[Kessobahn]

Ok, my vote was actually a joke. Look guys, we ALL know how dangerous Khell is. There isn't an open question there. Bu

However, he's also a strong asset for town. We really shouldn't lynch him based on so little on day one.

For now:
remove vote

[Ultama]

I've just realised how shit I am going to be at this.
I know who I want to vote but am fucking awful at alting people.

[Ultama]

Why hasn't Tatts been soaking over the thread yet?

vote Tattersall

[Aparal Forge]

Ultama, on 08 November 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

I've just realised how shit I am going to be at this.
I know who I want to vote but am fucking awful at alting people.

So which alt are you looking to lynch and give the rest of us an idea who to watch out for?

[Serc]

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Blend, on 29 October 2016 - 04:05 PM, said:

To be fair, if the randomizer makes someone scum a 2nd time in a row in my games, I'll usually switch him or her out with an RI in order to ensure everyone gets a chance to be scum and vice versa. I always try to make sure that the roles go to people who didn't have roles in a previous game, and so on and so forth.

This leads me to:

Vote Khell

Also, he still is the slipperiest of slippery.

That is lazy even by D1, Khell-vote-excuse standards. And that requires a special level of laziness.

If only I had any idea who you might be to put a vote on you...

BTW, I'm surprised too that Tatts still isn't ripping the thread apart with one of his crazy Day 1 plots.

[Aparal Forge]

That crazy Tatts, he should be spamming the thread.

Vote Tatts

[Aparal Forge]

quiet day so far

[Telas]

Serc, on 08 November 2016 - 08:55 AM, said:

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Blend, on 29 October 2016 - 04:05 PM, said:

To be fair, if the randomizer makes someone scum a 2nd time in a row in my games, I'll usually switch him or her out with an RI in order to ensure everyone gets a chance to be scum and vice versa. I always try to make sure that the roles go to people who didn't have roles in a previous game, and so on and so forth.

This leads me to:

Vote Khell

Also, he still is the slipperiest of slippery.

That is lazy even by D1, Khell-vote-excuse standards. And that requires a special level of laziness.

If only I had any idea who you might be to put a vote on you...

We're on the same wavelength. Let me know when you figure it out and I'll 2nd that vote.

[Hanas]

Ultama, on 08 November 2016 - 07:35 AM, said:

Why hasn't Tatts been soaking over the thread yet?

vote Tattersall

An excellent point. Call me suspicious but... if Tatts is unaltable ten hours into a day, he's hiding something

Remove Vote

Vote Tattersail

Oi, come on out!

[Mockra]

Morning, everyone.

I must agree, the lack of Tatts-spam in the thread is odd.

[Path-Shaper]

It is Day 1. 12 hours and 47 minutes remaining

11 Players still alive: Aparal Forge, Bek Okhan, Fanderay, Hanas, Kessobahn, Lock, Mockra, Omtose, Serc, Telas, Ultama

6 votes to lynch, 6 votes to go to night.

1 Vote for Mentalist ( Fanderay )
1 Vote for Khellendros ( Lock )
3 Votes for Tattersail ( Ultama, Aparal Forge, Hanas )


Players not voted: Bek Okhan, Kessobahn, Mockra, Omtose, Serc, Telas

[Aparal Forge]

12 hours left in the day and Tatts is halfway to lynch.

Seems a bit too easy.

Remove vote

Vote Omtose

Now who would that be?

[Aparal Forge]

(I am aware I cannot vote Omtose, but we do need more from them)

[Lock]

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:09 AM, said:

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:01 AM, said:

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

Telas, on 07 November 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

This is my first post.

Ah, this post looks like just trying to get post count up.

Posts don't count in this forum, and this account cannot post anywhere outside of this forum.

What I was trying to raise, was word count. Rather than posting "present" or "I'm here," I went for the five word count "This is my first post."

What's your excuse?

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Blend, on 29 October 2016 - 04:05 PM, said:

To be fair, if the randomizer makes someone scum a 2nd time in a row in my games, I'll usually switch him or her out with an RI in order to ensure everyone gets a chance to be scum and vice versa. I always try to make sure that the roles go to people who didn't have roles in a previous game, and so on and so forth.

This leads me to:

Vote Khell

Also, he still is the slipperiest of slippery.

Several folks had already suggested Blend not do that in future. I trust the advice was taken and that roles were assigned completely at random. When I vote for Khell, it will be for a dumber reason than this one you have chosen.

Of course, now I'm going to be hard pressed to find a dumber reason than yours. Quite the challenge.

Eh, excuse? People guilty of something need excuses, I have reasons. And what should I have an excuse for anyways?

So, what's your EXCUSE for wanting to raise the word count? Not that I could see you giving a meaningful answer.

Keeping in mind your answer to my post count objection, I assure you you're on the right path.

[Lock]

Hanas, on 08 November 2016 - 01:50 PM, said:

Ultama, on 08 November 2016 - 07:35 AM, said:

Why hasn't Tatts been soaking over the thread yet?

vote Tattersall

An excellent point. Call me suspicious but... if Tatts is unaltable ten hours into a day, he's hiding something

Remove Vote

Vote Tattersail

Oi, come on out!

Kessobahn, on 08 November 2016 - 03:40 AM, said:

Ok, my vote was actually a joke. Look guys, we ALL know how dangerous Khell is. There isn't an open question there. Bu

However, he's also a strong asset for town. We really shouldn't lynch him based on so little on day one.

For now:
remove vote

Everybody backed away with non-or close to non-existent reasons after my vote for Khell, and it even wasn't much of a pressure, this just smells. Thus I like my vote where it now is.

And I'm pretty confident that Tatts, at least from previous games, realizes the bullseye that his behavior paints on his back. And I think that he'd avoid it if he was somehow important. Or maybe, just maybe he does?

[Omtose]

Not much seems to have happened.

I agree that the Tatts is keeping way to quiet - he is either scum or has decided to play it quiet to avoid being alted on Day 1.

I wonder how long he will be able to restrain his inner Tattsy ness though

[Telas]

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:09 AM, said:

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:01 AM, said:

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

Telas, on 07 November 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

This is my first post.

Ah, this post looks like just trying to get post count up.

Posts don't count in this forum, and this account cannot post anywhere outside of this forum.

What I was trying to raise, was word count. Rather than posting "present" or "I'm here," I went for the five word count "This is my first post."

What's your excuse?

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Blend, on 29 October 2016 - 04:05 PM, said:

To be fair, if the randomizer makes someone scum a 2nd time in a row in my games, I'll usually switch him or her out with an RI in order to ensure everyone gets a chance to be scum and vice versa. I always try to make sure that the roles go to people who didn't have roles in a previous game, and so on and so forth.

This leads me to:

Vote Khell

Also, he still is the slipperiest of slippery.

Several folks had already suggested Blend not do that in future. I trust the advice was taken and that roles were assigned completely at random. When I vote for Khell, it will be for a dumber reason than this one you have chosen.

Of course, now I'm going to be hard pressed to find a dumber reason than yours. Quite the challenge.

Eh, excuse? People guilty of something need excuses, I have reasons. And what should I have an excuse for anyways?

So, what's your EXCUSE for wanting to raise the word count? Not that I could see you giving a meaningful answer.

Keeping in mind your answer to my post count objection, I assure you you're on the right path.

I have as little desire to raise the word count as I have for raising the post count. I confess to flabberghastation that you would point to someone's first post as an attempt to raise the post count. Your every post makes less sense than the one that came before.

[Bek Okhan]

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 01:33 AM, said:

From quantum mafia spoilers:

The idea behind this game stems from quantum mechanics (duh). There you can't make fixed predictions, but only say something about the probability with which a particle can be found at a certain point. This probability is the square of the absolute value of the so called Schrödingers Equation, which is a wave equation. That way it is possible for a system to be in more than one state at once, eg. Schrödingers Cat being alive and dead at the same time.

Now, for the purpose of the game, you start out as dead and alive and as town and scum all at once.
The game will contain 1 finder, 2 killers, one of which will only get to kill after the first on is dead, so he will inherit the kill. The rest are RI. At the beginning of the game, there will be multiple realities - one for every possible role distribution.
Each night you submit for every possible role you have - so I want killing and finding orders from each of you every night.

How kills are resolved:
You kill is resolved in every reality, where you have the ability to kill and terminates all realities, in which your target is your fellow killer. Your target loses some of probability to be alive. If everyone targets a single player in the same night, that player is 100% dead, since there is no reality left, in which he would be alive.

How finds are resolved:
According to the probabilities of the found player being town or scum, I will tell you if the player is town or scum.
For example player A is 67% town and 33% scum. Random dice roll gives me 94 --> you will find the player as scum.
If a player is later determined to be the opposite of what you found, all realities in which you are the finder are removed.

How lynches are resolved:
These are resolved the same way findings are resolved, so according to probabilities of being town/scum I will randomly determine, what that player was. Since looking causes the system to be in one state (if you look, the cat is dead or alive), the player will be 100% dead and 100% town/scum. All realities in which the player is not what the lynch showed him to be will be terminated.

In the end we should hopefully end up with just on reality.


Now, that is still quite far to be called similar to what Mockra is implying.

Ofcourse, since P-S stated set-up and mechanics pretty clearly, the question is an odd one.

That setup sounds awesome! Can we play it again?

[Lock]

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 01:22 PM, said:

Serc, on 08 November 2016 - 08:55 AM, said:

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Blend, on 29 October 2016 - 04:05 PM, said:

To be fair, if the randomizer makes someone scum a 2nd time in a row in my games, I'll usually switch him or her out with an RI in order to ensure everyone gets a chance to be scum and vice versa. I always try to make sure that the roles go to people who didn't have roles in a previous game, and so on and so forth.

This leads me to:

Vote Khell

Also, he still is the slipperiest of slippery.

That is lazy even by D1, Khell-vote-excuse standards. And that requires a special level of laziness.

If only I had any idea who you might be to put a vote on you...

We're on the same wavelength. Let me know when you figure it out and I'll 2nd that vote.

This wording is incredibly off, you will know when he votes, where does the need to be "let known" come from? Does it imply off-thread communication? It's a bit too careless for me.

[Lock]

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:39 PM, said:

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:09 AM, said:

Telas, on 08 November 2016 - 03:01 AM, said:

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 01:35 AM, said:

Telas, on 07 November 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

This is my first post.

Ah, this post looks like just trying to get post count up.

Posts don't count in this forum, and this account cannot post anywhere outside of this forum.

What I was trying to raise, was word count. Rather than posting "present" or "I'm here," I went for the five word count "This is my first post."

What's your excuse?

Lock, on 08 November 2016 - 02:35 AM, said:

Blend, on 29 October 2016 - 04:05 PM, said:

To be fair, if the randomizer makes someone scum a 2nd time in a row in my games, I'll usually switch him or her out with an RI in order to ensure everyone gets a chance to be scum and vice versa. I always try to make sure that the roles go to people who didn't have roles in a previous game, and so on and so forth.

This leads me to:

Vote Khell

Also, he still is the slipperiest of slippery.

Several folks had already suggested Blend not do that in future. I trust the advice was taken and that roles were assigned completely at random. When I vote for Khell, it will be for a dumber reason than this one you have chosen.

Of course, now I'm going to be hard pressed to find a dumber reason than yours. Quite the challenge.

Eh, excuse? People guilty of something need excuses, I have reasons. And what should I have an excuse for anyways?

So, what's your EXCUSE for wanting to raise the word count? Not that I could see you giving a meaningful answer.

Keeping in mind your answer to my post count objection, I assure you you're on the right path.

I have as little desire to raise the word count as I have for raising the post count. I confess to flabberghastation that you would point to someone's first post as an attempt to raise the post count. Your every post makes less sense than the one that came before.

Alright, the obvious question for you again - why were you then trying to raise your word count?