Jump to content

little wilson

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2831

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 Content Type 

Everything posted by little wilson

  1. little wilson
    If I had any close male friends in the area, I would. Instead, I'm bringing my sister along and she'll be my moral support to make sure I don't buy anything today (I want time to think and to talk to my dad before I buy, and I've got work off on Monday, so I can buy them, if I choose to). I would've liked it if my dad had been able to come down, but he's in a different state and he's busy this weekend, so that wasn't going to happen.
  2. little wilson
    Actually, it's not even close. They pronounce it Lan-cas-te (or some regions with a very very soft r at the end that is not emphasized at all). Lan as in land without the d, and cas like cast without the t. Rather far from Lane-kiss-ter.
  3. little wilson
    I'm going car shopping today. Last time I went car shopping, the car salesman (who was my coworker's husband) totally took advantage of young, naive me. I'm worried this is going to happen again. I kind of need a car (I've put over $2000 into mine this year alone and it's not even worth $2000, and now it has radiator problems and I refuse to fix it this time). I know exactly what I want, which helps, but I also have no desire to be swindled, and I fear that, me being female, that's exactly what they'll try to do. Wish me luck?
  4. little wilson
    September is swiftly approaching. When do we want to meet this month?
  5. little wilson
    Minor change to the Agents: they have a doc to talk in. This will be easier, I feel, than PMs. Plus, I'm sure a few people would like to see what chaotic things they discuss post- game (better make it good ).
  6. little wilson
    That's what the poll for this game is for. Split turns or a single turn.
  7. little wilson
    2 turns, 48 hours each, so 96 hour cycles. Yes. Drake, however, is talking about a single turn, 72-hour cycle.
  8. little wilson
    If you don't like day/night cycles, QF and MR are the way to go. With the LGs, it's like what Stick said - the thread eventually dies. You see that happen in just standard 48 hour cycles, especially later in the game. Now imagine those dead cycles being 72 hours instead of 48. We've had one LG that had combined cycles. LG 30. It worked because Aman built that game around RP incentives, heavily encouraging people to be active posters, RPing all the time. He wrote up insanely long write-ups every cycle, leaving prompts at the end to engage the players and give them something to RP. And it worked. Those 70 hour cycles were generally pretty active the entire time. Unless the GM is doing basically the same thing with a game built specifically for that kind of player engagement, 72 hour cycles will cause player inactivity. I would bet $100 on that. Few people would talk after the first 24 hours of every cycle after cycle 3.
  9. little wilson
    The gas company shut off the gas in my apartment yesterday and we can't get it turned back on until tomorrow sometime. I'm nearly certain this was caused by a roommate who moved out two weeks ago in revenge. I am not amused.
  10. little wilson
    The Agents of Chaos win con is to create enough chaos as deemed appropriate by the GMs. They will find out who else is in the faction at the start of the game. It will be in their PM from the GM. For abilities....Maybe, to fit with the chaos theme, the faction gives access to one of each ability in the game, but each can only be used once, by any one person on the team (meaning that any of the three could use an ability, but once they do, no one else on the team can use that ability). Oh, is there an action limit per person, per turn/cycle? I don't think there's a rule on that yet, but it would probably be good to make one.
  11. little wilson
    The rule is effective immediately, yes.
  12. little wilson
    Double post because I'm changing my rule and I don't want any chance of the GMs missing it. There is a faction called the Agents of Chaos. This faction has a maximum of 3 people on it, and are the first people to PM the GM requesting to be in this faction. Agents in this faction know who the other Agents are and they all must devote themselves to chaos. All Agents in this faction are also in other factions, but their primary affiliation is to chaos.
  13. little wilson
    Win cons. Right now, the rules state the GMs create the win cons, but I'm fairly certain that won't actually happen, considering the OP and Sheep specifically stating that if we don't do something, we'll just sit around until it's done. I'm not sure we can count on Sheep/Stink to create anything. Veto, yes. Balance, sure. Create? Not so much.... Additionally, while some rules have referenced multiple factions, there's no specific number on how many factions we're talking about here. Stink vetoed the one that specified ten. So....how many do we want? Do we want to play a pure faction game, or a mostly standard elimination game with a couple non-village/non-eliminator roles (possibly neutral or neutral evil)? I think I'm leaning slightly toward the former, but...yeah. We also have Orlok's rule so if we miss something in the creation stage, we'll be able to come back and add it later, by consensus. Welcome back, my son.
  14. little wilson
    This is one of the main reasons I'm seriously considering changing it. I could add that there are 5 passive rules that are in effect at all times, and the other rules change, but I don't really like that. Plus, building a game specifically around shifting rules will have a significantly better end-product than a rules free-for-all where few people are interested in actually building a coherent game.
  15. little wilson
    We could discuss potential rules/roles. This signup thread is basically a massive game-building session so we could easily work together to do that if we wanted. For example, HH had an idea for an alternate dimension that reversed everything. While his idea got vetoed (I'm pretty sure), I can think of one really interesting tweak to his idea: Every cycle, there's a 10% chance all rules and roles are reversed. Interesting is now Boring. Boring is Interesting. The Gunsmith steals guns. Survival win cons are now trying to die. Kill roles protect. Rioters soothe. Etc. ^That has serious possibilities and could be wicked awesome to play. Additionally, it might help if we all understood why this game exists. It's not for insanity. A long while ago, @Haelbarde made a suggestion for break-tank games, which was an idea to play-test games for 3-4 cycles, to check mechanics and see how the mechanics interact/if they break a game without actually compromising a full game. Nothing really every came of this (In theory, it's a great idea, but I really don't think it would work the way we hope it would in practice). Stink said this at one point: And now we have this game, which has no rules. This game is basically Sheep and Stink's version of a massive break-tank LG, play-testing potentially broken ideas, to see what can be done to fix them, if anything. If you're wondering about different ideas/rules/roles, there's a whole slew of them in Game Creation (really hard to find as well, unfortunately). Here are just a few that I found in my cursory scan of that thread: To finish, I will probably end up changing my Flex rule. While I like it and am interested to see how it works, I'm pretty sure I can build a whole game around it, with rules specifically made to fluctuate. I'm not sure how it will work in this game. And I know Hael (or others) had some break-tank game ideas I'd be willing to use for my rule. I do think it would be worthwhile to discuss the rules/roles/mechanics of the game we want to play.
  16. little wilson
    I've just asked Stink about PMs and PMs will not be a thing unless there's a rule, so if anyone wants to communicate privately, we'll need to get a rule in place for that.
  17. little wilson
    Willow signing up. Just want to point out that technically LGs are two turns. While it's possible to deviate from the two turn structure, it should really only be done for very good reasons (like LG17, which required an additional turn for each cycle). Additionally, I'm certain we've had a couple games in the past that lengthened a turn or two to 72 hours and virtually nothing happened in the back half of the turn, so it dragged for everyone and a bunch of people went inactive. And that was just a cycle or two, rather than the whole game. I fear that would happen here, for the entire game, if were running on single 72-hour turns. My rule: Like the game Flex, every turn, the rules change, taking from the pool of rules created by the players. The number of rules in play each turn is determined by the GMs.
  18. little wilson
    Delightful is Jewish. Just saying.
  19. little wilson
    It's been almost a month since anyone posted in here, so I think it's safe to close it up now. Thank you to everyone who played. I thought this was a really fun game, despite it being a little broken for the neutrals. I also think many of us learned a few lessons about neutrals - not only in game play but also in game building - and that's always a plus. A very big thank you to Hael for running this. I know you'd expected it to break at some point, but other than the neutrals stuff (which wasn't too bad), I think it actually went really well in that regard. So that's good! It was a great idea and made for a great game, though a little low on the parodies (sorry about that....). Congratulations to the eliminator team on their win! You all did excellent in bringing the barricade down. Long live the king. - As always, if anyone would like to try their hand at running a game, just get a hold of Orlok, Seonid, Alvron, or myself. Not only will we get you added to the list (and the GM PM group), but we'll be more than willing to help out in any way we can. You can also post game ideas, ask questions, and get feedback from everyone over in our Art of Game Creation thread too. With all the games that we've run so far, we have plenty of experienced GMs that can help you refine any game you're working on. Thanks again to everyone who played, and we look forward to killing seeing you in future games!
  20. little wilson
    If there's enough interest in it, we could start meeting twice a month. We tried to do that last year, but it tanked then. But if we've got enough of a draw and people want to meet a little more often, I'm totally up for it.
  21. little wilson
    I could give @RippleGylf a ride, since I'll be coming from Provo. I believe I'm available either weekend, though there's a chance I'll be going up to Idaho on Labor Day weekend, so the 26th would be better.
  22. little wilson
    I could not agree with this enough. And the thing is, the reasons why I was killed in every game I played in those two years wouldn't have changed had it been fifteen or forty. My fifteen game death streak could've easily been 20 or 30. I just stopped playing as frequently as I might've liked because I knew I would die - and not that I play to survive, because I don't. My death streak amused me until I hit 10-11, and then it just got annoying, because in every game I played, I was attacked by cycle 4. Every. Single. One. And if I didn't die, I'd die by the end, because I'd keep getting attacked. My survival percentage was about 20% (for reference, at the time, the survival rate on average was closer to 33%, and every player people would put me on par with in terms of skill was around 30%). So yeah. A six game streak when you play almost every game that comes along is vastly different than a two year long streak. That's only a couple months. It'll pass.
  23. little wilson
    Really? Link. Relevant bit: I'm fairly sure that's a vote on someone specifically because they are experienced and you think someone experienced must be in the team. Not tactician. Experienced.
  24. little wilson
    We're just sitting at a table in the Cougareat with pizza and root beer.
  25. little wilson
    El already touched on this, but what I will add is that even though you were right in this game, the basis for the logic is not always correct. Not every game needs to have a very experienced and active person on their team. Is that often what happens? Yes, but it's not necessary. The reason it happens so frequently is because so many GMs think that that is necessary. But we've seen teams full of very experienced players lose (LG20 and LG33). We've seen teams full of newer, less-experienced players either win or cause a draw (AG2 (since Lopen, the most experienced player on the team, died C1) and MR22). So that idea that elim teams need a very experienced player is very wrong. And let me tell how frustrating it is to be considered a very experienced player and then people start using that "logic" on you. You're about to join the ranks of those players, Len. You're over 20 games now. We've had 220 players and you're in the top 30. That's pretty high up. Do you want people saying that about you? That you have to be evil, and then targeting you for that logic? Pushing your death for it? Do you want to die merely because of how many games you've played and not because of how you're playing a particular game?
×
×
  • Create New...