Print

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

[Mephansteras]

  The battle rages on. Many of the guards seem to team up, at least for the moment, to take down weakened foes or suspected traitors.

  Caz and Tiruin focus on Deathsword some more. The Shieldman puts up a formidable defense, but it just isn't enough and he falls beneath their blades. As he dies, you hear him spit out a curse. "Damn you all, we could have just shared the money!". He was a Traitor Guard.

  Caz has no time to savor his victory, however, as Jim Groovester and Toaster flank him. Caught off guard, he doesn't even manage to mount a defense before he falls. As he slumps over to the ground he speaks "I am sorry, my Prince, that I could only take out one of these Traitors for you." he was a Loyal Guard.

  Dariush and Leafsnail trade blows, but neither is able to gain the upper hand. Seeing an opportunity, ToonyMan sneaks in an attack on Dariush and wounds him.


Caz has sustained 4 Wounds and has been slain!
Deathsword has sustained 4 Wounds and has been slain!
Tiruin has sustained 1 Wound
Dariush has sustained 1 Wound

Turn 2 has Ended. Any unused Actions were wasted.

Turn 3 Started and will End ~10am Pacific Thursday, or when all Actions have been made or Passed

[ToonyMan]

Also, on further consideration, I might as well finish this.
Attack Caz, again.

Can we get the reasoning you went through at least?

Defend self.

That's it?

Leafsnail: Are you going to attack Dariush again now that Caz was killed (as you said)?

[Toaster]

Toony:  There were a few reasons why I attacked again later and not all at once.  First, I had forgotten I could.  Second, I went back after the first attack after remembering my second attack and realized I could do a finishing blow- since I thought he was scum, that seemed reasonable to do so.  Why not end him instead of letting it putter on another day?


Since we're now down one on each side, how does that affect your reads?

[ToonyMan]

Since we're now down one on each side, how does that affect your reads?

It's kind of a neutral giving to our situation.  I'm suspicious of Tiruin for constantly getting game details wrong, but his scum hunting seems to be working.  Leafsnail is active-lurking and Dariush needs to post.

[Leafsnail]

Leafsnail: Are you going to attack Dariush again now that Caz was killed (as you said)?

No, his post in which he did literally nothing but defend himself won me over.

Toony:  There were a few reasons why I attacked again later and not all at once.  First, I had forgotten I could.  Second, I went back after the first attack after remembering my second attack and realized I could do a finishing blow- since I thought he was scum, that seemed reasonable to do so.  Why not end him instead of letting it putter on another day?

This response strikes me as odd because there's an obvious answer that you seem to have carefully avoided - that towards the end of the day you could worry less about leaving yourself undefended.  Did this really not occur to you, or did you think this answer would sound too scummy to say?

I want to see what Deathsword flips.

It's kind of a neutral giving to our situation.

So what flip would have resulted in a read other than "neutral"?  Considering that scum don't know who each other are I can't see how seeing the flips is particularly helpful for anything other than declaring a traitor revolution.

[IronyOwl]

Toony, no response to my assertion that you're being defensive and passive?

[Toaster]

Toony:

Since we're now down one on each side, how does that affect your reads?

It's kind of a neutral giving to our situation.  I'm suspicious of Tiruin for constantly getting game details wrong, but his scum hunting seems to be working.  Leafsnail is active-lurking and Dariush needs to post.

Okay.  Who is scum and why, then?  I'm also curious to your answer to Leafsnail's question.


Leafsnail:  That did occur to me briefly, but I didn't consider it relevant since it's pretty obvious.


Dariush:  Are you going to do anything today besides make stupid arguments at Leafsnail?

[ToonyMan]

I want to see what Deathsword flips.

It's kind of a neutral giving to our situation.

So what flip would have resulted in a read other than "neutral"?  Considering that scum don't know who each other are I can't see how seeing the flips is particularly helpful for anything other than declaring a traitor revolution.

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

Toony, no response to my assertion that you're being defensive and passive?

Says the Prince who hasn't attacked anybody once?  You may be confirmed, but you aren't using it very well.

For your response I'm going to argue that you're wrong.  I attacked Deathsword for suspicions and I was right.  If Dariush doesn't show up to at least say something I'm definitely going to attack him soon.

Toony:

Since we're now down one on each side, how does that affect your reads?

It's kind of a neutral giving to our situation.  I'm suspicious of Tiruin for constantly getting game details wrong, but his scum hunting seems to be working.  Leafsnail is active-lurking and Dariush needs to post.

Okay.  Who is scum and why, then?  I'm also curious to your answer to Leafsnail's question.

Scum(my):
Dariush is scum for not posting (his latest post is literally nothing) and his reasoing being completely nonsensical.
Toaster is scummy for offing Caz an hour before turn end but at least he's here.

Mixed:
Tiruin has constantly messed up game details (too many to link) but he seems okay.
Leafsnail has kind of tunneled on Dariush turn 2 and I don't feel like he's doing anything else, but Dariush is definitely worth attacking at least.
Jim hasn't really been here for a lot of the game it feels like, he needs to post soon but otherwise.

[Dariush]

Dariush:  Are you going to do anything today besides make stupid arguments at Leafsnail?

Yes.

Defend self.

That's it?

Why are you continuing to count words per post? On the same basis one could say your posts #155, #162 and #164 are also 'that's its', because they all are one-liners. Being a hypocrite is not a good practice.

Dariush is scum for not posting (his latest post is literally nothing) and his reasoing being completely nonsensical.

Because looking at profiles and noticing that the guy is offline is for noobs, right?

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

And how would 'worrisome' flip influence your play, scum?

Mixed:
Tiruin has constantly messed up game details (too many to link) but he seems okay.
Leafsnail has kind of tunneled on Dariush turn 2 and I don't feel like he's doing anything else, but Dariush is definitely worth attacking at least.
Jim hasn't really been here for a lot of the game it feels like, he needs to post soon but otherwise.

It's so adorable. If you put all the work you put into trying to look noncommittal and unsuspicious, an average household could be powered for three days.

His explanation makes sense to me. He even changes which one he's talking about in the first quote alone- it was a non-post, you did something that post.

...what. 'That' post quite unambigously refers to the post he was talking about. Which also means that same post was a non-post.

Do you have some brilliant explanation for why all of his quotes are referencing the exact same post?

Uh... logic?

Tiruin, suspicions?

[ToonyMan]

Defend self.

That's it?

Why are you continuing to count words per post? On the same basis one could say your posts #155, #162 and #164 are also 'that's its', because they all are one-liners. Being a hypocrite is not a good practice.

The problem is you never ended up adding anything even afterwards.

Dariush is scum for not posting (his latest post is literally nothing) and his reasoing being completely nonsensical.

Because looking at profiles and noticing that the guy is offline is for noobs, right?

However, you were online at turn end if you're going to say that.  I'm not sure what else you're saying here.

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

And how would 'worrisome' flip influence your play, scum?

Uh, traitor guards would outnumber loyal guards 2 to 1?  It would be reaching the point where the traitors could come out and win the ensuing battles with high probability.  Four traitors 2 loyals and the prince.  Unless the loyals had better roles we'd most likely lose right then.  The only saving grace we would have is if one or more of the traitors decided to stay "loyal" which would be pretty stupid.

Mixed:
Tiruin has constantly messed up game details (too many to link) but he seems okay.
Leafsnail has kind of tunneled on Dariush turn 2 and I don't feel like he's doing anything else, but Dariush is definitely worth attacking at least.
Jim hasn't really been here for a lot of the game it feels like, he needs to post soon but otherwise.

It's so adorable. If you put all the work you put into trying to look noncommittal and unsuspicious, an average household could be powered for three days.

Do you know what "mixed' means Dariush?  I kind of make sentences like that when I'm feeling "mixed".  I guess that's my fault.  You are completely ignoring my firm suspicions here.

[Jim Groovester]

I'm anticipating being busy today and tomorrow. I don't expect that I'll be able to post until sometime Thursday.

If I can't get in a post sometime sooner, I'll pass. If I do get a chance to post, it will not be very significant.

[Tiruin]

Tiruin, suspicions?

I'll answer this and any other questions directed to me later on because busy IRL. Sorry. Popping in to ask current eye-catching questions though.

ToonyMan

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

And how would 'worrisome' flip influence your play, scum?

Uh, traitor guards would outnumber loyal guards 2 to 1?  It would be reaching the point where the traitors could come out and win the ensuing battles with high probability.  Four traitors 2 loyals and the prince.  Unless the loyals had better roles we'd most likely lose right then.  The only saving grace we would have is if one or more of the traitors decided to stay "loyal" which would be pretty stupid.

Define the situation where 'stupid' happens.

Dariush

Defend self.

That's it?

Why are you continuing to count words per post? On the same basis one could say your posts #155, #162 and #164 are also 'that's its', because they all are one-liners. Being a hypocrite is not a good practice.

Why are you asking about word count when that subject seems irrelevant to that type of question asked?

The posts in question did not relate to an action, while his question totally did relate to an action - Ye hath defended thy self without prior notice as to why ye hath done so, sire.

[IronyOwl]

Toony:

Toony, no response to my assertion that you're being defensive and passive?

Says the Prince who hasn't attacked anybody once?  You may be confirmed, but you aren't using it very well.

Perhaps I'm doing it wrong, but I feel like outright attacking someone, or even leveling strong accusations at them, would be too... authoritative. It's too easy to follow the Prince's lead, I think.

For your response I'm going to argue that you're wrong.  I attacked Deathsword for suspicions and I was right.  If Dariush doesn't show up to at least say something I'm definitely going to attack him soon.

Yeah, but those are both pretty easy targets. You haven't had much to say on anyone who isn't your (fairly obvious) target until prompted.

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

And how would 'worrisome' flip influence your play, scum?

Uh, traitor guards would outnumber loyal guards 2 to 1?  It would be reaching the point where the traitors could come out and win the ensuing battles with high probability.  Four traitors 2 loyals and the prince.  Unless the loyals had better roles we'd most likely lose right then.  The only saving grace we would have is if one or more of the traitors decided to stay "loyal" which would be pretty stupid.

...so you're admitting that your interest in Deathsword's flip was because you want to know if you could drop the act?

In related news, do you think I should be more aggressive in attacking people I think are scum?


Dariush:

His explanation makes sense to me. He even changes which one he's talking about in the first quote alone- it was a non-post, you did something that post.

...what. 'That' post quite unambigously refers to the post he was talking about. Which also means that same post was a non-post.

No, it doesn't. There is absolutely nothing in that post that unambiguously states that any and all comments are directed towards the post being discussed in the quote and not the post linked in the quote. Where are you getting that there is?

Do you have some brilliant explanation for why all of his quotes are referencing the exact same post?

Uh... logic?

The correct term would probably be reading comprehension, actually. Of course, you've failed both anyway, and the correct answer would be specific explanations rather than vague snark.

[ToonyMan]

I'm anticipating being busy today and tomorrow. I don't expect that I'll be able to post until sometime Thursday.
If I can't get in a post sometime sooner, I'll pass. If I do get a chance to post, it will not be very significant.

I don't like how you're avoiding the game so much.

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

And how would 'worrisome' flip influence your play, scum?

Uh, traitor guards would outnumber loyal guards 2 to 1?  It would be reaching the point where the traitors could come out and win the ensuing battles with high probability.  Four traitors 2 loyals and the prince.  Unless the loyals had better roles we'd most likely lose right then.  The only saving grace we would have is if one or more of the traitors decided to stay "loyal" which would be pretty stupid.

Define the situation where 'stupid' happens.

They don't understand the favorable situation they're in.

For your response I'm going to argue that you're wrong.  I attacked Deathsword for suspicions and I was right.  If Dariush doesn't show up to at least say something I'm definitely going to attack him soon.

Yeah, but those are both pretty easy targets. You haven't had much to say on anyone who isn't your (fairly obvious) target until prompted.

When does it stop being (fairly obvious) targets?  Your argument here is that I'm doing well.

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

And how would 'worrisome' flip influence your play, scum?

Uh, traitor guards would outnumber loyal guards 2 to 1?  It would be reaching the point where the traitors could come out and win the ensuing battles with high probability.  Four traitors 2 loyals and the prince.  Unless the loyals had better roles we'd most likely lose right then.  The only saving grace we would have is if one or more of the traitors decided to stay "loyal" which would be pretty stupid.

...so you're admitting that your interest in Deathsword's flip was because you want to know if you could drop the act?

No.  I didn't even realize Toaster had landed a killing blow on Caz until my next post when I checked the count.

In related news, do you think I should be more aggressive in attacking people I think are scum?

You don't sound very confident.  You say it's because you want to avoid giving an "authoritative" influence, but wouldn't at least attacking people for good reasons grant the best outcome?  To withhold your attack is only better than attacking people for very stupid reasons.

[Leafsnail]

Leafsnail:  That did occur to me briefly, but I didn't consider it relevant since it's pretty obvious.

Huh?  It's part of the answer to the question, isn't it?  Why remove it even if it's "obvious"?

Well, two loyal flips would have been extremely worrisome.  I meant the situation in the second quote, not the flip which you seem to be inferring incorrectly.

It would be worrisome in that the game would basically be over, but I don't see how it would help find scum.

Hmm yeah this is still terrible.  Quibbling with ToonyMan over dumb things and quibbling with a fucking confirmed townie about your dumb misinterpretation.  You are contributing nothing of substance.  Dariush.

I'll answer this and any other questions directed to me later on because busy IRL. Sorry. Popping in to ask current eye-catching questions though.

I don't get why you'd do it this way round.  Surely it only takes a couple of minutes to post  a few names in response to someone bolding your name while it takes longer to read entire posts and ask questions about them.