Howdy

[Frank]

OK, this should work for now.

[normalphase]

*waves*

Going to go grab a snack, then I'll start in on the plotting. BRB. More good faith: Along with you, I made proposals to peeker, skeez and Guiri. All results favorable. Peeker mentions specifically he had contacted you as well.

[Frank]

I think peeker mass copied everyone, or nearly everyone.

I have been in negotiation with (variously) luvbwfc (who is an Investigator - don't tell!), and Idle Thoughts/Zeriel, who have already clanned together and want me to join them.

Here is my proposal, though, which you should feel free to refuse:

I propose a strong alliance between the two of us. I watch a lot of the TV show Survivor (please don't lose respect for me), which involves a lot of alliance-making and switching. In the show's very first season, the guy who won was kind of a schemer, and jumped around a bit. BUT: he also formed two alliances in the first week: one very strong alliance of two, and one slightly weaker alliance of four (including the original two). His primary loyalty was always to that first alliance of two.

I propose that we become an alliance of two. I further propose that we find another two, and create an alliance of four. But I'm willing to offer that I will do everything I can to make sure that I win and you win, regardless of whatever other loyalties either of us establish.

----

I further propose that we do not form a clan, at least not at first. As far as I can tell, in the early game, there is no advantage to forming a clan. The clan name and size will be posted on the public board, allowing others to know that it exists. If there are roles with the ability to investigate clan affiliation, the connection between you and me could be revealed unnecessarily.

Thoughts?

[normalphase]

Yes yes yes yes and mostly yes. And grr to a misclick for eating my almost-finished previous post.

Regarding alliances. I had been thinking that anyone who hoped to win this game would need both long-term and short-term strategy; hence long-term and short-term alliances. What you suggest fits that idea rather well. So -- yes. I agree.

Now the caveat. The victory conditions. In order for this to work, we will need to know we have compatible ones. For the moment, I think we can't be sure. I'm not even going to try outguessing the GMs given how horribly bad I always am at that, but even taking the sample PM and the public interpretations thereof at face value, there is no way for either of us to know the other is not of the House of Chains, for instance. So ... I think full disclosure may be required, and let the chips fall where they may. I'd like to know what you think of this issue; I will say that I have some reason to believe that an incompatibility may not be immediately fatal for me. It's possible you might have more to risk. But I think the issue needs to be addressed, so that it can then be set aside.

About peeker: he did mention you specifically. I contacted him before he contacted me, and in response he mentioned you as someone he'd also like to work with. I happen to think peeker is rather brilliant in his cracked sort of way, and I think he could be a good ally.

I agree we would be better separate than apart for now, not least because that would get us access to more than twice as much information. The only immediate complication is peeker, who says he wants to work with us both.

[Frank]

OK, let's do this thing. I am open to full disclosure; in fact, I intend to tell you everything there is to know about my role whether or not you tell me everything there is to know about yours, becasue my role is quite complicated and an alliance between us will be useless if you don't know the details.

I don't require this of you, but rather, I request it: will you reveal first? I have reasons, which I will make clear very shortly.

[Frank]

May 20, 2010 10:52:12 GMT -5 normalphase said:

I agree we would be better separate than apart for now, not least because that would get us access to more than twice as much information. The only immediate complication is peeker, who says he wants to work with us both.

What's the complication? Let's invite peeker into this group - I also think he's brilliant. We form an initial group of three - though this group of two remains primary - but do not create a clan. Just an alliance. Then all three of us are free to engage with whomever outside of this group - even name another group as a Primary, to engender trust.

[normalphase]

Yes, I will.

I don't remember the role name or anything else tangential; will grab that in a minute. Here's the meat and potatoes of it:

VC: House of Chains eliminated/Master of Deck of Dragons eliminated/Primary Clan in control at end
Ability: Bus Driver. Includes limited ability to switch myself.

[normalphase]

Re Peeker -- you're right; I was thinking in terms of getting him to form a clan with only one of us but not both. But this would be better, if more complex, to choose "neither".

[normalphase]

My role is Shadowthrone, King of High House Shadow.

[Frank]

OK.

First, I want to say for the benefit of any authors reading that I consider this to be the coolest game ever. I am about to make a fairly big attempt at a move. It is possible that I am about to end my game completely. But I really, really hope not. Here goes.

I have not been entirely honest so far. I have not directly lied, but neither have I told the whole truth. My name is Gethol, and I am a Member in Chains - part of the House of Chains. In order to win, you must eliminate me.




Now.

If you're still reading, that means you haven't yet gone to the main thread to report me and get me lynched. This is good, because the situation is fairly complex. My role PM is very long, and I had to do a bit of clarifying, so I'll sum up here for simplicity's sake.

I am engaging in a sort of... competition with the other members of the House of Chains. The throne of our House is vacant, and only one of us can fill it. The others, it seems, are going to have to die. My win condition has nothing whatsoever to do with clans or Primaries or what have you; in fact, I cannot join a Clan at all. Here is my full win condition:

You win when you are alive and all other members of the House of Chains, as well as the Master of the Deck are dead. At that point, you will ascend and be removed from the game. Your win is non-exclusive to a clan win.

I have checked and rechecked, and the situation is clear. Once every member of the House of Chains is dead, except me, and the Master of the Deck is dead as well, I win. I am also eliminated from the game at that point. Thus our win conditions are not incompatible. We cannot win together, but we can both win.

I don't know who the other Members in Chains are, and they don't know who I am. I don't even know how many there may be. And of course, putting this information out there requires a leap of faith on your part - it would be easy to report me and have me lynched. But here's my proposal:

We work together, as we have just discussed, without any kind of Clan affiliation. I have multiple powers. I can protect anyone but myself, investigate the role or clan of any player, role-block anyone, cloak myself,* or attempt a kill. Only one of these powers is limited - the last of them. I can attempt to kill only three times, and my kill will only work on another member of the House of Chains. I will use these powers to advance your position and the position of whichever clan you choose to make your Primary; in exchange, you help me win my competition, and become King of the House of Chains.

* If any member of the House of Chains uses a non-killing power on another, the acting member will learn the identity of the acted-upon member as a Member in Chains... unless the acted-upon member is cloaking.

I realize this is going to take, again, a pretty huge leap of faith. If you don't believe my win condition, or feel comfortable with the simple loophole that allows you to "eliminate" me by helping me win the game, then I'm completely screwed. But we'll see.

[normalphase]

You must be sweating bullets waiting for my reply. I was out picking up my son from pre-school, not exactly what I expected to come back to.

I'm thinking and thinking and can't quite see why you would tell me such damning information, then lie about only the last crucial bit (your win being exclusive seeming to me to be the most likely lie in all of that). I don't think you know me well enough to be sure I would stick with this and not just do the safe thing, report you, then beg for any and all forms of protection available against retaliation. You had a perfectly safe claim, minus the name and some of the excess abilities, and I don't think you needed to tell the truth. I think you wanted to.

So.

In.

Have you contacted peeker yet?

[Frank]

<Whew>

Basically, you've got my thinking right on target. I think the other members of the House of Chains are going to lie like rugs. I wanted to try a different tack - tell the whole truth, and see what comes of it.

Now, regarding peeker. What shall we do with him? Should I tell him what I've told you? If he turns out to be a Member in Chains himself (or the Master of the Deck of Dragons), he can kill me toNight and then this whole thing was for naught. On the other hand, if we're going to make the central alliance you, me, and peeker, we probably should be as transparent as possible with one another.

Speaking of which, how does your ability actually work? Say I am targeting peeker with a block (just for example). Can you:

1. Target me and redirect my block onto another player?
2. Target peeker and redirect any actions aimed at him onto another player?
3. Both?
4. Neither?

[normalphase]

I'm not sure about peeker yet; I blew all of my pre-lunch critical thinking on your reveal and I need to recharge.

As far as my ability, it's closest to #2. Color-wise, I disguise two players as each other. All actions targeted against one will hit the other, and vice versa. It's and enormously versatile and powerful ability given enough information -- I've seen a bus driver used to kill a protected player, for instance (me, as it happens!): target the protected player and a patsy with the bus driver, and target the *patsy* for the kill.

The power of the ability is why I figured I had a significant hedge against the risk of immediate betrayal -- most good players would not pass up the chance to get some use out of a power like that.

[Frank]

Near as I can tell, between the two of us, we could come very close to ensuring that neither of us ever die at Night, if you use your power on me and I use my protective power on you.

[Frank]

Anyway, re: peeker, I'll feel him out a bit first. I'm going to be kind of noncomittal to the rest of the folks who are testing me, at least for now.