It has been long since a man has seen a neutral witchhunt.
...and yet not long enough.
A man will need to do better than "I can win with any side" if he wants his claims to be believed.
Futhermore, he should have thought about the repercussions of passing on a Mandalorian's claims at the time he chose to do so.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Final Clarification for Curses (now that my computer works again)
Rule 1: Curses may not harm those with holy relics.
Rule 2: Curses may not bring harm to its caster or their interests (unless they explicitly allow it).
Rule 3: Curses may only be cast within its caster's sphere of influence.
Rule 4: Curses are permanent in that they cannot be changed once cast.
Rule 5: Curses fade when their master/caster dies, the cursed is cleansed, or the cursed individual dies.
Spheres of Influence:
The Acquaintance cannot effect the Game directly, except with his choices concerning his shards (which grant him a presence and a vote).
Demons cannot effect themselves or the Acquaintance.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
Wait wait a permanent curse, cast on a single target, can hurt a demon? This is not a demand for further clarification, just a statment of interest bewildernent.
That implies things and stuff! And the Sphere of influence thing seems to imply that if you're an Omerta and you're cursed then it must be an Omerta cursing you.
One might also wonder why the Mandalorian trusted a man enough to relay the message through him.
well he both died to the mafia and killed a seer so with all due respect to obifett i don't know that "who he trusted" is a barometer we should be caring about
Listen, adolescents. I have been polite so far, but I literally fail to comprehend what is happening with this attack on 'a man,' and believe me, it is not due to any deficiency on my part.
Here is the data. <Gandalf> says that he was told by <Obi> to announce that <Phyphor> ought to be slain by us generally if <Obi> does not survive the night. <Gandalf> is clear the whole time that he does not endorse this position, he merely repeats <Obi's> message as a favor to the slain. Yes, yes, I am not a moron, idiots, I will consider the possibility that <Gandalf> is lying soon enough. Now I merely compile the evidence.
Upon its becoming clear late enough in the day that <Gandalf's> message will be heeded by enough of you simpletons that it was a real threat, <Phyphor> announces that he is a seer. Several of us exchange jests, ha ha, about killing Gandalf since his message turned out to be of ill aspect. There is thereafter a smooth transition from such jests to a collection of imbeciles actually trying to kill Gandalf, despite no obvious story about why Gandalf is suspicious. Note that, in amid the pretty pictures that undoubtedly distracted the rest of you cretins, <Phyphor> notes that he seered <Obi> day 1, and, presumably, revealed this fact to Obi.
What do we know about <Obi>? We know he is a player of significant skill that derives in no small part from his intuitive ability to pick out the evil and his trust of that intuition. We also know that his skills were serving him almost uniquely badly in this game, as we already know he suspected and slew a seer.
What story makes all of this data make sense? Here's one such story, where Gandalf is telling the truth:
<Obi> is contacted day 2 by <Phyphor>. <Obi>, as he is wont to do, smells a rat. Note that <Phyphor> himself recognizes the possibility for a rat; if you will consider <Phyphor's> message that he is a seer, he notes a record of another game where such a thing as <Obi> suspected actually happened (I presume, I don't know the game in question). <Obi> picks a player who he believes is not evil, possibly because <Obi> believes him to be neutral, to pass on his suspicions in case he dies. I imagine <Obi> believes that, if <Obi> dies, that was evidence that <Phyphor> caught on to <Obi's> suspicions, and therefore further evidence that <Phyphor> was evil.
<Gandalf> then follows through on the dead man's wish, and now is at risk of his life for doing so.
That story is possible, even plausible, though it does, I acknowledge, require some coincidences. Nonetheless, this is the Game; if odd things could happen in a way as to render it all awry, those things will happen.
What is the story where we ought to kill <Gandalf>?
In this story, <Gandalf> must be evil, a demon; that is why we ought to kill him. Why would a demon go out of its way to attract attention and attempt to get <Phyphor> killed? One reason: because <Phyphor> is a seer. How does <Gandalf> know that <Phyphor> is a seer? One obvious way is if someone who knew told him: like <Obi>. But if that's true, then the above story works just as well; <Gandalf> being a demon does no work in that story.
Then <Gandalf> must know <Phyphor> is a seer some other way. Perhaps the demons have a power that lets them detect seers, like an action seer. But that power does not seem to mesh with our knowledge that the demons generally have duration-based curses. I am not sure how an action seer is integrated into that idea, nor am I sure why demons would have a power like an action seer. This is possible, but seems very odd, given what we know.
But even if the demons know that <Phyphor> is a seer, why are they exposing one of their own to possibly kill the seer? Why is <Gandalf> doing this? <Gandalf> is not a new player of the Game; he understands that when <Phyphor> dies blue, all eyes will turn to him. So either <Gandalf> wanted all eyes to turn his way, or <Gandalf> did not think that would happen. If the latter, it's because <Gandalf> thought <Phyphor> would not die blue. Like, for example, if he thought <Phyphor> were a demon.
Or perhaps <Gandalf> wanted all eyes to turn his way. If he did that to spoil our records, he has failed; we have good records today, I think, with significant discussion amongst options. More would be better, of course, but it is not blank. Perhaps <Gandalf> wanted eyes to turn his way because he is OSA, and is immortal; but even an attack on Osa is not wasted, if we eventually find and slay all Osa's minions, as Osa will die immediately when his last minion does, as I understand it. That means that Osa would not likely want to waste his immortality so early.
But all this would be unnecessary, in any case! The demons can kill! We've seen them do it more than once! Why would they not simply kill <Phyphor>, instead of going through all these motions? There has been no coordination, really, amongst us; the demons would not expect any resistance to their attack. Why wouldn't they just kill Phyphor in the night?
If you think I am too longwinded, then more fool you, but here is the short version: Obi could easily have suspected Phyphor, given what everyone involved has said. That makes sense; there is a full story to be told how everything has happened where Gandalf is innocently repeating Obi's suspicions, and Obi, as we know, suspected all the wrong people this game. There is no story to make sense of how Gandalf is a demon, and did what he did, because if he were a demon, he is virtually outing himself by accusing a seer, when he has no need to.
Generalísimo de Fuerzas Armadas de la República Argentina
I vote Cayrus because he is one of the only two rival wagons to <Gandalf>, who I have reason to believe is no demon, as I've said above. In any case, <Cayrus>'s input has been useless all game, full of one-line votes and no content.
The only other option is <Xenogears>, and I am not yet so desperate as to follow our host's lead.
Generalísimo de Fuerzas Armadas de la República Argentina
0
Options
blahmcblahYou pick your side and you stick - you don't cut and run when things get ugly.Registered Userregular
Why would Phyphor reveal his shard-removing ability to the thread if he was indeed what he claims to be? Wouldn't stating that he's a seer be enough? Or that he is a special?
He has claimed a role that sounds absolutely vital to the village, yet is completely unverifiable. Mark my words, that's a demon trying to deflect a bandwagon.
Why would Phyphor reveal his shard-removing ability to the thread if he was indeed what he claims to be? Wouldn't stating that he's a seer be enough? Or that he is a special?
He has claimed a role that sounds absolutely vital to the village, yet is completely unverifiable. Mark my words, that's a demon trying to deflect a bandwagon.
This is a good point, and I take this possibility seriously. Nonetheless, the consequences of being wrong are far too high, given that we are already down one seer, and another day might allow us to confirm this one way or another.
Generalísimo de Fuerzas Armadas de la República Argentina
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Now, Shalmelo is something of an expert on being the mafia, so I didn't see his criticism of Zonugal as remotely defensive. He made a really good point, which I agree with. I didn't realize Zonugal was new, but I also knew he was in no danger of getting voted out yesterday. It was just a hunch, but now I find Zonugal's hyper-defensive posture downright suspicious. I'll wait and see what shakes out, but for now I've got my eye on him.
I get super-defensive.
I also get super-offensive.
My life is one of hyper-driven actions. You could mistake this as the acts of an insidious intent but if you look at the other two phallas I have participated in you'd quickly see this is pretty much my style de form.
So there it is. You can wave a red flag towards me or away, but I know one thing.
I won't be changing the passion that bursts from my veins & mouth.
Wait, that wasn't about the biscuit-baking, was it?
Sometimes I have ideas for things.
0
Options
AssuranIs swinging on the SpiralRegistered Userregular
Epic Reveal, eh?
Hope you have better results than I did during Munkus' last game.
I'm gonna go with Romanian as well.
XoB is basically being called out by Larlar, right? Forgive me if I'm not terribly enthusiastic about that accusation. I do, however, admit that Larlar probably is more worried about the mafia at this point, so it's possible he's telling the truth.
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
edited March 2013
I'm going to stick with Blahmcblah.
Nothing personal...
I just personally don't trust you and you still seem to be launching yourself towards any bandwagon you can.
Zonugal on
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Blahmcblah
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Although Romanian dodged out on having a margarita during FloPAX.
Only a demon would pass on such a heavenly treat.....
One reason to say that would be the demons? Another way to remove shards also benefits them. So they might be more inclined to let him live. If he was what he says and etc.
Why would Phyphor reveal his shard-removing ability to the thread if he was indeed what he claims to be? Wouldn't stating that he's a seer be enough? Or that he is a special?
He has claimed a role that sounds absolutely vital to the village, yet is completely unverifiable. Mark my words, that's a demon trying to deflect a bandwagon.
Why not? I gambled that munkus wouldn't give larlar any direct kills and it seems I was right about that. The mafia don't care about the shards.
Now, if I am a demon, try to imagine a scenario that results in obi becoming suspicious enough of me to contact a third party in case he dies. That would require soft networking. Me. Soft networking. Have any of you ever tried to soft network with me? And didn't get your messages ignored and/or found anything out? So the real question is do you think I'm a mafia seer or village seer.
Posts
Shh, you'll blow his cover!
XoB
A man will need to do better than "I can win with any side" if he wants his claims to be believed.
Futhermore, he should have thought about the repercussions of passing on a Mandalorian's claims at the time he chose to do so.
Rule 1: Curses may not harm those with holy relics.
Rule 2: Curses may not bring harm to its caster or their interests (unless they explicitly allow it).
Rule 3: Curses may only be cast within its caster's sphere of influence.
Rule 4: Curses are permanent in that they cannot be changed once cast.
Rule 5: Curses fade when their master/caster dies, the cursed is cleansed, or the cursed individual dies.
Spheres of Influence:
The Acquaintance cannot effect the Game directly, except with his choices concerning his shards (which grant him a presence and a vote).
Demons cannot effect themselves or the Acquaintance.
I love it!
XoB
we have to remove all shards from play to beat the acquaintance. we have to beat the acquaintance to win.
in the event that all players not the acquaintance have shards, they all die and the acquaintance wins the game.
A man cannot win with any side, and has never said so. A man cannot win with the Sharding One, obviously.
Furthermore, the one called Phyphor has confirmed that he had relations with the Mandalorian, and thus the Mandalorian had opportunity to suspect him.
One might also wonder why the Mandalorian trusted a man enough to relay the message through him.
If a man is lying, 'twould be a truly foolish and pointless falsehood.
That implies things and stuff! And the Sphere of influence thing seems to imply that if you're an Omerta and you're cursed then it must be an Omerta cursing you.
well he both died to the mafia and killed a seer so with all due respect to obifett i don't know that "who he trusted" is a barometer we should be caring about
Here is the data. <Gandalf> says that he was told by <Obi> to announce that <Phyphor> ought to be slain by us generally if <Obi> does not survive the night. <Gandalf> is clear the whole time that he does not endorse this position, he merely repeats <Obi's> message as a favor to the slain. Yes, yes, I am not a moron, idiots, I will consider the possibility that <Gandalf> is lying soon enough. Now I merely compile the evidence.
Upon its becoming clear late enough in the day that <Gandalf's> message will be heeded by enough of you simpletons that it was a real threat, <Phyphor> announces that he is a seer. Several of us exchange jests, ha ha, about killing Gandalf since his message turned out to be of ill aspect. There is thereafter a smooth transition from such jests to a collection of imbeciles actually trying to kill Gandalf, despite no obvious story about why Gandalf is suspicious. Note that, in amid the pretty pictures that undoubtedly distracted the rest of you cretins, <Phyphor> notes that he seered <Obi> day 1, and, presumably, revealed this fact to Obi.
What do we know about <Obi>? We know he is a player of significant skill that derives in no small part from his intuitive ability to pick out the evil and his trust of that intuition. We also know that his skills were serving him almost uniquely badly in this game, as we already know he suspected and slew a seer.
What story makes all of this data make sense? Here's one such story, where Gandalf is telling the truth:
<Obi> is contacted day 2 by <Phyphor>. <Obi>, as he is wont to do, smells a rat. Note that <Phyphor> himself recognizes the possibility for a rat; if you will consider <Phyphor's> message that he is a seer, he notes a record of another game where such a thing as <Obi> suspected actually happened (I presume, I don't know the game in question). <Obi> picks a player who he believes is not evil, possibly because <Obi> believes him to be neutral, to pass on his suspicions in case he dies. I imagine <Obi> believes that, if <Obi> dies, that was evidence that <Phyphor> caught on to <Obi's> suspicions, and therefore further evidence that <Phyphor> was evil.
<Gandalf> then follows through on the dead man's wish, and now is at risk of his life for doing so.
That story is possible, even plausible, though it does, I acknowledge, require some coincidences. Nonetheless, this is the Game; if odd things could happen in a way as to render it all awry, those things will happen.
What is the story where we ought to kill <Gandalf>?
In this story, <Gandalf> must be evil, a demon; that is why we ought to kill him. Why would a demon go out of its way to attract attention and attempt to get <Phyphor> killed? One reason: because <Phyphor> is a seer. How does <Gandalf> know that <Phyphor> is a seer? One obvious way is if someone who knew told him: like <Obi>. But if that's true, then the above story works just as well; <Gandalf> being a demon does no work in that story.
Then <Gandalf> must know <Phyphor> is a seer some other way. Perhaps the demons have a power that lets them detect seers, like an action seer. But that power does not seem to mesh with our knowledge that the demons generally have duration-based curses. I am not sure how an action seer is integrated into that idea, nor am I sure why demons would have a power like an action seer. This is possible, but seems very odd, given what we know.
But even if the demons know that <Phyphor> is a seer, why are they exposing one of their own to possibly kill the seer? Why is <Gandalf> doing this? <Gandalf> is not a new player of the Game; he understands that when <Phyphor> dies blue, all eyes will turn to him. So either <Gandalf> wanted all eyes to turn his way, or <Gandalf> did not think that would happen. If the latter, it's because <Gandalf> thought <Phyphor> would not die blue. Like, for example, if he thought <Phyphor> were a demon.
Or perhaps <Gandalf> wanted all eyes to turn his way. If he did that to spoil our records, he has failed; we have good records today, I think, with significant discussion amongst options. More would be better, of course, but it is not blank. Perhaps <Gandalf> wanted eyes to turn his way because he is OSA, and is immortal; but even an attack on Osa is not wasted, if we eventually find and slay all Osa's minions, as Osa will die immediately when his last minion does, as I understand it. That means that Osa would not likely want to waste his immortality so early.
But all this would be unnecessary, in any case! The demons can kill! We've seen them do it more than once! Why would they not simply kill <Phyphor>, instead of going through all these motions? There has been no coordination, really, amongst us; the demons would not expect any resistance to their attack. Why wouldn't they just kill Phyphor in the night?
If you think I am too longwinded, then more fool you, but here is the short version: Obi could easily have suspected Phyphor, given what everyone involved has said. That makes sense; there is a full story to be told how everything has happened where Gandalf is innocently repeating Obi's suspicions, and Obi, as we know, suspected all the wrong people this game. There is no story to make sense of how Gandalf is a demon, and did what he did, because if he were a demon, he is virtually outing himself by accusing a seer, when he has no need to.
The only other option is <Xenogears>, and I am not yet so desperate as to follow our host's lead.
He has claimed a role that sounds absolutely vital to the village, yet is completely unverifiable. Mark my words, that's a demon trying to deflect a bandwagon.
This is a good point, and I take this possibility seriously. Nonetheless, the consequences of being wrong are far too high, given that we are already down one seer, and another day might allow us to confirm this one way or another.
I get super-defensive.
I also get super-offensive.
My life is one of hyper-driven actions. You could mistake this as the acts of an insidious intent but if you look at the other two phallas I have participated in you'd quickly see this is pretty much my style de form.
So there it is. You can wave a red flag towards me or away, but I know one thing.
I won't be changing the passion that bursts from my veins & mouth.
Island Name: Felinefine
Island Name: Felinefine
Nintendo ID: Pastalonius
Smite\LoL:Gremlidin \ WoW & Overwatch & Hots: Gremlidin#1734
3ds: 3282-2248-0453
*puts his feet up and slurps out of a coconut*
I can't wait until tiny umbrellas are invented!
Wait, that wasn't about the biscuit-baking, was it?
Hope you have better results than I did during Munkus' last game.
I'm gonna go with Romanian as well.
XoB is basically being called out by Larlar, right? Forgive me if I'm not terribly enthusiastic about that accusation. I do, however, admit that Larlar probably is more worried about the mafia at this point, so it's possible he's telling the truth.
Nothing personal...
I just personally don't trust you and you still seem to be launching yourself towards any bandwagon you can.
Only a demon would pass on such a heavenly treat.....
Just wait until he really gets going.
Why not? I gambled that munkus wouldn't give larlar any direct kills and it seems I was right about that. The mafia don't care about the shards.
Now, if I am a demon, try to imagine a scenario that results in obi becoming suspicious enough of me to contact a third party in case he dies. That would require soft networking. Me. Soft networking. Have any of you ever tried to soft network with me? And didn't get your messages ignored and/or found anything out? So the real question is do you think I'm a mafia seer or village seer.
It's extremely unlikely that gandalf is a demon
Cayrus
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile