% town arsonist in this game?

There is a small advantage to arsonist instead of vigilante: if you prime town, mafia might kill them for you. If you were a vig, mafia would have killed someone else instead. This obviously can't happen against mafia. So, the odds of killing scum are slightly higher for a town arsonist than for a town vig.

Of course, the fact that it isn't 100% town-aligned is really worrying. I definitely think that the Baratheons should no-vote when asked who is going to use the power.

Voltaire, what do you think about my comment on QTs? I'm curious.


PPE 2 : gee the self-lynchers multiply.

[Hydrad]

I'm slightly against the egork lynch as if we lynch egork and I move to lannister. If it ends up being a strong power that we want to keep then all scum will do is kill me and we lose the power. I guess if we have a doctor or something it makes it harder but if they have strongman it doesn't matter.

Also I may be forgetting but stark was a bullet proof power right? whats the difference between giving someone a bullet proof and a doctor?

[pingpongsam]

Vote: Voltaire

PPE 3 where now it looks like omgus

Hell, I agree then, Vote: pps

Then kill volt, please.

This implies you wanted to vote for me before you saw my comment that I would enjoy your lynch. Would you please elaborate?

I implicated you before for opportunistic traction seeking. You then indicated that since I did not emphatically call you scum that I was the one being scummy about it. Then you disappeared. Funny, now that my name was put on the table by someone else you come out in support of it. Again, opportunistic traction seeking. Now you have traction you were looking for.

[pacovf]

I'm slightly against the egork lynch as if we lynch egork and I move to lannister. If it ends up being a strong power that we want to keep then all scum will do is kill me and we lose the power. I guess if we have a doctor or something it makes it harder but if they have strongman it doesn't matter.

Also I may be forgetting but stark was a bullet proof power right? whats the difference between giving someone a bullet proof and a doctor?

Not the kind of content I was expecting...

I'll answer anyway: Stark has a bodyguard. If the person targeted would die, the bodyguard dies instead.

The point about EgorK and you dying is irrelevant: anyone that has passed through Baratheon will still count for empowerment purposes, and we intend to send 3 (or 4) people to Baratheon today anyway.

[Teproc]

Vote: Voltaire

PPE 3 where now it looks like omgus

Hell, I agree then, Vote: pps

Then kill volt, please.

RIght after I say you're being too reasonable for town!PPS ? It won't work.

[Voltaire]

Voltaire, what do you think about my comment on QTs? I'm curious.

I think QTs are massively pro-scum. They have all the info, they can manipulate better.

[Teproc]

Not "anyone who has passed through" Baratheon will count for empowering Lannister, you need an original memeber of the house, or at least tha's how I understood it.

QTs aren't necessarily pro-scum. They generally are though.

[Hydrad]

I'm slightly against the egork lynch as if we lynch egork and I move to lannister. If it ends up being a strong power that we want to keep then all scum will do is kill me and we lose the power. I guess if we have a doctor or something it makes it harder but if they have strongman it doesn't matter.

Also I may be forgetting but stark was a bullet proof power right? whats the difference between giving someone a bullet proof and a doctor?

Not the kind of content I was expecting...

I'll answer anyway: Stark has a bodyguard. If the person targeted would die, the bodyguard dies instead.

The point about EgorK and you dying is irrelevant: anyone that has passed through Baratheon will still count for empowerment purposes, and we intend to send 3 (or 4) people to Baratheon today anyway.

Oh I thought that we had to originate from baratheon to activate lannisters power. I misunderstood I guess. Also I'll try to get a big post later today but right now am at work. during break or something I will try to give a post of where all my reads are.

[pacovf]

Surely a Lannister can answer whether "passing through" is enough to qualify, but this post makes me think it does.

Lannister's EMpowerment is that the House needs to (collectively) have been sworn to the other Houses. So a former Stark/Targ, and a former Baratheon, in a 6-player House would be enough, for example.

[pacovf]

Not "anyone who has passed through" Baratheon will count for empowering Lannister, you need an original memeber of the house, or at least tha's how I understood it.

QTs aren't necessarily pro-scum. They generally are though.

So huh, would you be pro or anti dissolving Baratheon? Because right now, unless we empower them just to check, I think they are a liability for town, save for the extra QT. If the consensus is that QTs are pro-scum, I'm in favour of dissolving the House.

I guess we could send people there today and dissolve it tomorrow, just to have spare Baratheons for the Lannisters, but that's about it.

[azadin]

Surely a Lannister can answer whether "passing through" is enough to qualify, but this post makes me think it does.

Lannister's EMpowerment is that the House needs to (collectively) have been sworn to the other Houses. So a former Stark/Targ, and a former Baratheon, in a 6-player House would be enough, for example.

I confirm this. Passing through is sufficient.

[Hydrad]

keep in mind we only have 2 moves each. So sending people there today then leaving tomorow means they are stuck in that place the rest of the game.

[azadin]

Not "anyone who has passed through" Baratheon will count for empowering Lannister, you need an original memeber of the house, or at least tha's how I understood it.

QTs aren't necessarily pro-scum. They generally are though.

So huh, would you be pro or anti dissolving Baratheon? Because right now, unless we empower them just to check, I think they are a liability for town, save for the extra QT. If the consensus is that QTs are pro-scum, I'm in favour of dissolving the House.

I guess we could send people there today and dissolve it tomorrow, just to have spare Baratheons for the Lannisters, but that's about it.

I should mention that our empowerment condition only requires players having been sworn to the remaining houses, not all of the original houses.

[Teproc]

As long as there are at least 3 Baratheon (enough to ensure they won't use their power, or if they do there should be at least one townie to tell us about it) I want to keep it. We have no idea what empowered houses really are : we've been guessing it's a bigger version of the original role, but who knows ?

In terms of flavor for example, why would House Stark in power be a Doctor ? I mean they could I suppose, but there are probably other things completely unrelated to protection you could imagine.

I don't see Baratheon as being a threat at all as long as there is a reasonable number of people in the house.

[Voltaire]

I implicated you before for opportunistic traction seeking. You then indicated that since I did not emphatically call you scum that I was the one being scummy about it. Then you disappeared. Funny, now that my name was put on the table by someone else you come out in support of it. Again, opportunistic traction seeking. Now you have traction you were looking for.

I totally am trying to get wagons going, but that's where my "agreement" with your case on me ends. With all the theory talk going on, I want to make sure scum-hunting doesn't fall by the wayside. I think we've (mostly) accomplished that. As for me "disappearing", you'll note I made a post indicating I'd be more-or-less gone over the weekend.

Do you not see how me using my weapon (my vote) is pro-town?

[Voltaire]

So huh, would you be pro or anti dissolving Baratheon? Because right now, unless we empower them just to check, I think they are a liability for town, save for the extra QT. If the consensus is that QTs are pro-scum, I'm in favour of dissolving the House.

I guess we could send people there today and dissolve it tomorrow, just to have spare Baratheons for the Lannisters, but that's about it.

As I have said before, I am pro-dissolving Baratheon.

Also, if someone was asking, it's anyone who was sworn to a House, not an original member, for Lannister empowerment.

[Voltaire]

As long as there are at least 3 Baratheon (enough to ensure they won't use their power, or if they do there should be at least one townie to tell us about it) I want to keep it. We have no idea what empowered houses really are : we've been guessing it's a bigger version of the original role, but who knows ?

We do. At least Lannister says that our House power gets better, right there in the opening post. No details, but the language makes me 100% convinced Empowered powers are going to be recognizably super-charged versions of original powers.

[pacovf]

I should mention that our empowerment condition only requires players having been sworn to the remaining houses, not all of the original houses.

Oh, ok, that makes some considerations irrelevant.

In terms of flavor for example, why would House Stark in power be a Doctor ? I mean they could I suppose, but there are probably other things completely unrelated to protection you could imagine.

I've said before that I feel like it might be some sort of redirecting power (redirect all actions on target player to self, for example).

It's true that empowered powers might not be stronger/bigger versions of the current power, but the word "empower" kinda implies that, no? PPE: yeah, the word used isn't "gets better", but it sort of says that is going to fill in a similar role.

[pacovf]

*the word used sort of implies that it's going to fill in a similar role.

[Voltaire]

A reminder that House votes are weighted based on time in the house. It's fine now (everyone changing during D1 gives us all the same weighted votes (2) tonight) but something to be aware of if you're thinking longer-term.

[pacovf]

Pretty sure that anybody not changing houses today will get 3 votes tonight, instead of 2.

@Mods: can you confirm this?