Snipped. Bolding mine.
To clarify, I quoted BlaM’s ** post to show that my post has been quoted at least once, and even storyteller** has gone along with the plan. Skim much?
Sorry about not making my position clear.
I am not certain, as i type this, whether trying to find infected Vampires is in the best interest of Townspeople. Until I am sure, I am not going to commit myself to making any such statement.
This is the issue I am thinking about. Back soon-ish, unless I fall asleep on my keyboard.
While you’re stalling for time, can you give me any downsides to the plan?
Don’t think “stalling for time,” think “Ensuring that people, in their eagerness to do something tangible, aren’t thoughtlessly helping the Werewolves.”
What I’m afraid of is revealing something that helps the Werewolves more than it does the Townspeople. So I’m thinking (in between Euro 08 games and dropping off at the keyboard) about possible game setups and whether actually discovering that Dracula exists helps the Werewolves more than the Town.
Fairly obviously, if everyone makes that statement, it doesn’t prove Dracula does not exist; I very much doubt that Dracula would be prohibited from making it. But if we find someone who cannot say it, that prove Dracula does exist.
Do we want to hunt Vampires, or let Werewolves worry about finding and killing them for us?
This plan is simply to test whether or not there is a game mechanism in place to prevent bite victims from claiming, as was discussed on the very first Day. If there is, anyone who has been bitten will either not claim and thus reveal himself, or claim and result in negative consequences for him. If everyone claims, we can either assume that no one has been bitten because nothing prevented the victims from claiming, that no such mechanism exists and the victim is playing purely for a Vampire win, or that Dracula does not exist.
At this point, since I do believe we’re a bit behind, and that wolves have pretty much perfect information. The worst that I can foresee this plan revealing is the identity of Dracula. Yes, this furthers the scum’s win condition, but wouldn’t you rather have them target Dracula at night than one of us? If he exists and they don’t know who he is, they’re pretty much shooting in the dark amongst all the non-wolves which means they may hit him, or they may hit a townie.
Really, at this point, I’m inclined to believe either he doesn’t exist, or there’s no mechanism to prevent a claim and he simply hasn’t bitten anyone else. However, I think dispelling the paranoia around Dracula so that we can focus on more pressing matters is worth the effort.
On further thought, there may be downside to revealing Dracula, because then we end up in a game of chicken because the scum would then be able to avoid killing him. OTOH, at that point we may be able to manipulate Dracula to our advantage. I haven’t worked out any specifics, but it’s possible that we could find a way to use the fact that he’d die if he bit a wolf as a pseudo-investigator. However, that’s a complicated gambit, so I’m not going to bother working out the details to see if it works until such a situation actually occurs.
Day 5 Vote Count (as of post 1187)
storyteller: Santo Rugger, Blaster Master, MHaye, Fretful Porpentine, Nanook, Koldanar, Hal Briston
Blaster Master: storyteller
No Current Vote: Pollux Oil
We can hunt Vampires, and then let the Werewolves kill them for us.
At this point in the game, we could almost treat Dracula as a confirmed townie. What we need to find and lynch are the wolves, not Dr. Teeth. Blam’s idea of using him as a pseudo-investigator isn’t a terrible idea either, though the specifics would obviously have to be worked out since what’s to stop Dracula from lying? It would depend on whether or not the bitten person is informed whether or not he is bitten.
I have to wonder why exactly you think it sucks. It feels like you decided I was scum, and then went looking for reasons to believe that, rather than seeing things and deciding I was from that. And that is, to steal your term, a classic scum move.
I like to think the games are realistic enough so that if I woke up with a big honking fangmark on my neck, I’d notice it at that time, and take preventive measures from letting the rest of you find out.
I think it’s very telling that about 3 players have refused to take part in the plan, which is the same number of people I’d expect to have been bitten by now, and the same number of scum that remain. It’s very possible that it’s not a posting restriction at all, but the wolves are afraid it is, and want to be able to be use the fact that they were “bitten” as a way to confirm themselves.
**Koldanar **skirted around the issue like a little weasel.
**Hal **completely ignored it.
MHaye simply said he thinks it’s a bad idea, without really giving any reasons why it might be bad.
Pollux hasn’t been around at all, I hope his surgery went well.
Huwha?!?! I did the line, answered the question. Good misrepresentation there.
I’m not strictly disagreeing with you, however it should be noted that there’s been plenty of fiction written where a vampire’s victim is not immediately aware of it happening, mainly due to the mental powers of the vampire. We don’t know what fiction, if any, this vampire is drawn from from a color standpoint. No, the fact that the role is named Dracula does not tell us anything per se. I tend to agree with you though that the odds are more likely than not that bitten players will be informed, I’m just saying it’s not out of the question that they aren’t.
I have been bitten by Dracula.
I’m also going to
Vote storyteller
clearly.
Sorry I haven’t been around at all toDay. It isn’t because of the surgery (stupid HMOs, I won’t get it done until next month. Sigh.) but rather RoOsh has come to visit and he’s been staying at my place for the last few days and thusly so I haven’t been at the computer very much.
I’ll weigh in more about stuff in general later tonight. RoOsh is scheduled to leave tonight, but he was supposed to stay at another friend’s house during the week and unfortunately that friend’s had some family issues pop up. Regardless I’ll be around by Wednesday at the latest to make sure I get in enough posts to not be modkilled.
Because people are arguing about it, here’s the revelant portion from the rules, post 137:
The obvious implication by the underlined portion is that any victim would obviously have to know that they were bitten because they’d know who Dracula is.
To Nanook, I’m not sure if you simply forgot or what, but I do remember it was fairly prevalent in the early discussion about Dracula. Either way, I’m not really sure what to think of that.
I’m running in three current games, 2 of which are absolute nightmares for rules and roles and one of which has a vampire of its own. I forgot how exactly it was laid out originally in this game, I apologize for the distraction on that point.
Fair enough.
Ten minutes until the kickoff of the France/Italy match.
I managed to track a copy of Jsexton’s formula down last night; it helps evaluate games around here. There remains some room for a small contingent of Townsfolk with power roles, or a total of three anti-Town forces. I count Dracula as one of the Wolves for balance purposes, because he is unable to bite a Wolf.
I don’t like the “feel” of a two-person Wolfpack plus Dracula. I think there would be at least three Wolves in a 17-person game. So we are looking at one of three configurations; either 14 vanilla Townspeople vs three regular Werewolves, 13 vanilla Townspeople vs four regular Werewolves or three regular Werewolves and Dracula vs 13 Townspeople with a minimal number of power roles.
I was concerned about possibilities I could not fully articulate, but most of the downsides were regarding configurations I no longer worry about. The only question is does the easing of paranoia about the existence of Dracula aid the Werewolves more than the Townspeople.
I don’t know, but allowing myself to become a focus of suspicion Tomorrow because I refused to cooperate at all Today would be foolish.
I have been bitten by Dracula.
Sorry about two posts in a row.
Now. Post [post=9913008]1192[/post].
Let’s have a look at what I’ve actually said about this in the past two days.
In post [post=9911066]1183[/post] I said that “I am not certain, as I type this, whether trying to find infected Vampires is in the best interest of Townspeople.”
In [post=9912223]1185[/post] I reiterated this, explaining that I was thinking about the consequences.
Did I say “I think it’s a bad idea,” or words to that effect? No. I said “I don’t know whether it’s a good idea or not, and I won’t commit myself without thinking about it. A lot.”
In these games, you can’t reverse a mistake. You can’t ask people to forget you said something. Rushing into an action is always wrong, unless you’re on a deadline – and we’re hardly under time pressure here. The statement could be made at any time Today. So I took my time, and said I was taking my time, and that I was thinking things through first.
Santo Rugger characterised this as “MHaye simply said he thinks it’s a bad idea, without really giving any reasons why it might be bad.”
That is a mischaracterisation of my position.