PIS or perhaps an indication that he’s inclined to believe that they have incurred risks in their public statements which “scum probably wouldn’t do”.
Now the last time I “defended” someone on Day 1, it turned into a lovely red herring that lasted for Days and even beyond the grave (Hawkeyeop’s grave, not mine) so be that as it may…
I see sachertorte’s statement as indeed reason to keep an eye on him, but no more than that…yet.
Metagaming. Before I realized that Pleo made everything random.
I’m not sure about the mass dump… Wouldn’t scum just be able to pick it up easier?
Secondly, how do we confirm that everyone has put down an item? - Someone must watch the hoard, and they won’t be able to put down their items, and how would we know they aren’t scum?
Considering it’s day 1, sachertorte is really pinging me. Many of his actions seem scummy to me. Both the mass dump suggestion and the “good guys” assumption.
I see no reason to put my item down. I like my item and do not want it in hands other than mine. Well, there are others who would it be fine with it as well, but I have no way of knowing who those would be. Besides even if everyone were to put all items down, it would be an all vanilla game, and all vanilla games are very difficult to find scum in.
Alternately, I suggest we try to determine a lawful player and give him all magical items. I suggest me. If you don’t trust me you can always kill me later. This will results in the items being returned to the hoard anyway.
Of course I’m the one pinging you, I’m the one talking the most!
Why is it, every game, I try and spur discussion, and I get dinged for it? As for the mass dump here is what I said:
Sinjin mischaracterizes my statements here:
Where did I say everyone should put their item into the Hoard but me? I never said that.
I said that I would need to use a Turn to put my item in the Hoard, a turn where I could be investigating. I ALSO say that others might feel the same way about their Turn. These are arguments AGAINST a mass dump. See what I did there? I’m DISCUSSING an idea. That means I get to posit pros AND CONS.
Discussion doesn’t mean rabidly pursuing an end result. It means weighing the advantages and disadvantages of an action. If we Discuss and decide that a mass dump is more advantageous than detrimental then we will have done so, knowing what the disadvantages are.
If we were to enact such a policy, I would prefer giving items to a confirmed Good player. The Lawful win condition is not something to worry about until midgame to endgame. Keeping items out of the hands of Evil is more important.
On the other hand, is piling up the items on one character a good idea? How is that functionally different than putting items into the Hoard?
Though, if we piled the items up on one of the Thieves (if we can prove one Thief is Good), then the Thief’s abilities will better protect items from being stolen by Evil. Plus, such a confirmed Good Thief could steal items away from players who should not use a Turn to give the item to him. The problem of course is generating a confirmed Good Thief.
This is to both Hawkeyeop and Sachertorte. Giving all items to one player is a very bad idea. There are two Thieves here and while I know I’m not Evil, I don’t know that Darth isn’t. One of the abilities of a Thief is to once per game ROB A PLAYER OF ALL MAGIC ITEMS. If we have an evil Thief that would be very bad.
I’m in the middle of moving into a new apartment today so I probly wont have any further comments until later tonight. As far as giving up my item, I see no pro-town benefit in doing so given the nature of my item. Which I’ll reveal if we’re going to mass claim them, but if we’re not, I’d rather let the scum guess.
Good point. Thanks for pointing that out.
(Aside: This is why we discuss things. There are so many powers and items that any plan will need everyone to look at it and look for weaknesses.)
sacher, I don’t believe I’ve mistated what you are doing. You started your quest suggesting that three items be thrown into the hoard in post 68. All of the items mentioned impaired an investigator’s role so that makes sense given your role. In post 73 you add the staff of command to the list. In this one, 114, you come up with four more items for the hoard. Agree with Hockey Monkey about another item in post 126.
Then you posted this in response to Hockey Monkey’s suggestion that we put everything in the hoard:
Note that here you are replying to Hockey Monkey, a thief, and yet it didn’t occur to you to have her steal your item and place it in the hoard for you thereby saving your turn for investigation.
I don’t feel I’ve mischaracterized you at all. I am not trying to stifle discussion I am commenting on the discussion.
Sinjin,
Do you understand what a conditional is?
Discussion of putting items into the Hoard is not equivalent to supporting putting items into the Hoard. There are benefits to doing so and there are disadvantages. I’m trying to understand both.
Rules clarifications:
So what happens when someone is watching the watcher?
Let’s say Almost Human and pedescribe are watching Pleonast. And Pleonast is watching Hoopy Frood. AH and ped each roll a die to see if the successfully observe Pleo’s action. Let’s say AH succeeds and ped fails. This produces results for them:AH: Pleonast (un)successfully used a physical action on Hoopy Frood.
ped: You fail to notice what Pleonast did.Then, AH and ped also roll a die for each character targeting Pleo. Specifically, each other. Let’s day AH fails and ped succeeds. This produces these results for them:AH: You do not notice anyone targeting Pleonast.
ped: Almost Human successfully used a physical action on Pleonast.If AH has succeeded, she’d gotten this message:AH: Pedescribe unsuccessfully used a physical action on Pleonast.The success/failure state of a watcher depends on their success/failure of noticing the action of their target, not their success/failure of noticing other targeting the target.
Clear as mud? 
You know what? I’m kind of pissed off.
The “Good” thing is a legitimate gripe and if I get killed for it, that will be my fault.
But this whole discussion that I’m trying to push for item dropping or really pushing for any specific action at this point is crazy. Someone seems to think that sitting back and implying that others ideas are bad is useful discussion. I do not.
So you don’t want to drop items? Fine. Say so. And say why.
I have dozens of ideas of what we can do and I’m trying to sort them all out. Sitting back and just saying “Oh I don’t like what sachertorte is saying” is NOT helpful. It’s actually quite irritating. You have ideas? State them.
I’ve suggested many things. Some have involved dropping items, BUT NOT ALL.
I suggested to Squid that dropping an item might be helpful because I would like to investigate.
I agreed with the assessment that storyteller should hold onto the Helm of Empathy with the hope that someone can nullify it. (That certainly doesn’t sound like I’m pushing for dropping everything does it?)
I’ve entertained the idea of a mass drop, but noted that I (as well as others) have other actions that might be better.
Look, there are a bunch of items that I’m concerned about. I don’t know what to do about them! I’m trying to figure out a good approach to dealing with them. It’s not like I’m going to instantly know the solution. Again, that is why we discuss things.
Hey I’m sorry you got pissed off. I thought your “Good” people statement was highly suspicious so I went back and reread your posts and noticed what I thought was a trend. I didn’t have time to post much yesterday, work and all, so just posted a one liner. You accused me of mischaracterizing you. Today I posted the trend as I saw it. Whatever.
I just get a “Sach Knows Best” vibe from you and I don’t like it. I won’t vow to say no more on this subject because I always, always, always break it, but I will try.
Okay. I think Pleonast’s latest post was in response to a question I sent him this morning.
All this discussion of putting things into the Hoard (or on another person) have been motivated by the idea of getting anti-Town items out into the open where watcher actions could keep an eye on these items. From a physical world viewpoint this makes sense, as piling everything up where we can watch it makes intuitive sense. What I had failed to realize until this morning was that my thinking could be flawed if “stealing” actions are indistinguishable from “watching” actions. That is, I assumed that someone watching the Hoard could catch someone else stealing from it.
When I re-read the watch action description (I was actually looking for the probability) I saw the the phrase “physical power” which made me realize that I was stupid and that if “stealing” is not distinguishable from “watching” and we have half a dozen people watching the Hoard, all we will get is a bunch of useless information. So I wrote to Pleonast to make sure.
Prior to this revelation, I was keen on the watching stuff. It seemed like a subtly strong power. Looks innocent, but catching a magic-oriented role doing a physical action would be evidence of Evil-doing. But I hadn’t realized that Watching itself was a physical action.
So now I’m pondering the ramifications of Too Many Watchers. The immediate problem I see is if on Turn Two we find that Storyteller no longer has the Helm of Empathy and six people claim to have seen someone else perform a successful physical action on Storyteller, then we are screwed. Similarly we don’t want Too Few Watchers. Ugh.
On Preview:
Sinjin, I will always state what I think is best. I’ll even discuss things that I have no clue as to whether they are good ideas or not. As a researcher, that’s how I need to operate. I can try and put a bunch of “I Think…” in my posts, but if I forget, just pretend that there is one there.
NETA:
By the way, I think Pleonast’s clarification is a point in the NOT dropping everything into the Hoard column.
Man, I really don’t know what to make of all of this. Between the magical items and the two victory conditions, there really is a lot of parameters in this game.
Are we allowed to vote yet?
I’ll have to reread, but it seems to me that there aren’t a lot of posts so far for 15 people. And by that, some people are not participating much.
sachertorte, in that scenario of course we’re also taking storyteller’s word on whether he has the helm or not.
Now that I think about it the way you’ve described, I think there’s going to be a LOT of noise related to investigations like watching, particularly if more than one person is doing it, and particularly since actions can fail. In other words, nothing is very confirmable, am I right? So if we’re both watching something and you see something and I fail, either of us could be lying.
That is true. We should probably figure out what happens when an item is nullified. I’ll send Pleonast a PM. In my head I was thinking that we would be notified of the item’s nullification, but I should check that.
Gah, I’m so stupid sometimes.
For some reason, I thought everyone could steal items. I now see that only Thieves can steal from another player. That actually simplifies things greatly.
My item paranoia is lessening.