|
 |
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
07-06-2007, 11:15 PM
|
#1 |
|
Flame of the Ainulindalë
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wearing rat's coat, crowskin, crossed staves in a field behaving as the wind behaves
Posts: 9,308
   |
I think you are reading me too literally Rune. It's not the number of words I'm after. And as I've said before I know I'm a bit bad in this as I tend to be babbling in much too lengthy a manner in the games - and in post-game discussions...
I'd need a course in making clear and straight statements in English, I sure could use that. That's one of the reasons I decided to try a different game... which never materialised. But with the risk of repeating myself, let's see if I could formulate my point understandably this time - and after this I will give up with it, honestly. So let's bring these to the extremes to see the point. Game1: no one speaks anything. Everyone just makes a vote once/Day (or forgets to do that). That will be a game of pure randomness and not funny to anyone. Just pure chance like throwing a dice or then just voting for those persons you don't like so much personally and thence it would only be a (cruel) game of social differentiation... Game2: Everyone is required to make a full analysis of each other player in the game everyDay + a lengthy visionary post concerning all different possibilities the game-mechanics might work. That would hardly be amusing either... Only a dedicated player with lots of free time could read all through it in a game of twenty. Neither seems like an enjoyable game. But after we get more towards the middle ground and the reality the scene changes... The problem in this mixed envirovment I think is in the inbalance. The contributors work from the basis of "I give to you new ideas about others and chances to pick suspicious things from my posting as well and you give me the same" while the quiets work on the basis of "I will give you nothing from myself but you should give Me everything". Remember that there is no game without the former people - but just Game1 whom no one wishes, I think... well, hope... In practise this leads to the situation where one or two or three openly playing (one can look like playing openly while cheating!) will get lynched sooner than later as they are the only persons the others have an opinion. And why is that? Because they have made the game in the first place - remember Game1 once more. I mean, how could you make a case against totally silent player number 12 instead of totally quiet player number 11, or 7, or 4? How can you differentiate between them? Game1 once again... But of those loud players 1 and 2 and 3 it's much easier as they have contributed - given something to others. This was not meant to be pointing to this game we played in particular. It was a small village indeed and many of my arguments are not valid with this "village" So basically it has nothing to do with this game we played. This was just an answer to Rune and as I promised, I will keep my mouth shut after this - even though I'm afraid I wasn't able to make my point clear enough. Let's discuss this in Finnish the next time? I'll promise you a rhetorically outstanding argument in twenty words then! 
__________________
Upon the hearth the fire is red Beneath the roof there is a bed; But not yet weary are our feet... |
|
|
|
07-06-2007, 11:32 PM
|
#2 | |
|
Flame of the Ainulindalë
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wearing rat's coat, crowskin, crossed staves in a field behaving as the wind behaves
Posts: 9,308
|
Quote:
In the last game I opened the game with a Monty Python parody making it just nonsense and then only added a few starters to others to start picking up possible things (and to see how they would pick them or not). What followed? Everyone was sure that I was a baddie because of that post... and I needed to do a considerable amount of work to assure them otherwise (while they naturally were right as I was a wolf indeed...). Jesting I do like even if many others seem not to like it, but a game with only arbitrary jokes would not be a fun game - like a joke in RL isn't worth much if it doesn't point to something real.
__________________
Upon the hearth the fire is red Beneath the roof there is a bed; But not yet weary are our feet... |
|
|
|
|
|
07-07-2007, 12:07 AM
|
#3 |
|
Hauntress of the Havens
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: IN it, but not OF it
Posts: 2,538
|
Ah well, it was really tough for the wolves to win. The odds really were against us. Wolf victories were very much attainable when there were three of them and the gifteds didn't know each other, but with only two of them, a very small village, and communicating gifteds? I wouldn't recommend an arrangement such as this again for future games.
STAWB, thank you for being an amazing co-wolf. Too bad we didn't get to push with our plan...but I ask you, Outlaws: could it have worked? Nogrod, haha, sorry for all that. Just doing my job.  When you first mentioned the possibility of me and tgwbs being the wolves, that was really freaky. Or was that Rikae?Speaking of whom, congratulations for picking up the guilty vibes. I don't EVER want to be a villain again, it's so distressing! I've only played with you once before, if I remember right, and now you're such an expert at it! You astounded my with your last kill choice, Brinn - I had no idea at all you woud go after me like that, especially with how sure you were of my innocence. That was brilliant analysis on your part. You too, Mac. I should have known that we won't win if you're paired with someone, because the only time I won as a werecreature... Gil, too bad they didn't consider at all that we could have been the wolves. I'm sorry I didn't see more of you in the game, Mum, or at least not as much as I wanted to. Or maybe it was better that way, or I would have gone after you. Izzy, Shasta, xyzzy, it was a pleasure to play with you. Finally, thanks for the wonderful game, Legate! When Nilp told me that I and tgwbs were the wolves, I immediately wondered if you chose us deliberately. That was certainly an exciting way to play Werewolf again (after ten games had passed!), even if I really hate it when I have to be a wolf. You came up with really brilliant ideas in relating the story to the game, and I commend you for that. Would that we had started early, though, or I wouldn't have been so clumsy near the end... (Excuses.) |
|
|
|
|
07-07-2007, 01:06 AM
|
#4 | ||
|
Hauntress of the Havens
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: IN it, but not OF it
Posts: 2,538
|
*howls*
Those were interesting reads, Brinn and Mac. Thanks. But you should both be suspected of lycanthropy for flipflopping on me.
 I really should stop making sense when I'm evil.  Quote:
Quote:
About Nienor, Brinn, I personally didn't think much of her because I wasn't too aware of what her role does. Plus there already were the Captains on whom to focus. As I said in the wolf PMs, I was completely LOST so far as the gifted roles were concerned. And your killing me came just in time- the next Day, I would have been completely unable to go online on account of a Microbiology paper. So, yes, thanks for killing me. |
||
|
|
|
|
07-07-2007, 10:59 AM
|
#5 | |
|
Shadowed Prince
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Thulcandra
Posts: 2,343
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-07-2007, 12:53 PM
|
#6 | ||||
|
Odinic Wanderer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Under the Raven banner, between tall Odin and white Christ!
Posts: 3,846
 |
Quote:
Quote:
You cannot just enter a game and set your own standard for how it should be played and then expect people to do so. To some degree you tend to do that. No where is it written that this game should be about thorough analyzis, it could just as well be about simple observation. Whenever I seem to spot a wolf it is not because I look hard at every word he says and try to analyze it, it is often because I spot a single sentence that seem manipulative or something of the sort. I then say tbat this seems wolfish and that is my reason to vote as I do. That should be perfectly acceptable, I should not be forced to look at every word that the person has written and have an oppinion about it. Because I do not have an oppinion about them all, if I an forced to write about them anyways it will seem like I am grasping at straws and I will be lynched for being wolfish. . . . Quote:
The thing is that you broaden your chritisism to players who contributes and makes vallid points, they just do it to a lesser extend than you and in another way. My guess is that mostly they do so because that is the way they like to play and I do not think that anyone has the right to tell them that their way is wrong.
__________________
Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
|
07-07-2007, 03:34 PM
|
#7 | |||
|
Flame of the Ainulindalë
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wearing rat's coat, crowskin, crossed staves in a field behaving as the wind behaves
Posts: 9,308
|
Going against my promises once again but this starts to look like an actual game of ww where two innocents try to tear each other apart while they share mostly the same goal...
 Quote:
I'm not looking at everything everyone says in a game and analyse their every sentence myself either. It would be 24-hour undertaking every Day - if that would be even enough... Indeed it's been a while since I've tried a "full-analysis" on anyone as it's so time-consuming and more often than not very unproductive. But I hope you also agree that for you to "spot a single sentence that seem manipulative or something of the sort" you need the other players to actually post those sentences for you to spot them? So you need others to play to play yourself! Exactly what I've been calling for! Quote:
Quote:
Just two short points. I've myself repeatedly said that I would love to try a different style to play these games. And maybe one day I manage to try it? But I couldn't think that way if I'd think that only one way of playing is right. So your speculation on what I think is clearly wrong. What happens though in games where the majority posts little or at least clearly less than the vocal minority, the few loud players tend to get killed pretty soon because they are the only ones people will have an opinion. That's sad in a way as without those loudmouths there would be much less for anyone to do (much less sentences you might spot). But that's something I've accepted already a long time ago. This is a question of personal preference to be sure but I couldn't even think I could be in a position to require everyone else to play "loudmouthedly" as that comes naturally for some and would be very hard or even unpleasant for others... and we surely play these games to have fun, right?
__________________
Upon the hearth the fire is red Beneath the roof there is a bed; But not yet weary are our feet... |
|||
|
|
|
|
07-07-2007, 05:33 PM
|
#8 | ||
|
Odinic Wanderer
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Under the Raven banner, between tall Odin and white Christ!
Posts: 3,846
|
Quote:
I might be drawing conclutions, but I seem to remember a game or two where I and others have been told that we were way to silent and was "required" (that word was not used) to speak up. . .There can be plenty of reasons not to be posting much, other people might have made your point, you can find nothing suspiciouse or simply that you have been kind of busy that day. Anyways I just think that the chritisism should be limited to when people are hardly speaking at all or when it really gets to you, this way you words will also weigh more.
__________________
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
07-11-2007, 10:47 AM
|
#9 | |
|
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
Just a note...
Quote:
The roles were in original totally random. I just picked a randomizer, put in all players' names, and some result came out. But I didn't like it. It was unbalanced, the persons rolled did not fit the roles. So I rolled again. And again. And again... you know how it works And finally, when there came a result that I liked, I said: "Yup. This is it." And then I just wrote down the list that came out of the randomizer, changed one or two names and that was it So, here it is - you have your answer. 
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
07-16-2007, 02:29 AM
|
#10 |
|
Werewolf Psychic
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In fire, water, earth, and air. But mostly water.
Posts: 2,832
|
I feel like I must apologize to Legate for ruining one of his special roles.
 Yes, I knew Brinn was Turin from the start, and I had just formed the tiniest bit of a plan to that end when... I died.
|
|
|
|
|
07-16-2007, 03:22 AM
|
#11 | |
|
A Voice That Gainsayeth
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In that far land beyond the Sea
Posts: 7,431
|
Quote:
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
