Long Game 38: In the beginning...

[Arinian]

2 minutes ago, Steeldancer said:

We can give them all to one person!!!!!

Nothing in rules says that we can give items and nothing in this exact rule says that we can. And even if we can give bunnies everyone will lose atleast 1 item, if I understand it right.

[Sparkrunner he/him]

And? Items are yucky and heavy.

[Steeldancer he/him]

Just now, Arinian said:

Nothing in rules says that we can give items and nothing in this exact rule says that we can. And even if we can give bunnies everyone will lose atleast 1 item, if I understand it right.

It's once a cycle. 

And I really thought we could *scratches head* otherwise they can't breed and that's the whole point of this rule!!!!!!! For them to multiply and populate the cosmere!!!! A bunny party! 

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

Seeing as rule #1 is my rule, I'm voting for it. I forgot to do that, the last time I proposed a rule.

Plus, unlike my last rule, this one actually stabilizes the game and improves it.

 

EDIT: Also, to y'alls that tried to vote, it's nighttime... And while I quite agree with the notion that night time provides the best atmosphere for a good old fashioned torches and pitchforks lynch mob, the rules seem to say otherwise (unless you change them )

Edited September 7, 2017 by Drake Marshall

[Hemalurgic Headshot he/him]

I think I'll vote for rule 4. It adds more factors to the game and prevents anyone from winning too quickly.

[Steeldancer he/him]

*awesome narrator voice on*

The storm wanted a party. And so it created... bunnies. 

But the bunnies, being bunnies, decided to make even more of a party. Multiply and replenish the cosmere indeed. 

Would anyone take these poor little souls in? 

The speed force storm rumbled. And then began to dance. "Making things is fun" decided the storm. "How about some platypi." 

[Clanky he/him]

So the Secret keeper likely is the reason for the removal of the conversion rule or perhaps an elementalist I guess. I don't really know what to analyze in this game beyond rule proposals.

Rule 1 is okay. It won't really affect much unless there are no rules people like then we can limit the entry of new rules into the game. 

Rule 2 is obviously something from the worldsmiths. I see no reason for anyone else to vote for it. Maybe we need to coordinate to get three other rules with enough vote to ensure this doesn't get in?

Rule 3, I'm not really sure what this is supposed to acheive. Each individual player has the primary win condition to be the last alive so there is not much that will affect that.  The factions all have group win conditions. I guess since we hadn't made a rule about the game ending at all it might not have ended even with one person left. idunno

Rule 4 seems mostly like adding to a normal factionless win condition wherer they have to be the only one left alive. This just stops factions from winning without killing them. Not really a bonus for whomever becomes odium.

Rule 5 Bunnies are kinda fun. Do we have any mechanic to pass/move items other than spheres (or maybe the elementalist) that would ever lead to someone getting multiple bunnies? 

 

I'm not sure what I'm going to vote on yet. None of the rules seem to offer any major change to the game play like other rules in the previous cycles. 

[little wilson she/her]

6 minutes ago, Clanky said:

Rule 4 seems mostly like adding to a normal factionless win condition wherer they have to be the only one left alive. This just stops factions from winning without killing them. Not really a bonus for whomever becomes odium.

[snip]

None of the rules seem to offer any major change to the game play like other rules in the previous cycles. 

Confirmed: Clanky is not, nor ever has been, factionless. If he were, he would know that the factionless have no kill abilities outside of items they may have started with (which are one-shot). The Odium role gives a single factionless a kill ability, making it that much easier for that factionless to attain the individual factionless win con.

Between the WorldSmiths and the Agents of Chaos, I'd say he's a WorldSmith.

[Clanky he/him]

Just now, little wilson said:

Confirmed: Clanky is not, nor ever has been, factionless. If he were, he would know that the factionless have no kill abilities outside of items they may have started with (which are one-shot). The Odium role gives a single factionless a kill ability, making it that much easier for that factionless to attain the individual factionless win con.

Between the WorldSmiths and the Agents of Chaos, I'd say he's a WorldSmith.

Or I didn't read very carefully and just missed the part where it said Odium got a kill ability...  But I'm too smart to have done something like that obviously. 

[Ecthelion III he/him]

I have absolutely no idea what is going on.

The rules for "claim a role" are rather vague, but I believe I'd be safe to say that for some reason, I can give items to players. This is confirmable. There's nothing against faction claiming, so I am neutral SK. And also boring. #stealthmode

I vote The Bunny Rule (5) because it will make my job easier, mwahahahaha...

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

Hmmm can bunnies eat other bunnies though? That would kind of screw with things. And a literal read of  the rules would certainly imply that this is possible.

[Elenion he/him]

Even if Clanky is WorldSmith, he still makes a good point that Rule #2 could be anonymously vote-hammered into play by the WorldSmiths unless we coordinate. But I do have to wonder, if he is a WorldSmith, why he would have brought that to our attention.

[DeTess she/her]

@AliasSheep, Would bunnies count as items? And if they do, how would rule 5 and 2 interact if they both came into play at once?

[Sami she/her]

Dang it, I'm going for the bunnies! Because, nobody can resist bunnies 

I vote for the bunnies

Lol if rule 2 came into existence the Worldbringers would be peppered with bunnies. And there would be more bunnies.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Sami

[Steeldancer he/him]

I have created a platypus rule to balance out how the bunnies work. Look out next cycle for that! 

[Arinian]

4 minutes ago, winter devotion said:

What if the wS win by virtue of there being no items? Does that still count?

Quote

Win Condition: Have the most items by the end of the game

WS can't win till end of game and right now we have only 2 ways to end game: kill everyone and be last man(faction) standing or Brotherhood's win con(not sure if this one ends game).

That's what you asked?

[little wilson she/her]

7 hours ago, Elenion said:

Even if Clanky is WorldSmith, he still makes a good point that Rule #2 could be anonymously vote-hammered into play by the WorldSmiths unless we coordinate. But I do have to wonder, if he is a WorldSmith, why he would have brought that to our attention.

I don't think it's possible for us to coordinate enough to block that rule from going into play. We'd have to make sure that 3 other rules have at least 5-6 votes on them to be safe, and even then we couldn't be certain because if one of the rules has two WS saying they'll vote on it, they're not going to do that, so that role will be shorted and the WS rule will succeed. I would be surprised if that rule isn't implemented, which is why I would suggest everyone who has an item uses it. It's either that or lose your item to the WS. Because with how big that faction is supposed to be (I'm pretty sure the rule was 1/3 of the players), we can't coordinate enough to beat that 3 times. If we had the first rule already implemented, yes. But not as things stand right now.

Also, as for why he would suggest it: to make people think he's not. That's like asking why an eliminator in a normal game offers up ideas to help find eliminators.

And I don't think he's trying to disguise his alignment with the factionless comment, by the way. It's in everyone's best interests right now to seem factionless, whether they are or aren't. Think about it: all of the factions are problematic to either other factions and/or the factionless. The factionless, though, aren't much of a threat because they have no one to really work with (that they won't have to turn on eventually to get their win con) and no practical way to achieve their win con, outside what they were lucky enough to start with. If someone indicates they're not factionless, that's a slip and they probably aren't.

[Arinian]

1 hour ago, little wilson said:

I don't think it's possible for us to coordinate enough to block that rule from going into play. We'd have to make sure that 3 other rules have at least 5-6 votes on them to be safe, and even then we couldn't be certain because if one of the rules has two WS saying they'll vote on it, they're not going to do that, so that role will be shorted and the WS rule will succeed. I would be surprised if that rule isn't implemented, which is why I would suggest everyone who has an item uses it. It's either that or lose your item to the WS. Because with how big that faction is supposed to be (I'm pretty sure the rule was 1/3 of the players), we can't coordinate enough to beat that 3 times. If we had the first rule already implemented, yes. But not as things stand right now.

Also, as for why he would suggest it: to make people think he's not. That's like asking why an eliminator in a normal game offers up ideas to help find eliminators.

And I don't think he's trying to disguise his alignment with the factionless comment, by the way. It's in everyone's best interests right now to seem factionless, whether they are or aren't. Think about it: all of the factions are problematic to either other factions and/or the factionless. The factionless, though, aren't much of a threat because they have no one to really work with (that they won't have to turn on eventually to get their win con) and no practical way to achieve their win con, outside what they were lucky enough to start with. If someone indicates they're not factionless, that's a slip and they probably aren't.

Probably someone just should create rule which kills all bunnies and returns items on their places as it was on start of N2.

[Elenion he/him]

@WorldSmiths Take pity on the game balance, please? Just because you can hammer in Rule 2 doesn't mean that you should.

[little wilson she/her]

22 minutes ago, Arinian said:

Probably someone just should create rule which kills all bunnies and returns items on their places as it was on start of N2.

Doing that would just create a nightmare-ish back and forth between everyone else and the WorldSmiths every turn.

[Sparkrunner he/him]

23 minutes ago, Arinian said:

Probably someone just should create rule which kills all bunnies and returns items on their places as it was on start of N2.

BOOO Don't like bunnies eh? Could you be... A worldsmith?

[Arinian]

1 minute ago, Roadwalker said:

BOOO Don't like bunnies eh? Could you be... A worldsmith?

No, I just don't like stupid rules.

[Sparkrunner he/him]

Like roleclaiming?

[little wilson she/her]

Just now, Roadwalker said:

Like roleclaiming?

To be fair, he suggested changing that rule. Sheep said it was a more interesting rule than he was giving it credit for.

[Arinian]

4 minutes ago, little wilson said:

To be fair, he suggested changing that rule. Sheep said it was a more interesting rule than he was giving it credit for.

Nuh... roleclaiming rule was nice, but there was too many loopholes(which abused right now) and I hoped that GM will remake my rule little bit to close this loopholes.

Edited September 8, 2017 by Arinian