Print

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

[Tiruin]

Are you actually reading my posts instead of being blind to your own reasoning?

I gave ToonyMan an ultimatum to explain his posts. I had a damn FOS ON HIM.

If you can't reason that I was going to attack him after that, then I have lost all faith in logic and human reason.

But it was Toaster attacking that triggered your attack, not anything ToonyMan did.  Sure you had an FoS.  The question is why that FoS only became an attack once you felt you had backup.

Leafsnail: What makes ToonyMan so important that you've to defend him by your words?

Nothing, and I haven't.  The key fact is that you are a mafia member and clearly don't give a damn what alignment your targets are as long as you can kill them.

Ugh.

Your attempt to twist my words is plainly obvious. Toaster, in no damn way, triggered my attack. If you can actually read my post, perhaps you can see what I'm coming at when I addressed ToonyMan, yes?

And to the last statement, you provide nothing in the face of denial. Just because I can attack means I'm scum? Just because I uphold the path of the Sword mean I'm scum?

Oh hey, wait, deflection. You haven't answered why you're really defending ToonyMan but are saying something else to divert the flow of thought. I mean, oh yes I'm scum. Don't kill me buddy![/sarcasm] Why are you coming up with weak reasons to support your attack on me? Where is your proof that way? Why are you sounding like you are defending [and I speak in the form of wording] my target? How is Toaster triggering my attack? Why aren't you defending ToonyMan if that's your take on my attacks?


No wait, I'm being a retard. I'm sorry that my mental capacity can't take your insinuations and I'm stupid that way.

[Tiruin]

Let me restate my amalgam of questions it in this post so you won't miss it.

What is your read on ToonyMan, and everyone else with details on why on each of them? What is your take on actions and turns - should attacks/defends by a guard be used per turn, or not? In relation to the survival of the Prince.

Now answer me truly.

[Leafsnail]

Your attempt to twist my words is plainly obvious. Toaster, in no damn way, triggered my attack. If you can actually read my post, perhaps you can see what I'm coming at when I addressed ToonyMan, yes?

Yeah it's obvious from the fact that you quoted and addressed Toaster while making the attack.

And to the last statement, you provide nothing in the face of denial. Just because I can attack means I'm scum? Just because I uphold the path of the Sword mean I'm scum?

I don't understand what you're saying.

Oh hey, wait, deflection. You haven't answered why you're really defending ToonyMan but are saying something else to divert the flow of thought. I mean, oh yes I'm scum. Don't kill me buddy![/sarcasm] Why are you coming up with weak reasons to support your attack on me? Where is your proof that way? Why are you sounding like you are defending [and I speak in the form of wording] my target? How is Toaster triggering my attack? Why aren't you defending ToonyMan if that's your take on my attacks?

First question assumes my reasons are weak, they are not.

Second question makes no sense.

Third question you need to provide some explanation of what you mean because I have no goddamn clue.

Fourth question he had to attack ToonyMan and ask you why you weren't attacking ToonyMan to get you to attack.  You quoted his post and addressed him while making the attack.

Fifth question wait now you want me to be defending ToonyMan, huh.  My take on your attacks in now way implies ToonyMan is town

What is your read on ToonyMan, and everyone else with details on why on each of them? What is your take on actions and turns - should attacks/defends by a guard be used per turn, or not? In relation to the survival of the Prince.

Now answer me truly.

Null.  The swordsmaster thing really doesn't strike me as scummy (Toaster comparing it to an earlier mislynch doesn't help his case).  I think it's better to look for scum but it's true that traitor swordsmasters are a lot more dangerous because they can kill their allies freely and still win at the end.  I can definitely relate to his refusal to answer your questions without simplification because jesus christ you ask a lot of unanswerable questions.  He's also right about you being scum so I'm happy to keep him alive at least until you die.

I don't understand your second question.  There's no real need to use our actions every day because there's no penalty at all for allowing turns to end.  Particularly if we all used our defends there'd be barely any damage dealt per day and the game would last forever so that's a bad idea.

[Tiruin]

I don't understand your second question.  There's no real need to use our actions every day because there's no penalty at all for allowing turns to end.  Particularly if we all used our defends there'd be barely any damage dealt per day and the game would last forever so that's a bad idea.

Which leads to: "When do you think is the best time to defend someone else but the Prince."

Your attempt to twist my words is plainly obvious. Toaster, in no damn way, triggered my attack. If you can actually read my post, perhaps you can see what I'm coming at when I addressed ToonyMan, yes?

Yeah it's obvious from the fact that you quoted and addressed Toaster while making the attack.

...

I love your reasoning, Leafsnail.

What is your read on ToonyMan, and everyone else with details on why on each of them? What is your take on actions and turns - should attacks/defends by a guard be used per turn, or not? In relation to the survival of the Prince.

Now answer me truly.

Null.  The swordsmaster thing really doesn't strike me as scummy (Toaster comparing it to an earlier mislynch doesn't help his case).  I think it's better to look for scum but it's true that traitor swordsmasters are a lot more dangerous because they can kill their allies freely and still win at the end.  I can definitely relate to his refusal to answer your questions without simplification because jesus christ you ask a lot of unanswerable questions.  He's also right about you being scum so I'm happy to keep him alive at least until you die.

Everyone points to that assumption.

Wait, no it's just you and ToonyMan.

In the event that only two people are left (Prince and Traitor or Conniving Heir), a Swordsman or Swordsmaster will win. Otherwise, the Prince wins only if he has more health than the other player.

Oh wait, ToonyMan quoted the whole thing in its entirety on a very improbable conclusion.

INB4 CRAP @ MY FACE. We can safely assume that the word 'more' pertains to the Prince having any sort of life > opposing player's life. That, or I fail in English forever and am quitting the Mafia board.

I was wounded right before Toony's attack on me. If I was a traitor and lived up to that point, look who wins? This is Toony's main reason of his shift//attack on me.

Prince = A.
Traitor Sword= B.

Two man duel.

A uses attack and defend on the respective target.
B uses attack 2x.
Both players get -1 hitpoint.

A uses attack and defend on the respective target.
B copies him.
No life lost.

If you, Leafsnail, can't have seen this prospect earlier with your line of thinking then I am deeply disappointed in you.

Same goes to ToonyMan.

[Leafsnail]

The best time to perform an action is whenever you've decided to do it, I'm not sure what your point is

Do you seriously not understand what "otherwise" means?  The phrasing is completely unambiguous and you appear to think that making random words larger will cause me to miss that one.  The rules are that a traitor swordsman beats a prince, period.

So yes, all you need to do to win is kill everybody else.  If you happen to kill loyal guards that's a bonus, but you don't actually need to keep any other traitors alive.

[Tiruin]

...

Mephanesteras. Does a Traitor Swordsman/master always beat the Prince in single combat - regardless of life?

[Toaster]

Tiruin:  It seems you took an awfully long time to commit to an attack when I don't see why there was any point in delaying- Toony was giving his same crappy line over and over.

@Third: Before that...he was pretty clear in my eyes - judging by reason and being calculative in his words and attacks. But ever since that. Well, his tunneling on Dariush's death followed by his recent attack, I find it feasible that he just wants to strawman me before saying I'm 'bandwagoning.'

So... before he attacks he's clear, but then you cite something he did before that as evidence that he's scum?  This is contradictory.

Mephanesteras. Does a Traitor Swordsman/master always beat the Prince in single combat - regardless of life?

You must be reading the rules differently than me, because I see Meph very clearly stating yes to that.


Jim:

Toaster, read on Leafsnail's attack and his reasons?

Well, he has been going after Tiruin all day, so I don't see it as particularly off-kilter.  Tiruin's timing was indeed a bit odd, so if it was the breaking point for Leaf, fair enough.

Plus, someone I suspect is getting attacked, so woo hoo.

[Tiruin]

@Third: Before that...he was pretty clear in my eyes - judging by reason and being calculative in his words and attacks. But ever since that. Well, his tunneling on Dariush's death followed by his recent attack, I find it feasible that he just wants to strawman me before saying I'm 'bandwagoning.'

So... before he attacks he's clear, but then you cite something he did before that as evidence that he's scum?  This is contradictory.

I should work on my synonyms which have the meaning of being uncertain more.

Mephanesteras. Does a Traitor Swordsman/master always beat the Prince in single combat - regardless of life?

You must be reading the rules differently than me, because I see Meph very clearly stating yes to that.

When Meph confirms or denies this, let me just take a long, one year refreshment course in English. And that wasn't sarcasm.

Tiruin:  It seems you took an awfully long time to commit to an attack when I don't see why there was any point in delaying[...]

Do you know that I was giving him one last chance to try to give something else from that?

Also, you're siding with Leafsnail in the thinking that I was delaying?! I can't even get damned sleep for anything anymore? How many times should I repeat the fact that I was not delaying.

Yay for personal attacks. Now let me just stay online for the rest of my life to watch this thread. Thank you.

[Toaster]

Tiruin:  Well, misunderstanding Meph isn't scummy, so I'm not faulting you for that.

I'm saying you were delaying in the sense you looked like your case against him wasn't going to get any stronger, so why not go ahead and attack him roundabouts the time you blued him?  I seriously doubt he could have changed your mind at that point, assuming your intentions were pure.

[Tiruin]

Tiruin:  Well, misunderstanding Meph isn't scummy, so I'm not faulting you for that.

Sure.

I'm saying you were delaying in the sense you looked like your case against him wasn't going to get any stronger, so why not go ahead and attack him roundabouts the time you blued him?  I seriously doubt he could have changed your mind at that point, assuming your intentions were pure.

Noooo

I'll pull this point from meta. The second, I'll pull directly from his mouth. The third, I'll pull from my own observations.

First, ToonyMan seems to me as a man who knows how to strike at the emotions of people - useful for shifting a reaction but more along the partly-vague-that-must-be-asked-the-question, as well as attacking a person's [well, me. But as Hapah said, it's mostly personality] sense of logic if it was right or not.

Second, prod.

Third, he was using cyclic reasoning. It is pretty obvious where you see my take on it, in size 14/18 letters. Still, given that viewpoint, his observations were skewed to misunderstanding and incoherence and I wanted to find out more.

Why are you both accusing me of delaying? Since when did you both seem to know that he would continue along that tangent? @Toaster: Why the doubt on him? @Leafsnail: Why are you poking at the very topic that was answered by me? The horse is dead, I have acted. Why do you keep on acting like it's a big matter?

[Toaster]

I'm accusing you of delaying because I think you're doing it.  I've said why pretty clearly, I believe.  I keep bringing it up because you keep denying it.

[Tiruin]

I'm accusing you of delaying because I think you're doing it.  I've said why pretty clearly, I believe.  I keep bringing it up because you keep denying it.

So I'm stuck with a conjunction. You're both with the idea that I'm delaying the whole thing and want me to say otherwise until I crack with obvious information, right? Or perhaps, just saying that I'm delaying because I'm denying it and giving the reason why it isn't delaying.

I. Am. Not. Nor. Was. I. Delaying.

That is a huge difference from giving a person a chance of acquittal while backing it up with an FoS, and a timer. And yet I get insults on my post and formatting other than even just a wee 'answer' to anything I'm said.

[Mephansteras]

...

Mephanesteras. Does a Traitor Swordsman/master always beat the Prince in single combat - regardless of life?

That is correct.

[Tiruin]

...

Mephanesteras. Does a Traitor Swordsman/master always beat the Prince in single combat - regardless of life?

That is correct.

Excuse me while I douse my current mental processes with this milestone here.

[Mephansteras]

Ak, sorry guys. Day went crazy. I'm going to Extend to ~10am Pacific Wednesday