Shadow, on 11 December 2009 - 03:28 PM, said:
Kalse, on 11 December 2009 - 03:20 PM, said:
Shadow, on 11 December 2009 - 03:18 PM, said:
Kalse, on 11 December 2009 - 03:14 PM, said:
Shadow, on 11 December 2009 - 03:11 PM, said:
So yes, the bride kills Bill before taking the kid.
And Kalse, I assume that was via the reveal, and the bride couldn't have killed since she didn't have a sword before then. (Notice the scene did ninja stars, right?)
you seem pretty damn certain of that, Shadow. I think you know something the rest of us don't...
So you make a claim that cannot be proven. I say 'claim dosen't go with the movie', you claim we aren't following the movie closely, and I say we are.
That makes me scum, right?
So from what I understand, you are either lying, or you just revealed as Bill. I hope we have a healer.
Well I just don't see how you ever-so-confidently assume that because the scene from night 1 showed her getting a sword from Hanzo, that that most definitely mean with certainty that she couldn't kill before that. Why would you just go and assume such a thing?
Becuase that is what I think happened? That would explain the no-kill on night 1, if the Assassin missed the timer or something, and the Bride couldn't kill. Then night 2 someone tried to hit Kalse and hit Karatallid instead. Where is what I assume is at least one more kill? I am very worried at the lack of killing in this game. I assume a Kill Bill game would be loaded with murder.
Anyway, I guess I would like to hear from Korbas before I vote him. Why, Kalse, were you defending Sorrit so heavily? And then lied to make it seem like you were symping him. If you are Bill, then you should have been much more careful.
remove vote
The idea, Shadow, is to play without letting completely random-ass assumptions permeate your play. Sure, that's one possible explanation of why there was no kills night 1, but I can think of a dozen more explanations, but you don't see me bandying them about with absolute certainty because there's reason to assume those explanations are correct. That you would suddenly pop out with such a certain assumption is either foolish play or a scum slip. And I'd rather not make an ass out of myself by assuming it's the former.
As for defending Sorrit, well that was mostly to attack you and see the reaction it got (not to mention the sudden inclusion in the actual game). As for being careful, clearly you just don't understand that I've very carefully weighed the merits of this and judged appropriately based on the information I have. I could've exposed Korbas day 1 since I was pretty damn sure he was the kid back then, but it wasn't prudent then. It is now.