[WW] Bloodlust GAME OVER - WEREWOLVES WIN

[King Mook Mook]

honestly i don't think this was a good idea on King Mook Mook's part (no offense, KMM).

To be honest, I didn't think that this was a fantastic idea either: there was a reason I didn't say she was Vampire Hunter at the beginning as I thought that would increase her chances of infection (and I didn't feel it to be mine to disclose without asking her).

However, as she made it clear to me in her previous post, she was going to disclose it, and I may as well agree and make it clear. This does not clear her from being a werewolf though, as Vampire Hunters are not at all immune to being infected by the werewolves.

I dont think anyone is still discussing whether or not is should be allowed. That is completely beyond the point here. What is up for discussion right now is whether or not I, or anyone else currently under strict scrutiny, would betray their side.

As to the point of your post, I maintain my stance that the more restrictions you try to actually enforce on people the less fun the game will be. It shouldn't be written into the rules that a player has to play a certain role a certain way, whether it be remaining loyal or not. It should be unto the player to weigh the current an future consequences of their actions and make the decision from there.

I totally agree: this game was envisaged by our God, ravenvii, as being an open-ended game where it would evolve and people could play to their own strategy, and use their own morals to shape and change the game. Sanctioning what people can and can't do in the game takes much of the fun out of it: it puts people to a systematic way of playing which will get boring very quickly. By allowing it to evolve and change quickly and easily to the players' desires it makes the game more fun, more interesting and most importantly unpredictable. This change and evolution is what keeps people coming back, and in my opinion is extremely important to keeping the game interesting and great fun (as it is now).

As someone posted, it would be ridiculous for a starting werewolf to turn against his own kind or a goth to betray the vampire after becoming activated. I think your initial player assignment should determine your general role in the game and alignment. Where it gets tricky is with specials as these roles can be left up to interpretation. As I've pointed out you could view the hunter role as the most noble and therefore easily maintain the scope of the character by outing yourself once infected. However, you could just as easily argue, as someone else posted before, that once infected you no longer have any expectation of loyalty to your former side because you now are "one with the pack" and there is no scrap of humanity or nobility left within you.

I do agree with this too, but here it appears that you would favour sanctioning this into the game (correct me if wrong here)? I believe that if you are a werewolf or vamp at the beginning it would be quite unfair for you to betray your fellow characters, but I think that sanctioning it is the wrong way to go about it. Sure, you don't want to play that way, and neither do I, but I think by sanctioning it we slow down the evolution of the game and make it much less fun. For example, with chrmjenkins' offer to reveal the other vampires when he found them brings up an interesting case. While it would have been interesting to take this offer and seen where it went, we did not. However, we could have: and that's what made the game interesting and unpredictable. Because he could have just given us false names, one true name and then other wrong ones, told the truth or oh so many other options. We didn't and don't know! That trust is an important part of the game by any measure, and regulating it out would be absolutely no fun and just make the game too predictable and not as interesting.

Now, while people can play infection any way they like, I have chosen that if I was infected I would give you guys the names of the werewolves because I feel that that is the type of character (do-gooder) that the Seer is. Others can play it differently as they like. That choice and freedom is theirs alone, and shouldn't be decided by others. If abijnk wishes to play on the other side if infected; fine, that's her decision and we should respect that.

I've been playing this game from the start (in fact, I was the first to sign up! And first to be killed! Badges I wear with pride!) The point of this whole spiel is, we need to keep that freedom to choose and decide based on own ethics and morals because that's what makes the game interesting and keeps me (and many others, I'm sure) coming back for more!

For you TL;DR peeps!
I think that the game should have as little restrictions as it as possible, and that how you play your character (things you can and can't do) shouldn't be sanctioned because leaving issues (and how to play the game based on your character) up to personal interpretation is what makes the game (and the people) so much fun, so unpredictable and its what keeps us coming back to the game for more!

 

[lbro]

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....

How about we do this, you are not allowed to give away your initial role (the one ravenvii gives you) but you are allowed to give it away if you are infected.

 

[King Mook Mook]

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....

How about we do this, you are not allowed to give away your initial role (the one ravenvii gives you) but you are allowed to give it away if you are infected.

Ohh... that cut me deep.... bro.



And no, I disagree with your suggestion! I think you just missed to entire point of my spiel. For all you TL;DR'ers out there here's a cut down version:
I think that this sort of stuff really shouldn't be sanctioned because leaving things up to personal interpretation is what makes it so much fun, so unpredictable and what keeps us coming back to the game for more!

 

[lbro]

Ohh... that cut me deep.... bro.

 

[jav6454]

Ok, after reading this entire 2 pages I was gone I am reconsidering obviously my suspicions for abijnk to downgrade her furness status down to 10% therefor giving her an 90% reliability.

As per KMM, I still think it was bad idea; however, I don't think it wise to kill him now, I'll wait till he gets home [reference to Daffy Duck]. References aside, it should be interesting to see who gets to be eaten tonight. However, I can't put aside that KMM self proclaimed honesty is a valid as a cow being purple and red. I know I have hammered this point alot, but I can't just believe him 100% after revealing he'd never say he was a wolf or betray his new comrades; people don't change with the flick of a switch like that. Hence, his scannings should be taken with a grain of salt. I do believe he will tell us the truth with respect to who the Goth and Vampire is (after all if he got infected, those are the people wolves will target). I also believe he will tell us who villager Specials are (for the wolves to take them out). However, I am doubtful when he just says villager because it could be, like General Akbar (sp?) once said, a trap.

At this point, I also believe what stonyc says, we have enough info to start doubting people. It may drag the game a bit, but that is how it was designed. This is exactly the opposite of the mob vote which KILLED the initial games.

Any who, in my list I am adding:

willbro along with Rodimus Prime, you both are top furness right now. 70% I'd say.

Also, I don't think we should be discussing game schematics and role plays right now, thats before and after the game. Right now we play as we agreed on, so please, let's leave that discussion aside and concentrate on now. Even if that means me getting lynched.

I am still sticking with my vote for Rodimus Prime.

 

[Don't panic]

Ok, after reading this entire 2 pages I was gone I am reconsidering obviously my suspicions for abijnk to downgrade her furness status down to 10% therefor giving her an 90% reliability.

As per KMM, I still think it was bad idea; however, I don't think it wise to kill him now, I'll wait till he gets home [reference to Daffy Duck]. References aside, it should be interesting to see who gets to be eaten tonight. However, I can't put aside that KMM self proclaimed honesty is a valid as a cow being purple and red. I know I have hammered this point alot, but I can't just believe him 100% after revealing he'd never say he was a wolf or betray his new comrades; people don't change with the flick of a switch like that. Hence, his scannings should be taken with a grain of salt. I do believe he will tell us the truth with respect to who the Goth and Vampire is (after all if he got infected, those are the people wolves will target). I also believe he will tell us who villager Specials are (for the wolves to take them out). However, I am doubtful when he just says villager because it could be, like General Akbar (sp?) once said, a trap.

At this point, I also believe what stonyc says, we have enough info to start doubting people. It may drag the game a bit, but that is how it was designed. This is exactly the opposite of the mob vote which KILLED the initial games.

Any who, in my list I am adding:

willbro along with Rodimus Prime, you both are top furness right now. 70% I'd say.

Also, I don't think we should be discussing game schematics and role plays right now, thats before and after the game. Right now we play as we agreed on, so please, let's leave that discussion aside and concentrate on now. Even if that means me getting lynched.

I am still sticking with my vote for Rodimus Prime.

at this pace, it will take several days before we reach 'tonight'.

yay! nobody dies! everybody wins!

 

[mscriv]

How is "I am loyal to the side I am on" a dodge?

I called it a "sort of dodge" and what I meant was that it seemed you were taking a black and white view of the issue which didn't leave room for the grey middle ground that I spoke of which in my mind is a way to sort of be loyal to both sides. Also, it's kind of like you said, "I'm completely loyal, but only until I'm infected, then I'm not loyal, except to my new team." When we're talking about loyalty and the WW infection, I wouldn't call that a position of loyalty in the strictest sense. It's really a position of fate.

However, as I said, I appreciate your honesty and feel that playing the game as you have stated you would is perfectly within the spirit of the game and ethical per se.

Oh yeah, I probably should also mention that being the crafty player you are it's highly likely that you are throwing this loyalty to the wolves card out there as a way to further entice them to infect you so that they waste the infection and you can out them. Kind of like your husband tried to use the seer role last game to out the infection.

I do agree with this too, but here it appears that you would favour sanctioning this into the game (correct me if wrong here)? I believe that if you are a werewolf or vamp at the beginning it would be quite unfair for you to betray your fellow characters, but I think that sanctioning it is the wrong way to go about it. Sure, you don't want to play that way, and neither do I, but I think by sanctioning it we slow down the evolution of the game and make it much less fun. ....

I'm not in favor of setting up the rules in a way that would mandate play and restrict player freedom. However, I do think players should use common sense and I hope that people would respect the game enough to play in a manner that would not ruin it for everyone else. If someone is upset about the role they get or can't honestly play that role in the "spirit of that role" then I think they should let ravenvii know and drop out of the game.

For example:
- if you're only playing in the hopes of being a baddie and end up a villager. Don't ignore the game, infrequently participate, and cast random votes. I'd rather you not play at all.

- if you end up a hunter, but decide you want the baddies to win and don't use your protection or insta-kill the seer, you are going completely against the nature of your role and that would be no fun for anyone.

Like I said before, I only think this "ethical" dilemma exist in reference to the use of the WW infection because it is the only part of the game that puts someone in this position. What I do find interesting about there being freedom is that you could decide to play it one way in this game (the infected hunter stands by the villagers and sacrifices himself) and entirely differently the next time (the infected hunter turns on his former friends and joins the pack in slaughtering them) and both would be within the spirit of the game and the scope of the character.

 

[abijnk]

Also, it's kind of like you said, "I'm completely loyal, but only until I'm infected, then I'm not loyal, except to my new team." When we're talking about loyalty and the WW infection, I wouldn't call that a position of loyalty in the strictest sense. It's really a position of fate.

I guess if you want to try and make it more complicated than it is you can, but what I said was 100% clear cut, or "black and white" as you put it.

 

[mscriv]

I guess if you want to try and make it more complicated than it is you can, but what I said was 100% clear cut, or "black and white" as you put it.

Yes, and again, I appreciate your honesty.

 

[abijnk]

Yes, and again, I appreciate your honesty.

I should also probably clarify that this...

Oh yeah, I probably should also mention that being the crafty player you are it's highly likely that you are throwing this loyalty to the wolves card out there as a way to further entice them to infect you so that they waste the infection and you can out them. Kind of like your husband tried to use the seer role last game to out the infection.

is wrong. I've been infected before, and you are welcome to go back and see how that went down.

Also, just a side note, but I find it interesting that you, and others, seem to believe that my husband and I think exactly the same way and would play exactly the same. It's very interesting. Completely wrong. But very interesting.

EDIT: Oh, and it is probably worth noting how well that worked out for Chris, too.

 

[ucfgrad93]

Ok, are you people just going to sit around and whine, complain, and nit pick what should or shouldn't be allowed to happen in the game?


LETS VOTE ALREADY!!!!!!!!! I'D LIKE TO FINISH THIS GAME BEFORE I DIE OF OLD AGE. KING MOOK MOOK WAS RESURRECTED ON 9/14 AT 8:21 ET ALMOST 3 DAYS AGO!!!!!

SINCE THEN THERE HAVE BEEN 6 PAGES OF THE MOST MIND-NUMBING CRAP POSTED THAT I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO READ

SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE, BUT ENOUGH ALREADY. SHUT UP AND VOTE!!!!!!!!

 

[jav6454]

Ok, are you people just going to sit around and whine, complain, and nit pick what should or shouldn't be allowed to happen in the game?


LETS VOTE ALREADY!!!!!!!!! I'D LIKE TO FINISH THIS GAME BEFORE I DIE OF OLD AGE. KING MOOK MOOK WAS RESURRECTED ON 9/14 AT 8:21 ET ALMOST 3 DAYS AGO!!!!!

SINCE THEN THERE HAVE BEEN 6 PAGES OF THE MOST MIND-NUMBING CRAP POSTED THAT I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO READ

SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE, BUT ENOUGH ALREADY. SHUT UP AND VOTE!!!!!!!!

No, that would be mob voting, and precisely what favors the wolves a lot. ucfgrad93's furness level went from 14% all the way to 45%.

 

[abijnk]

Ok, are you people just going to sit around and whine, complain, and nit pick what should or shouldn't be allowed to happen in the game?


LETS VOTE ALREADY!!!!!!!!! I'D LIKE TO FINISH THIS GAME BEFORE I DIE OF OLD AGE. KING MOOK MOOK WAS RESURRECTED ON 9/14 AT 8:21 ET ALMOST 3 DAYS AGO!!!!!

SINCE THEN THERE HAVE BEEN 6 PAGES OF THE MOST MIND-NUMBING CRAP POSTED THAT I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO READ

SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE, BUT ENOUGH ALREADY. SHUT UP AND VOTE!!!!!!!!

Actually, I would say the revelation of a major role is anything but "mind numbing"

 

[184550]

Ok, are you people just going to sit around and whine, complain, and nit pick what should or shouldn't be allowed to happen in the game?


LETS VOTE ALREADY!!!!!!!!! I'D LIKE TO FINISH THIS GAME BEFORE I DIE OF OLD AGE. KING MOOK MOOK WAS RESURRECTED ON 9/14 AT 8:21 ET ALMOST 3 DAYS AGO!!!!!

SINCE THEN THERE HAVE BEEN 6 PAGES OF THE MOST MIND-NUMBING CRAP POSTED THAT I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO READ

SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE, BUT ENOUGH ALREADY. SHUT UP AND VOTE!!!!!!!!

I agree, it really is taking entirely too long.

On the other hand...

 

[Don't panic]

...snip...

Like I said before, I only think this "ethical" dilemma exist in reference to the use of the WW infection because it is the only part of the game that puts someone in this position. What I do find interesting about there being freedom is that you could decide to play it one way in this game (the infected hunter stands by the villagers and sacrifices himself) and entirely differently the next time (the infected hunter turns on his former friends and joins the pack in slaughtering them) and both would be within the spirit of the game and the scope of the character.

it's funny how we see the infection working with respect to the 'loyalty' issue
from exactly opposite perspectives:
in my view the infected players are 'loyal' when they follow their current role.
So the moment they are infected they ARE wolves and to turn against the wolves would not be a 'sacrifice', but betrayal.

doesn't change the substance, just interesting how the default assumption is different.

 

[ucfgrad93]

No, that would be mob voting, and precisely what favors the wolves a lot. ucfgrad93's furness level went from 14% all the way to 45%.

You can stick that fur-o-meter where the sun don't shine, brother.

Seriously, this is getting quite ridiculous. It has been 3 stinking days and we have yet to come to some sort of decision while a large part of the posts have been about what should or should not be allowed in the game.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

No, that would be mob voting, and precisely what favors the wolves a lot. ucfgrad93's furness level went from 14% all the way to 45%.

tell you the truth the longer that it goes one the more likely that mob vote goes.

jav hate to say it but you are dead. I will admit right now that part of the reason I voted for you was because I am tired of waiting days for it to happen. We can not use logic to do anything because we just get locked up for days.

 

[abijnk]

You can stick that fur-o-meter where the sun don't shine, brother.

Seriously, this is getting quite ridiculous. It has been 3 stinking days and we have yet to come to some sort of decision while a large part of the posts have been about what should or should not be allowed in the game.

Not in the thread I've been reading. In the thread I've been reading there has been discussion about what a player would choose to do and how it affect whether or not we should vote them off based on how we expect them or how they say they will act (a discussion I should point out you haven't been participating in).

That said I will change my vote to jav6454. I don't think it is him, but I also don't think I am going to be able to pull enough people to vote for stonyc.

 

[jav6454]

Here I'll help you all, Jav6454. There, fate sealed. Now, carry one with the game and that dumb mentality. Mark my words, ucfgrad93 has furness chance next to the one of willbro and Rodimus Prime.

I haven't even seen him post a analysis at all.

 

[ucfgrad93]

Not in the thread I've been reading. In the thread I've been reading there has been discussion about what a player would choose to do and how it affect whether or not we should vote them off based on how we expect them or how they say they will act (a discussion I should point out you haven't been participating in).

That said I will change my vote to jav6454. I don't think it is him, but I also don't think I am going to be able to pull enough people to vote for stonyc.

pffft.....

 

[jav6454]

pffft.....

Answer:

 

[Don't panic]

Ok, are you people just going to sit around and whine, complain, and nit pick what should or shouldn't be allowed to happen in the game?


LETS VOTE ALREADY!!!!!!!!! I'D LIKE TO FINISH THIS GAME BEFORE I DIE OF OLD AGE. KING MOOK MOOK WAS RESURRECTED ON 9/14 AT 8:21 ET ALMOST 3 DAYS AGO!!!!!

SINCE THEN THERE HAVE BEEN 6 PAGES OF THE MOST MIND-NUMBING CRAP POSTED THAT I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO READ

SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE, BUT ENOUGH ALREADY. SHUT UP AND VOTE!!!!!!!!

UFC, i appreciate you collected and balanced contribution and, unlike jav, i don't think that it necessarily adds to you 'furness' (oh, and do vamps have toothness?), but i'd like to re-direct to post 815 with the vote update:
everyone except mscriv already voted, the problem is the votes are spread out and we are nowhere close to a majority.

since KMM resurrection we have had abjnk exposed as a villager initially and as the vampire hunter next, and nathan claiming to be the sorcerer. these development however have lead to almost no changes. some people, (me included) have modified their votes, providing some rationale on why. This however has not lead to any significant difference, nor provided any kind of momentum towards a resolution.

if you have any suggestion on how to get the game moving faster, i am all ears.

 

[King Mook Mook]

As per KMM, I still think it was bad idea; however, I don't think it wise to kill him now, I'll wait till he gets home [reference to Daffy Duck]. References aside, it should be interesting to see who gets to be eaten tonight. However, I can't put aside that KMM self proclaimed honesty is a valid as a cow being purple and red. I know I have hammered this point alot, but I can't just believe him 100% after revealing he'd never say he was a wolf or betray his new comrades; people don't change with the flick of a switch like that.

Mmm, you don't have to trust my scannings, I understand fully! It's your prerogative, after all. And I realise that my changing of view on the issue was sudden and I'm sure for some, quite unexpected. The reason I did change was Mscriv's commentary on the issue about being your character which really spoke to me, and I found to be extremely persuasive: hence my change of view.

QFT!

My point was that there has been a lot of talking about the ethics behind how one goes about playing the given roles in this game. If a player, like KMM, wanted to preserve his/her integrity yet, as chrmjenkins has a certain natural slant, then he/she could take a middle ground stance towards infection.

For example, "I'm a good guy and will not succumb to the evil that has been forced upon me, but out of respect for the other players I will not reveal the identity of the wolves. Thus, I propose that if I am infected I will reveal such so that I can be lynched for the purpose of saving the village." If KMM or any seer in a future game took this stance then it might help the villagers in deciding if it was worth the risk of keeping the outed seer around. Naturally, this stance would also make the seer more of a target for the wolfpack to kill.

As I said before, the more I play the game and the more we tweak rules, powers/abilities, and roles, the more I see nuances and different ways to go about playing the game.

 

[Don't panic]

updated votes:

Jav6454: 7 (appleguy123, philbeeney, ucfgrad93, Mexbearpig, Rodimus Prime, abjnk, jav6454)
Abijnk: 2 (willbro, Don't panic)
Stonyc: 2 (melrose, King Mook Mook)
iBlue: 1 (renewed)
Renewed: 1 (iBlue)
Philbeeney: 1 (Stonyc)
Willbro: 1 (NathanMuir)

mscriv didn't vote

majority is 9

edit: Abjnk, i still think you should use your insta-kill (that would jolt the game, wouldn't it?). The more you keep it the more the possibility you get wolferized, the more you will be a danger for the village and a candidate for the gallows, even if innocent.

 

[184550]

I'll change my vote back to Jav6454 since it is obvious that I will not swing 8 votes for willbro.