Author Topic: Super Touhou RPG ~ Abandoned due to mod (Pesco's) screwups (Read 58170 times)

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #330 on:** October 20, 2009, 01:16:05 AM »

Ramus, I was referring to UK and Edible. >_>

Ramus · « **Reply #331 on:** October 20, 2009, 11:05:33 AM »

Okay...

Anyway, since a few things have been cleared up, Roukanken, why do you think Edible and UK are working together past the fact that they both might be scum?

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #332 on:** October 20, 2009, 12:08:55 PM »

Quote from: Ramus on October 20, 2009, 11:05:33 AM

Anyway, since a few things have been cleared up, Roukanken, why do you think Edible and UK are working together past the fact that they both might be scum?

Uh...that's EXACTLY why I think they're working together. This whole spellcard drama might be an elaborate act to separate them from one another, and it's interesting that as soon as I pointed out that Edible's card looked rather scummy UK came to his defense.

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #333 on:** October 20, 2009, 01:39:28 PM »

Quote from: Roukanken on October 20, 2009, 12:08:55 PM

Uh...that's EXACTLY why I think they're working together. This whole spellcard drama might be an elaborate act to separate them from one another, and it's interesting that as soon as I pointed out that Edible's card looked rather scummy UK came to his defense.

This is ridiculous! I "came to his defense" because your argument was nothing better than a pile of horseshit. I'm surprised you didn't get called out on it more.

Serp · « **Reply #334 on:** October 20, 2009, 05:51:46 PM »

Rou, are you going to break UncertainKitten's spellcard or not?

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #335 on:** October 20, 2009, 05:56:36 PM »

UK: The reason I don't like that statement is that you seem so certain that this isn't possible, in the same way you insisted that there wasn't any sort of Mafia kill. Sounds like additional knowledge to me.

So yeah, to hell with it. You survived on your copclaim, and now that has proven to be false. Indeed, on top of your screaming as soon as you were attacked, believing you're really a character with a crummy card like that who also only has 1 attack/heal with only 8 HP is, in all, rather hard to believe.

##Tank Tackle: UncertainKitten

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #336 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:14:08 PM »

Quote from: Roukanken on October 20, 2009, 05:56:36 PM

UK: The reason I don't like that statement is that you seem so certain that this isn't possible, in the same way you insisted that there wasn't any sort of Mafia kill. Sounds like additional knowledge to me.

So yeah, to hell with it. You survived on your copclaim, and now that has proven to be false. Indeed, on top of your screaming as soon as you were attacked, believing you're really a character with a crummy card like that who also only has 1 attack/heal with only 8 HP is, in all, rather hard to believe.

##Tank Tackle: UncertainKitten

What I'm certain of is that his spellcard does NOT implicate him. I am not certain of his alignment. I only know my own. I don't see how you got anything besides this out of my statements regarding Edible. As for insisting there's no mafia kill, well, have you seen one yet? Further, does that make sense in a hurt heal set up? I've actually played one, you haven't.

At any rate, trying to game the set up is probably the worst reason to kill me. But, I grant there are a plethora of other reasons so I won't get all up in arms about it.

Just about the only thing that irritates me is that pretty much all your justifications for finishing me off today have been craplogic, when there already is a quite decent case on me.

This, in fact, worries me a little bit.

Seian Verian · « **Reply #337 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:18:31 PM »

...I wake up and look at this topic to find... This. Rou is being a total idiot, giving arguments that make NO SENSE WHATSOEVER and complaining about being called out on it (which I sort of did too) and Serp keeps trying to get Rou to tackle UK to break her spell card... When I'm pretty sure it's already broken and it's going to finish her off!

*cut*

...Are you serious? I mean... You're actually considering her abilities and health to be scummy? And you're still considering the same with Edible? ...I honestly have no idea what to say. Are you really that... I mean... ARGH!

Whatever... At least we'll get info when UK flips...

*cut again*

...I keep being cut <_<;

The things Roukanken can not cut ar*tanked*

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #338 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:26:43 PM »

Pre-emptively calling out Drake for a MASSIVE chainsaw.

Also, UK, your accusation doesn't make any sense. If I were scum trying to get you lynched, wouldn't I stick with the reasons that people had already accepted rather than try to go for more?
And if you end up flipping Town I'll be angrier at Umu than anything. I mean come on, this setup has me in a tank hitting three times harder than other people with added damage resistance, and I'm meant to believe you have nothing to make up for it?

If she hasn't been finished off yet, does anyone feel like tackling UK for that last bit of HP or whatever she has left?

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #339 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:28:07 PM »

Quote

Also, UK, your accusation doesn't make any sense. If I were scum trying to get you lynched, wouldn't I stick with the reasons that people had already accepted rather than try to go for more?

WIFOM. Perhaps you are feeling like it's not quite good enough. Not that you'd admit it. If you were scum, you'd know I was town and you'd feel more compelled to bring up more and more "reasons" for me to die.

Quote

And if you end up flipping Town I'll be angrier at u? than anything. I mean come on, this setup has me in a tank hitting three times harder than other people with added damage resistance, and I'm meant to believe you have nothing to make up for it?

Better get your RAEG ready.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #340 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:33:52 PM »

Quote from: UncertainKitten on October 20, 2009, 06:28:07 PM

WIFOM. Perhaps you are feeling like it's not quite good enough. Not that you'd admit it. If you were scum, you'd know I was town and you'd feel more compelled to bring up more and more "reasons" for me to die.

Despite the fact that more or less everyone is chiming in? Making a further effort to incriminate you would only draw unnecessary attention, IMO.

Then again, apparently I can't defend myself because everything boils down to WIFOM. >_>

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #341 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:37:18 PM »

Quote from: Roukanken on October 20, 2009, 06:33:52 PM

Despite the fact that more or less everyone is chiming in? Making a further effort to incriminate you would only draw unnecessary attention, IMO.

Then again, apparently I can't defend myself because everything boils down to WIFOM. >_>

You can. That defense is just a horrible one.

I'm not saying you are doing it on purpose. I'm saying you are in the process of fucking up if you are scum.

* UncertainKitten sighs

I guess I'll try to do that reread now. WoT incoming.

Seian Verian · « **Reply #342 on:** October 20, 2009, 06:41:52 PM »

He's not "in the process of messing up" and not only if he's scum. Half the things he says qualify as "messing up" IMO <_< Just because, you know, complete lack of any kind of sense in his arguments and whatever...

...Yes, I'm getting annoyed. Yes, I probably should stop looking at this topic for a while. It's just, even just facepalming at Rou is better than being bored for me <_<;

Serp · « **Reply #343 on:** October 20, 2009, 07:20:16 PM »

Quote from: ShiningDrake on October 20, 2009, 06:18:31 PM

Serp keeps trying to get Rou to tackle UK to break her spell card... When I'm pretty sure it's already broken and it's going to finish her off!

Prior to Rou's attack, UncertainKitten had been tackled once and healed once. She claimed to have two HP left at the start of the day, and her spell card's durability was claimed to be three. She should still have two HP left. And as to finishing her off, if we don't do it today, we're probably going to do it tomorrow, right? That seems to be the consensus, and I agree with it, so we might as well get it out of the way, before scum gets another chance to screw with us.

Ramus · « **Reply #344 on:** October 20, 2009, 08:00:05 PM »

I refuse to finish UK off until she gets done rereading and posting whatever she needs to.

Meantime, Roukanken, you... I'm positive you're town. But, hah... ready for some advice? Your biggest problem is your use of fallacies. Here's a list of ones that I can suggest thinking about:

False Dilemma: I rarely ever see you pick out more than two possible outcomes. To work this one out, I strongly recommend to force yourself to see at least four possible outcomes.

Begging the Question: You start with your conclusion and work in a circle to get there. Pick a person you think is scummy and work up a structure of arguments to make that person scummy. It can't just be they're acting scummy. You need why that action is scummy. Trust me, this one is hard to get, it took me forever to grasp it. Your argument should never be based on the target definitely being townie or scummy, otherwise you get narrow minded hunts.

Ad Hominem: Actually, you're pretty clean compared to others here, but still, you've got some.

Actually, everyone should take a good look here: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouFailLogicForever

GREAT source for logic and reasoning. Also, take discrete math while you're at it, fun class, great information.

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #345 on:** October 20, 2009, 08:24:38 PM »

I'm still irritated by Rou's shift of opinion between post 49 and 52. But that's been beaten to death.

Nietz 57 bothers me a bit. But again, we've beaten this to death

ShiningDrake 58 bothers me a bit and hasn't been touched much. It's not really commenting on anything :S

Nietz 68 asks the same question I was thinking when Rou said he didn't want to tank, etc.

Affinity 69 also bothers me. I don't think the reasoning was all that sound. Especially since he seems to play both sides at the end.

Oh by the way, obviously D1 my attack on umu counted, hence why Rou wasn't hurt. Wasn't sure if that got established

Rou's self righteous attitude in 79 also feels...off.

By 80 I'm getting the impression Edible has spoken more about the set up than anything else.

Drake 90 feels sincere

Rou's projection in 91 is inaccurate and feels bad

I feel Zak 99 is forced.

Zak 104 feels a LOT like minimizing what Rou did...it's subtle

Affinity 110 I don't think I responded to. I think that the consequences of actions ARE rather important to consider, and also there is a difference between what was said and what actually happened.

Rereading Serpy 112 I honestly...see his point :S

Zak 114 is better than his last post on the subject. I'm not sure I agree with his views on Ramus, but he explains his views on me being attacked FAR better. Rather, more decently.

Ramus 117 feels like a decent counter to serp, and the attack on Affinity feels justified. Too bad you already acted

Serpy 118...is also reasonable.

I love how I ended up proving Nietz 128's point :S

Edible 131 is fair, but I think the assertation about healing is a bit of a stretch

Drake and Ramus' lockstep...bothers me slightly. Notice that Drake has followed Ramus in a lot of actions...

I'd like a clarification on Rou 139. Are you proposing Edible and Serp are both scum?

Rou 145 is interesting. I'm not sure I like his initial assertation that I had a sizable case on Serp that he subsequently takes back

I would have preferred examples of misrep in Zak 153. Rather than just asserting it

Rou 157 feels bad. Mostly for the trivialization of basically the entire game

Affinity 158 is bad. He acts like my declaration was just as bad as actually doing it. I don't like this. His attack on Ramus was slightly elaborated on but...not sure if it feels good. However, he does have a fair point that letting Serp defend himself is best, so I retract my complaint about Zak 153

Nietz 160 starts off bad with trying to assert the unprovable. It feels like trying to take a free shot. Also, wanting to lynch someone for anti-townness as opposed to scumminess also feels bad.

Serpy 164 bothers me. I think it's mostly because I meant one thing and presented it as something else. Namely the damage thing. I didn't mean to agree he had taken too much damage, just that he should return and elaborate before there are more tackles.

Affinity 165 feels like baiting. Especially since, yanno, Ramus CAN'T do more than one action. Oh, and the fact that he got chewed out for healing me. Why would he heal someone else when most of the group disagrees with healing?

Rou 166 feels like opportunism at it's finest. The only problem though is that amongst the rather intentional attacks on me...he does have fair points. But...it still rubs me the wrong way.

Affinity 168 feels like a poke on Rou without doing anything about instead handwaving it. The admission on Nietz feels rather...regretful as well. I don't know what to make of this

AFfinity 169: Who's yoshi again?

Rou 174 involves misrep on me as well as getting rather involved in catfighting me. way to tunnel Rou.

Zak 176 makes me want to ask for what that misrep is. He then misreps my points.

Nietz 188 is a subtle change in opinion, but well explained.

Zak 193: Weren't those points directed at Rou? Why are you answering for him when you wouldn't answer for Serp?

Rou 218 feels bad. At this point I think he's attacking me because I irritated him as opposed to any real townie motivation

Rou 228 was already covered. It still irritates me.

Affinity 256: I want to know why fluidity of opinions is bad?

Drake 259: Hmm...this actually seems somewhat decent and not follow the leader. I'm not sure if I agree with the case per se.

Serpy 262 feels off, but I'm not sure why

Drake 287 unsettles me, especially given it's right after RAmus

Edible 291: What made you think I was multishot?

Rou 301 is the bad Edilogic

Further, I fail to see how my 302 is defending him more than pointing out your logic fail

Rou 303 is...an interesting theory but I heavily doubt it. I missed it earlier

Affinity 316 feels rather bad. He's disregarding general town consensus

Rou 325: It has? Seems to me you're the only person who does that.

Drake 342: I mean making scum slips

Serpy 343: I don't think I have a spellcard shield after using the card. But whatever

Anyway, Ramus, I'm drawing the exact opposite conclusion on Rou.

I have a feeling he's actually scum utilizing his meta. I've basically gone through what I had trouble with. A fuckton of inconsistency, the whole thing earlier I mentioned about how he seems to be trying to pile on more to justify his attacks, and further his tunneling and desperate desire to justify his initial attack on me. It feels like there's a lot of insincerity.

If there are two scum...I'm actually leaning towards Zak scum. I don't have much he's directly done except that inconsistency where he'll answer for Rou and not serp, and other things I mentioned in the wall.

Actually, I'm also willing to put Affinity forth as possible scum either with Zak/Rou or just with Rou. Namely, it feels like he hasn't had decent reasoning for attacking Ramus, and also appears to poke Rou without doing anything about him several times.

If I were to attack a suspect, I'd attack Rou. Since I'm going to die anyway, I might as well act on this

Tackle: Roukanken

Ramus · « **Reply #346 on:** October 20, 2009, 08:33:07 PM »

D:

So much... umm, so yeah, I'm going to be doing some reading. Regardless, that's a contribution, and I'm kicking off kitten until I get done with that list and all of the posts it points to. That probably won't be in this Mafia day, so for lack of anything better to do, I've been sitting at 2 HP less than full, so...

##Lick own wounds

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #347 on:** October 20, 2009, 08:34:25 PM »

Quote from: Ramus on October 20, 2009, 08:33:07 PM

D:

So much... umm, so yeah, I'm going to be doing some reading. Regardless, that's a contribution, and I'm kicking off kitten until I get done with that list and all of the posts it points to. That probably won't be in this Mafia day, so for lack of anything better to do, I've been sitting at 2 HP less than full, so...

##Lick own wounds

Sorry, the WoT is my secret, supa ineffective weapon. It doesn't do much but it at least lets you see what I'm thinking in stream of consciousness format.

I should probably compile data on how often I've caught scum this way. To see if it's actually decent enough to be better than random.

Ramus · « **Reply #348 on:** October 20, 2009, 08:51:36 PM »

Roukanken 49&52: Don't bother me much, again, that's Rou meta for me.

Nietz 57: Same reason as above.

Drake 58: I fail to see how this is an indicator.

Nietz 68: So what?

Affinity 69: SEX and yes, that's pretty much what I've thought about with Affinity. Would also be the there is only middle ground fallacy here.

D1: Yeah, I figured that out. Doesn't stop it from being dumb.

Rou 79: Strikes me as pissed off more than anything, which really gives no clarification.

Ed 80: Hmm... one question before I go off to dinner.

Edible: What else does your card do besides give you +1 defense?

UncertainJakutten · « **Reply #349 on:** October 20, 2009, 08:55:51 PM »

Quote

Nietz 68: So what?

Reflects well on him.

Quote

Drake 58: I fail to see how this is an indicator.

Mostly follow the leader makes it easier to blend in. He could potentially be scum.

Quote

Rou 79: Strikes me as pissed off more than anything, which really gives no clarification.

I feel he usually tries harder to not get trapped like that, especially after being bitten by it in a previous game.

Edible · « **Reply #350 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:14:10 PM »

Quote from: Ramus on October 20, 2009, 08:51:36 PM

Edible: What else does your card do besides give you +1 defense?

That's all. No fancy effects like UK.

We're almost out of time today, I think. UK's flip should point us in a good direction once we know her alignment.

Is there anyone else here to poke her?

Ramus · « **Reply #351 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:15:49 PM »

Quote

Mostly follow the leader makes it easier to blend in. He could potentially be scum.

Ah, good point. I'll be sure to keep that in mind.

Drake 90: I assume that means truthful, in which sure, if he did that based on emotion. Else, he may be acting and using pathos (AKA AtE or the pathetic fallacy) to clear himself. I'll assume the former for now.

Rou's 91: Again, metaing, Roukanken is frustrated by past games and is angry with already being under fire in this one. Still going to call it non-indicator.

Zak 99: Vague words, what do you mean by forced?

Zak 104: Not that subtle. He does essentially join Roukanken and helps to end the slap fight. However, until you tell me what you mean by forced in the previous post, I can't comment much here.

Affinity 110: I tend to go by AtE of a person being important in general. It's one of the three basic methods of argument, and one of those isn't even really usable in Mafia (attack by using social standard and correctness.)

Serpy 112: I'm still trying to figure out if I'm for or against low HP at this point.

Respond to those please.

EDIT: So is that a permanent one defense throughout the game or not?

Nietz · « **Reply #352 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:17:15 PM »

Quote from: UncertainKitten on October 20, 2009, 08:24:38 PM

I have a feeling he's actually scum utilizing his meta. I've basically gone through what I had trouble with. A fuckton of inconsistency, the whole thing earlier I mentioned about how he seems to be trying to pile on more to justify his attacks, and further his tunneling and desperate desire to justify his initial attack on me. It feels like there's a lot of insincerity.

Ironically, you vehemently denied when I accused you of using your meta.
And also ironically, I had the same idea on Rou. Invasion Mafia clearly showed that he's very well capable of using craplogic as a townie, so he could be using it now under a meta disguise. The thing is, I don't think is likely for him to actually try pull it off on purpose (yes, I do think you'd be more likely to do it than him), so I can't really base any concrete suspicion on him yet. Not before your flip, in any case.

And yes, while I though Ramus' idea of keeping UK alive was worthwhile, at this point I don't think it's really going to work. Seems we really need to get UK out of the way or the game won't progress, most of the cases around are linked to her flip.

Edible · « **Reply #353 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:18:24 PM »

Oh, right.

Quote

Edible 291: What made you think I was multishot?

Your spellcard ability allowed you to target a user to deal damage, right? I'm pretty sure the rules mentioned somewhere that you could use that ability as long as your spellcard persisted, or something, as it replaced your normal attacks. Thus I was under the impression that you could target more than one person over the life of your spellcard, assuming you were actually a cop.

@Ramus: Nope, just until my spellcard expires in two days. Or it breaks, I guess.

Edible · « **Reply #354 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:18:47 PM »

Nietz, did you use an action today?

Edible · « **Reply #355 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:20:34 PM »

EBWOP: I guess you did. -_-;

Well, UK, you may live by virtue of no one else being around to kill you.

FinnKaenbyou · « **Reply #356 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:23:48 PM »

Oh for the love of Kanako.

PROTIP: WE CAN'T WIN THIS GAME WITHOUT KILLING ANYONE. T_T

Ramus · « **Reply #357 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:26:20 PM »

Zak 114: His argument is better for attacking since he gives sufficient words for it. Despite this, the attack against me is one paragraph long, and even then, three lines long. Every time someone has attacked it me, it was with little justification and that drives me up a wall.

Ramus 117: I'm going to have to take back that argument against Serp until I see what more spell cards can do. And again, I still feel Affinity is going under the radar, lurking, and generally not giving enough reason behind his actions.

Serpy 118: Again, all reasonable. I've retracted my statement on the spellcards.

Nietz 128: Ah... no comment.

Oh hey, Edible, I'm calling bullshit on that. I demand to know what else your spellcard does. Now.

EDIT2: We can tie though. <3

Affinity · « **Reply #358 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:27:29 PM »

@Ramus:

If you want to complain about my case, reply to my latest post instead of nodding your head blindly and cheerleading, please. I don't see the fallacies you extol. The fact that you are also clinging on to the disadvantages to 69 is also rather funny, really. Other than that you, don't seem to be doing all that much in pointing out fallacies without following up on them.

Furthermore he does not follow up on his list of suspicions here here at all.

And Ramus, why are you defending against UK about other people, when they could best be answered by those people in question themselves.

---

@UK:

Quote

Affinity 69 also bothers me. I don't think the reasoning was all that sound. Especially since he seems to play both sides at the end.

Elaborate on the second part.

Quote

Affinity 158 is bad. He acts like my declaration was just as bad as actually doing it.

Since I'm not a very utilitarian person, I disagree with you on this. You would also be calling most of town 'bad' in a way because this is what most of the town think; and primarily why you are liable to be lynched soon. Intent is just as, if not, more important than the consequences of your actions because some factors that bring those intentions to realization are rather left to chance (especially in this game), but your intentions are clear and solid the moment you utter them. As for going back on Nietz, isn't that calling me out on the fluidity of opinions?

Quote

Affinity 165 feels like baiting. Especially since, yanno, Ramus CAN'T do more than one action

What? He healed you because Rou though you had bad reasons for attacking him and yet feels that you are town. He did not heal Edible, without even elaborating why even though these two situations are similar, even going so far to say things which are irrelevant to the topic at hand, about 'the playstyle changing' and stuff when the main focus was Roukanken's actions.

Quote

Affinity 256: I want to know why fluidity of opinions is bad?

Idea goes that changing your opinions when there has been a minimal change in that guy's actions screams insecurity. Scum, who have to go to lengths to fake an opinion, is thus

Quote

Affinity 316 feels rather bad. He's disregarding general town consensus

Worst point ever. So... by not doing what town is doing... I'm scummy? What? This is my view about you, that flips are needed and are beneficial for town, which was justified. And you don't, for example, call Zakeri out for agreeing with me... it seems that you are skimming without analysis. Might as well say that I was scum for attacking Ramus from the very beginning.

Quote

point about Rou being handwaved

It's his choice not to reply despite two or more instances, and labeling those two or more instances as 'handwaves' is a rather dubious action.

---

Not convinced by the wall. And nope, I'm all out of actions.

Edible · « **Reply #359 on:** October 20, 2009, 09:31:35 PM »

Quote from: Ramus on October 20, 2009, 09:26:20 PM

Oh hey, Edible, I'm calling bullshit on that. I demand to know what else your spellcard does. Now.

Well, technically I can use my other actions - the standard 1 damage/heal thing. My card didn't specify that I lost them during the card's active phase, so. Why are you so upset about this?