|
Post by soylentred on Mar 23, 2009 10:20:56 GMT -5
I would like to explain why I was hinting at my role PM and also I would like to know if that was out of line. I thought we were told we could not divulge what was in our role PM - I just hinted at an aspect.
Maybe this is just stupidity but when at the end of day one only a core of 4 people voted - each just one vote on a different person. First I thought - mafia would not do that - they would jump on another vote. But then again it didn't matter because tie of even one would lynch Jason. So that was reason number 1 for thinking those 4 were town.
The other thing from my role PM - you are town - you MUST vote to lynch everyday and Not all town got the same message. So when 4 singleton votes came at the end of the day. Only 4 of 9 voted and it was really last minute - I thought those 4 were a core group of town who got the same message I did. I thought Fire, me, Sint, Ludacris had a note in their PM that said you MUST vote everyday. I had myself convinced that this was special instructions because we had no lynch days in the last game and that with such a small number and high ratio of mafia to town - we were being told we had to lynch everyday. Now the stupid part is - maybe that is included everytime you get a PM saying you are town - but I don't remember being told before you MUST vote everyday. I was hoping by hinting at the PM if there was a core group of town with special instructions we would recognize each other on that basis.
|
|
|
Post by nolecub on Mar 23, 2009 10:39:01 GMT -5
I can see what you were hinting at now soy.
Just bringing up the phrase "PM" should just be avoided. Technically, I quoted from my role PM when I stated my role, but how else would I have to convey the role?
Only way I could see you phrasing it differently would be something along the lines of: If you were really town, you would know that we MUST lynch someone daily. You not voting on day one blah blah blah blah.
Of course in this case, it would mean nothing to me as I had a totally different PM concerning my role.
Well, at least I had 2/3's of the mafia on my radar this game.
|
|
|
Post by Nac Runo on Mar 23, 2009 11:53:53 GMT -5
@soy: Now i get what you meant but the early game PM was not such as a secret code as you made it to be unfortunately. First of all the only common thing in the PMs i sent to plain townies was "Not all townies receive the same message.". Secondly your message was not saying you MUST vote, it was saying you MUST lynch everyday. Which is actually what the game rules suggest with no-lynch rule.
While writing the identical part about not receiving the same message, i thought of the case it might be used, and think it is completely gg if you can manage to use it without actually saying it. As the rules say you are not allowed to use any PM content in the game. This doesn't necessarily mean you can not refer to anything you received, you just must not use it as a message from the host. Giving hints or making valid claims about your role is totally okay as nole said.
|
|
|
Post by soylentred on Mar 23, 2009 11:57:36 GMT -5
Thank you. Just a small core voting at the end of day made me think they were all acting on the message in the PM. We have so little to go on at the start everything looms large.
|
|
|
Post by water_moon on Mar 23, 2009 16:14:16 GMT -5
There have been a few other games with no NK or a start of day one due to the mod. (I was paying attention in case I was called upon to step in for some one.) But usually it is stated by the mod, so that was different. Which brings me to the next point, sure the games tend to follow a particular pattern, but most GMs want at least ONE thing specifially different. As for the PMs, I REALLY don't like the PM rule as it's written. As the rules say you are not allowed to use any PM content in the game. This doesn't necessarily mean you can not refer to anything you received, you just must not use it as a message from the host. Giving hints or making valid claims about your role is totally okay as nole said. Incorrect. As the rule is written (this is what happens when you've had classes on logic as it applies to law) using PM content includes truthful role claims (though lies are allowed), including "townie". Period. Stop. End of Story. Unless the rule explicitly states the expection (role claims) you can't even say you're playing. Since thus far those who have included that rule have had a seperate rule stating role claims are allowed, I've assume intent rather than the letter. But I avoid including the PM rule because I try to avoid fine print.
|
|
|
Post by soylentred on Mar 23, 2009 17:15:05 GMT -5
Water by that - I did not give any PM content at all - I just said something in my PM was driving me to think a certain way, made me think a certain thing. I did not even hint to the thing - I just hinted to what it made me think. Is that allowed in your book?
|
|
|
Post by muzzz on Mar 24, 2009 12:20:21 GMT -5
I've always read that rule as "don't use the word PM". In other words, you can discuss any information that was in your PM, including quoting it word for word, as long as you don't claim that it was from (or inspired by) your PM.
---
Nicely played, mafia. While I almost killed Sint during night two, I doubt if I would've identified either Noodle or Ludacris.
---
Kudos to Nac for balancing this round. I think you did a great job at including some interesting twists without over-complicating things. I really liked the daykill/suicide thing with the vigilante. I came up with nearly half a dozen bold ways to make the most out of it, and I seriously had trouble choosing between them. Too bad I died before I could really set anything in motion.
|
|
|
Post by water_moon on Mar 24, 2009 16:15:43 GMT -5
@soylent: according to the rules of logic, the question would be the word "role." You said "role PM" and if the PM contained the word "role" you included content.
O/C this can be reductio ad absurdum. "You included the words 'the', 'a', and 'is' in your post and those words were contained in your PM, therefor you are in violation!" Hence my objection to the wording of the rule.
I think I much prefer muzz's version of the rule, that combined with different wording in each PM should effectivly prevent some of the cheesiness without having a 10 page long rule set.
|
|
|
Post by soylentred on Mar 24, 2009 18:56:15 GMT -5
Thank you so much - bottom line - if in doubt leave it out.
|
|