Not to throw a wrench under the bandwagon, but we're basing it on a hunch at this point?
I'm inclined to think that warban most likely got in contact with some specials, so there might be a better lead. Unless of course, there is proof that Burnage is one of the Interesting 8, and then he's got to go.
I was more hinting that in his brief stay, he was able to put something together. It's a bit risky though, you're right.
Pardon my ignorance (if that is the case), but how would he have been able to gather that kind of intel on Day 1 aside from just pm'ing numerous amounts of people?
I was more hinting that in his brief stay, he was able to put something together. It's a bit risky though, you're right.
Pardon my ignorance (if that is the case), but how would he have been able to gather that kind of intel on Day 1 aside from just pm'ing numerous amounts of people?
This is Rainfall Intuition. Something about Burnage is setting my nerves on edge. I dunno if he's #3 or not, that day 1 vote was just a throwaway, but now he's acting odd. I've read the thread three times and each time my brain says 'something is up with that Burnage guy.'
I don't offer a guarantee on this. I'm no seer(I suck as a seer.) But dammit, he's setting my teeth on edge.
!Burnage
Also, guard me, because rainfall is obviously the odd day seer and I am the even one.
Also, did you get the first edition of the new book Rainfall?
Here's my question issue. Rainfall threw Burnage under the bus on day one, even calling out his role (The Interesting Third). Now that we've seen the naming conventions of the bad guys (Interesting 7, etc.) does it not make anyone else see red flags all over the place.
1) Somehow Rainfall seered Burnage before the vote close, or
2) Rainfall is a bad guy who had access to the naming conventions and tried to throw Burnage out as a distraction.
Thoughts?
Jester313 on
0
Options
sportzboytjwsqueeeeeezzeeeesome more tax breaks outRegistered Userregular
edited October 2008
Yes, please explain Rainy.
sportzboytjw on
Walkerdog on MTGO
TylerJ on League of Legends (it's free and fun!)
Yeah, what the hell is this? Rainfall calls me the Interesting Third or something, then backtracks and claims 'it's just intuition olol'? It's not like I started the bandwagon that got her killed in the last main phalla or anything.
Oh, wait.
I'm not an important role in this, I'm a damn scrap metal collecting ship. I can kill inactives.
There's my 'epic' reveal. If you want to vote for me, feel free, but this just seems like Rainfall's using a grudge to get a bandwagon started on me for no reason.
Yeah, what the hell is this? Rainfall calls me the Interesting Third or something, then backtracks and claims 'it's just intuition olol'? It's not like I started the bandwagon that got her killed in the last main phalla or anything.
Oh, wait.
I'm not an important role in this, I'm a damn scrap metal collecting ship. I can kill inactives.
There's my 'epic' reveal. If you want to vote for me, feel free, but this just seems like Rainfall's using a grudge to get a bandwagon started on me for no reason.
Now that is a reveal I do not trust !Burnage. I mean it's the GM's job to kill inactives, not players.
Toxic Toys on
3DS code: 2938-6074-2306, Nintendo Network ID: ToxicToys, PSN: zutto
During the signup phase, before roles were assigned. Rainfall wasn't the first to use that terminology. Not saying he is innocent, but I thought along those lines as well, and I don't think it pans out.
delroland on
EVE: Online - the most fun you will ever have not playing a game.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
0
Options
IanatorGaze upon my works, ye mightyand facepalm.Registered Userregular
edited October 2008
Yeah. Why would we want to remove those that still count as not-Interesting, hmm, !Burnage?
Ianator on
Twitch | Blizzard: Ianator#1479 | 3DS: Ianator - 1779 2336 5317 | FFXIV: Iana Ateliere (NA Sarg) Backlog Challenge List
Actually, burnage's role makes sense, I assume it allows him to absorb the roles of inactive players so that the village is not unjustly penalized when they are removed.
Actually, burnage's role makes sense, I assume it allows him to absorb the roles of inactive players so that the village is not unjustly penalized when they are removed.
Actually, burnage's role makes sense, I assume it allows him to absorb the roles of inactive players so that the village is not unjustly penalized when they are removed.
I'm not an important role in this, I'm a damn scrap metal collecting ship. I can kill inactives.
FYI, 'Fires of Inactivity' doesn't sound like a role power. The GM is doing a fine job of nuking inactives(on the first night, no less) and I don't think your reveal holds water.
MGW, he said nothing about getting inactives powers. He just said killing them. If he claimed something effective, I would have let it slide. This is just stupid though. Also, first edition of what new book huh?
Jester, I used simple logic. If we're facing against the Interesting Eight, it's only natural that they would be entitled the Interesting First Through Eighth. However, I saw The Interesting 7 in the kill list, so it looks like my assumption was wrong.
Regarding the whole Interesting Seven/Seventh thing, Gumpy's always referred to members as Interesting One, Two, Three, etc. Not saying this is definitely the case here (although it looks like it from the narration) but I'd wager that they're all named this way.
Unless there's some type of doppelgänger shenanigans wherein we'd have 2 sets of Interesting people.
Alright. Good discussion everyone. If Burnage's real role is that of killing inactives, he's pretty pointless. However, I'd hate to kill off another good guy just because he has a lame ability.
The GM is doing a fine job of nuking inactives(on the first night, no less) and I don't think your reveal holds water.
...
Jester, I used simple logic. If we're facing against the Interesting Eight, it's only natural that they would be entitled the Interesting First Through Eighth. However, I saw The Interesting 7 in the kill list, so it looks like my assumption was wrong.
Wait, there was an inactivity kill? Where was that?
And I don't see why people are having a hard time with Interesting 7 being member #7, in Gods phalla where I was part of the original Interesting 8 we all had numbered avatars and Gumpy renamed our accounts to be "Interesting _" and all, he was pretty gungho about it.
We also were 9 members because we added Ardor after we formed up. Sneaky! There won't be two Interesting factions, that makes no sense to me.
I agree with Stew, and I still like WilDPanthA05 as an alternative.
I said no such thing you treacherous swine!
At any rate, I honestly don't think that Rainfall is a seer. The terminology is similar, yes, but it isn't that big of a stretch to go from interesting 3 to interesting third.
I trust in Rainfall's intuition, as it got me killed in Phallout II. Burnage!
Posts
I'm inclined to think that warban most likely got in contact with some specials, so there might be a better lead. Unless of course, there is proof that Burnage is one of the Interesting 8, and then he's got to go.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
I was more hinting that in his brief stay, he was able to put something together. It's a bit risky though, you're right.
Oh, I thought you were saying we ask him.
Pardon my ignorance (if that is the case), but how would he have been able to gather that kind of intel on Day 1 aside from just pm'ing numerous amounts of people?
People PMing him.
!Burnage
Also, guard me, because rainfall is obviously the odd day seer and I am the even one.
Also, did you get the first edition of the new book Rainfall?
1) Somehow Rainfall seered Burnage before the vote close, or
2) Rainfall is a bad guy who had access to the naming conventions and tried to throw Burnage out as a distraction.
Thoughts?
TylerJ on League of Legends (it's free and fun!)
Oh, wait.
I'm not an important role in this, I'm a damn scrap metal collecting ship. I can kill inactives.
There's my 'epic' reveal. If you want to vote for me, feel free, but this just seems like Rainfall's using a grudge to get a bandwagon started on me for no reason.
And I have red voted people correctly on hunches before; sometimes you just feel a pattern to someone's posts.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
Just throwing that out there.
----
I think you're on the wrong path here, Jester. Perhaps Gumpy saw what a good naming convention Rainfall had created and used it?
Now that is a reveal I do not trust !Burnage. I mean it's the GM's job to kill inactives, not players.
Wouldn't that leave a helluva lot up to coincidence then?
During the signup phase, before roles were assigned. Rainfall wasn't the first to use that terminology. Not saying he is innocent, but I thought along those lines as well, and I don't think it pans out.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
Twitch | Blizzard: Ianator#1479 | 3DS: Ianator - 1779 2336 5317 | FFXIV: Iana Ateliere (NA Sarg)
Backlog Challenge List
The first post of the thread.
"Go up, thou bald head." -2 Kings 2:23
That was an edited in. It originally read "Gumpy & Friends vs the Generic Bad People"
LOG ON IN THE MIDDLE OF MIDNIGHT FOR THE PURPOSE OF A FORUM GAME GODDAMNIT!
Signing off, finding my copy of TWEWY in the hopes that beautiful people singing in foreign tongues will lull me to sleep.
Wait, I just watched the SIlent Hill 4 LP, not going to fucking sleep, not after the last one.
Shit.
That's an interesting idea. Do we risk it tho'?
Yes.
FYI, 'Fires of Inactivity' doesn't sound like a role power. The GM is doing a fine job of nuking inactives(on the first night, no less) and I don't think your reveal holds water.
MGW, he said nothing about getting inactives powers. He just said killing them. If he claimed something effective, I would have let it slide. This is just stupid though. Also, first edition of what new book huh?
Jester, I used simple logic. If we're facing against the Interesting Eight, it's only natural that they would be entitled the Interesting First Through Eighth. However, I saw The Interesting 7 in the kill list, so it looks like my assumption was wrong.
As it is, I'm slightly on the fence here. I don't really believe you, but I'm going to wait for a bit any see if anything more conclusive shows up.
Unless there's some type of doppelgänger shenanigans wherein we'd have 2 sets of Interesting people.
Anyone have any other targets in mind?
Wait, there was an inactivity kill? Where was that?
And I don't see why people are having a hard time with Interesting 7 being member #7, in Gods phalla where I was part of the original Interesting 8 we all had numbered avatars and Gumpy renamed our accounts to be "Interesting _" and all, he was pretty gungho about it.
We also were 9 members because we added Ardor after we formed up. Sneaky! There won't be two Interesting factions, that makes no sense to me.
I said no such thing you treacherous swine!
At any rate, I honestly don't think that Rainfall is a seer. The terminology is similar, yes, but it isn't that big of a stretch to go from interesting 3 to interesting third.
I trust in Rainfall's intuition, as it got me killed in Phallout II. Burnage!
if Rainy's a vig, then fine.. I won't vote for her... but I'm trusting Burnage's reveal.
there's some authenticity to it that comes without being 'epic'.
!retract Rainfall
!vote TTR
nothing personal buddy, but we can't afford to lose 2 specials.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
I don't like this.
I don't like the current trend of epic reveals by whoever is being bandwagoned either.
But I don't have any better suspects in mind. Goose! didn't exactly leave much of a trail. So, for the time being, !Burnage must burn.
Me say 'getting better but not more better enough!'