Rexozord

Staff
  • Content count

    755
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Rexozord last won the day on October 13 2016

Rexozord had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Rexozord

  • Rank
    Precision Blade
  • Birthday 03/21/1990

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    Rexozord

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Donator
    Sparkbomb Supporter

Recent Profile Visitors

2,743 profile views
  1. I can understand how other people could have misunderstood that. You, however, had an alignment dream and your heir power specifically said you heired the first "innocent" to die. Not sure how you could possibly conclude the game was not an innocent vs baddie format based on that. I do admit that the rules wording could be interpreted to indicate equal team numbers. That being said, with sufficient behind-the-scenes communication (or hell, in thread too, although I seem to be the only person who likes to do that), it should have been not hard to determine that there were way more Overworld people than anything else, which would point to a innocent vs baddie format. Blacjak and I had thought of an interesting mechanic to allow the game to persist if all baddies were eliminated from the tournament, but we never fully fleshed it out because... well... it never really looked like it might actually happen.
  2. My apologies for the delay. Shattered Rift killed Sinical in the ring (Sinical died). This renders the outcome of the second fight irrelevant: if Cel wins, the baddie team of Shattered Rift and Cel wins. If Cel loses, Cel has activated a power that will allow her to convert Rox. Either way, the baddies win.
  3. Whoops. That part of the tie clause is from an outdated ruleset. I must have missed it in my edit pass. Sorry. The tie-rule we applied was comparing only Power Level. Sinical and Red may or may not have had the same Fighting Spirit when they fought.
  4. The vote for the second fighter would be a tie (0 votes for all combatants minus the one with votes), and one combatant would be randomly selected from that pool. The Tournament must go on, after all.
  5. Sorry about the delay guys. We're in the process of re-designing a couple things to make the game work with the current number of players. We should have the game thread up tonight.
  6. My initial analysis was the same, Weee, but then I realized that any Mason roleclaim would have to be initiated by the traitor specifically. If the Wolf and Traitor claimed Mason, and the Masons trueclaimed, we could simply execute the two players who claimed last out of the four (one from each pair) and the game would end. Realistically, I think if you drop all the claims into a minimax analysis, you're going to get both villagers and the wolf and the traitor all claiming villager, with the Wolf attacking the remaining three and hoping not to hit the wolfsbane (not claiming or claiming Masons will result in the innocents winning at least 9/10 if the innocents play correctly).
  7. I didn't elaborate (it wasn't terribly relevant and no one asked at the time), but the thing that made me suspicious is not that you objected to my plan (you do that pretty regularly, and I think we approach Werewolf in different ways most of the time) but because the way you objected (the way you said what you said) made it feel like you had an idea of a different or better way to organize the hunt for baddies, but then you didn't suggest anything else. It also could have been a misread that got lucky. No way to tell for certain.
  8. Killing the wolf was the only way the innocents could have ended with victory, so yes. Not sure who the traitor was, though. It could have been NPM and if I had to choose one person I'd guess her, but I don't think that's more likely than any of the other living players combined.
  9. And more inactivity. Lovely. Welp, nothing for it but to Vote: Cel
  10. The issue with claiming is that NPM can no longer claim (that makes everything a lot murkier). If you have a villager role and have not claimed, you should claim immediately because two people have claimed villager roles.
  11. No Werewolf kill. This means that the Werewolf did not submit a list. I think it's incredibly likely that the Werewolf is Cel, Exile, or Lion (in that order of suspicion). I think Cel is by far the most likely since she checked in quite early and hasn't posted since. EDIT: After checking, Cel was not online for all of Wednesday (not online since shortly after her post timestamp). Also, to respond to NPM (on the assumption that she was not the traitor, which I suspect that she was) I do not assume that people who don't claim are innocent power roles. I assume that the people who do claim (villager) are not innocent power roles (i.e. the inverse). Unfortunately, my entire strategy relies on 1) the innocent villagers agreeing to true claim and 2) the innocent power roles agreeing to not false claim. And we know that 1) wasn't met, so the entire thing does not work.
  12. What do you think will likely happen, then? There's a pretty small number of variables involved. Randomly voting is a terrible idea. If we miss the first execution, we must execute the wolf or traitor Day 2 or we lose. You seem to misunderstand the concept. We will only vote for players who claim villager (including me) if four players claim villager. We will not vote for the unclaimed power roles because they will be, by necessity, innocent power roles. That being said, since blacjak has already claimed wolfsbane (assuming no counterclaim occurs), the masons might as well claim now, and we can narrow down the wolf and traitor to 2/3 people (or 2/4 if you want to assume that my head is still on the chopping block). No, we will only get 2 chances to execute unless we successfully execute the traitor, in which case we will get 3. If counterclaims occur, that is good because it narrows our focus. Why would you not want execution Day 1 unless you are a baddie? We lose an execution if no execution occurs on Day 1. (7->6 from wolf kill, 6->4 from kill and execution and wolf+traitor prevent innocent majority.) Currently, I am not suspicious at all of blacjak (unless he gets counter-claimed, but I doubt he will), I am leaning toward innocent on Lion, not certain on Cel and Exile, and leaning toward baddie on NPM and Zilary. I'm going to rest my vote on NPM at the moment, but I'll be monitoring things closely in case that needs to change. Vote: NPM
  13. Normally I'd agree, NPM, but I don't think the Masons are particularly useful other than they start out with better default information (two known innocent instead of one) and the Wolfsbane is only useful if actually killed by the Wolf. It would be insanely counterproductive for an innocent role to false claim in this game (especially because it would cast doubt on any counter claim they might choose to make later). If we get four villager claims and the wolf does choose to kill out of the three non-claiming roles, they may eat the wolfsbane (which gives us an extra execution if we execute the Traitor). If the wolf and traitor choose not to claim, and the innocent power roles agree to claim, then it's all over. If the innocents decide to act as a unit and have only villagers claim, the wolf and traitor must claim or they lose instantly. We're only going to have two executions unless we hit the traitor. There's no point in twiddling our thumbs. We're already in the end-game.
  14. Question: if the Werewolf is killed, does the Traitor inherit and the game continue, or is the game over at that point? Based on parity, we will effectively lose an execution if we choose not to execute Day 1 (with 7 we will lose after two bad executions, with 6 we will lose after one). There are also no investigative roles, so there is no reason not to execute Day 1. Also, I think we should do a staggered on thread force-claim. First, all villagers should claim (presumably, both Traitor and Wolf would claim). If we get four claims here, we execute purely out of the pool of "villagers". I've got some potential ideas for what we could do if we don't get 4 villager claims, but I will share them if a sufficient number of people think that the idea is good. To go ahead and show that I'm serious and kick things off, I'm going to go ahead and claim that I am a villager.
  15. I would love to try this idea out, but 6 people is definitely too low. I'm fine with swapping to a more generic game if that's what we need to do to get participants.