The Resistance: Avalon (Game Over)

RMC · Post by **RMC** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:02 am

Holman wrote:Maybe now is the time to dump this team and start fresh.

Actually with two bad guys in the mix of the four, yeah, cut us all loose and start fresh.

That means we have at least 2 of team evil in the group of 4.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:10 am

Holman wrote:Maybe now is the time to dump this team and start fresh.

No, we should definitely keep this team and continue to add to it.

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:10 am

I would like to take a moment to note that the game's official nomenclature, as shown on the grail cards, sets SUCCESS against FAIL.

Ew. What ever happened to FAILURE as an antonym for SUCCESS?

SUCCEED | FAIL : acceptable
SUCCESS | FAILURE : acceptable
SUCCESS | FAIL : icky and published

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:17 am

This is Arthurian legend, so it's EPIC FAIL.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:20 am

stessier wrote:
Holman wrote:Maybe now is the time to dump this team and start fresh.
No, we should definitely keep this team and continue to add to it.

Who let Roose Bolton in here, anyway?

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:23 am

Holman wrote:This is Arthurian legend, so it's EPIC FAIL.

A good point.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:57 am

stessier wrote:
Holman wrote:Maybe now is the time to dump this team and start fresh.
No, we should definitely keep this team and continue to add to it.

Isn't there some way to create a matrix of groups to track their success/fail and who was in each group to look for common connections? The only problem with keeping the same group is that the evil members will continue to make sure they fail.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:05 am

So two thirds of my questmates were traitors. And at least one faked success to keep cover last quest.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:16 am

Moliere wrote:
stessier wrote:
Holman wrote:Maybe now is the time to dump this team and start fresh.
No, we should definitely keep this team and continue to add to it.
Isn't there some way to create a matrix of groups to track their success/fail and who was in each group to look for common connections? The only problem with keeping the same group is that the evil members will continue to make sure they fail.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:27 am

So, the immediate question is who should I scan?

RMC · Post by **RMC** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:29 am

El Guapo wrote:So, the immediate question is who should I scan?

You might be evil, so I am not sure I trust anything you say.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:30 am

RMC wrote:
El Guapo wrote:So, the immediate question is who should I scan?
You might be evil, so I am not sure I trust anything you say.

Fair enough, but it will still produce information, and I have a job to do regardless.

Chaosraven · Post by **Chaosraven** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:34 am

If he's evil, we don't want him finding Merlin.
If he's good,maybe he should check his own Party.

We obviously had at least one evil in Party One, and at least two in Party Two.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:40 am

stessier wrote:
Moliere wrote:
stessier wrote:
Holman wrote:Maybe now is the time to dump this team and start fresh.
No, we should definitely keep this team and continue to add to it.
Isn't there some way to create a matrix of groups to track their success/fail and who was in each group to look for common connections? The only problem with keeping the same group is that the evil members will continue to make sure they fail.

What does this mean? Do you disagree with me or agree that finding team evil is going to be a pain?

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:48 am

Chaosraven wrote:If he's evil, we don't want him finding Merlin.
If he's good,maybe he should check his own Party.

We obviously had at least one evil in Party One, and at least two in Party Two.

FWIW a scan doesn't identify role. I am not sure how that really bears on my scan choice here, though.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:18 am

FWIW I am inclined to scan someone off my team. Since 2 of 3 teammates are evil, I probably hit an evil person. BUT I still could not trust the other two teammates in that scenario (since one would be evil), so I / we would presumably still stay away from the rest of the team. Plus then evil would get control of the scan.

I'm interested in more input, then I plan on deciding this afternoon.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:41 am

We set this up so you would be able to scan Holman. Holman is the next in line to pick a team. Wouldn't it be good for you to know how to vote / analyze said team members?

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:42 am

This also has the added benefit of knowing if he's good, the other two are bad. And if he is bad, well, that just makes all sorts of fun possibilities for you to deduce stuff going forward.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:43 am

I assume that Holman is going to get rejected even if I scan him and he comes back good. Though he is my probable in-team scan choice.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:46 am

Even if he is rejected, he has to pick a team. That can tell a thoughtful individual things whether he is Good or Bad.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:52 am

Fair enough, but we already know (depending on who you are) that he has a 50% or 66% chance of being evil. We can already infer information about Holman. If his team would be rejected anyway (which he knows and which would skew the info provided) shouldn't we reject him and have me scan the next in line (chaosraven) so that we are not flying blind with him?

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 12:32 pm

That is a fair alternative, but there is no guarantee that Chaos' party will be accepted either, so that criteria doesn't seem to be useful. A better argument is that there is a 50/66 (depending on your viewpoint) chance that Holman is Evil and since your Scannee becomes the next Scanner, it is better that we take the 2/6 chance that Chaos is Evil instead.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 6:35 pm

So right now we're just waiting on the Lady's scan?

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 6:42 pm

I don't know if I am going to get any more input or suggestions, so I'll just plow ahead.

scan chaosraven

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 7:10 pm

El Guapo wrote:I don't know if I am going to get any more input or suggestions, so I'll just plow ahead.

scan chaosraven

The Lady of the Lake has learned the alignment (Good||Evil) of Chaosraven.
Chaosraven is now the Lady of the Lake.

This ends Quest #2. But there is more to be done if Camelot is to survive!

The next Leader is Holman. Please propose a Questing Party of Four members.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 7:52 pm

Well, I suppose I'm under the cloud from Quest 2, so I won't nominate any of its participants, including myself.

That leaves me nothing to go on. Does anyone have any input before I pick a random corner of the round table and go from there?

RMC · Post by **RMC** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 7:53 pm

Holman wrote:Well, I suppose I'm under the cloud from Quest 2, so I won't nominate any of its participants, including myself.

That leaves me nothing to go on. Does anyone have any input before I pick a random corner of the round table and go from there?

Maybe hear what El Guapo has to say about Chaos first?

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:21 pm

Chaosraven is good.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:28 pm

Let's remember that El Guapo himself is a suspicious character, having been part of Quests 1 & 2. If we can't be sure we trust El G, we can't be sure we trust his scan.

Just to be safe, I'm going to skip Chaosraven and go with the next fresh princes.

Isgrimnur, Moliere, Scoop20906, bb2112

What say ye?

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:02 pm

Holman has nominated Isgrimnur, Moliere, Scoop20906, and bb2112 as a party for Quest #3. Please send me your vote, whether you ACCEPT or REJECT.

Chaosraven · Post by **Chaosraven** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:20 pm

El Guapo wrote:Chaosraven is good.

Well you may be evil but you aren't a liar.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:47 am

Chaosraven wrote:
El Guapo wrote:Chaosraven is good.
Well you may be evil but you aren't a liar.

So is this 1) an evil person correctly announcing a good person, 2) an evil person pretending a fellow evil is good, or 3) a good person announcing that someone else is good? I don't see any reason for a good to pretend that an evil person is good so no fourth option.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:38 am

Holman wrote:Let's remember that El Guapo himself is a suspicious character, having been part of Quests 1 & 2. If we can't be sure we trust El G, we can't be sure we trust his scan.

Just to be safe, I'm going to skip Chaosraven and go with the next fresh princes.

Isgrimnur, Moliere, Scoop20906, bb2112

What say ye?

It would be nice to have known if Chaos is good. Should have been yourself, Chaos, El Guapo and one other.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:03 am

stessier wrote:
Holman wrote:Let's remember that El Guapo himself is a suspicious character, having been part of Quests 1 & 2. If we can't be sure we trust El G, we can't be sure we trust his scan.

Just to be safe, I'm going to skip Chaosraven and go with the next fresh princes.

Isgrimnur, Moliere, Scoop20906, bb2112

What say ye?
It would be nice to have known if Chaos is good. Should have been yourself, Chaos, El Guapo and one other.

I assumed that any quest roster involving one of the earlier members would be rejected anyway. Otherwise I would have included myself (since I'm sure I'm good) and three fresh names.

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:39 am

bb2112

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 7:53 pm

Grundbegriff wrote:bb2112

I'll post results at 9pm EST regardless, but it would be nice to have all the votes since that's nearly the only signal in this game's noise.

bb2112 · Post by **bb2112** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:16 pm

Sorry, just voted. Been busy with Family stuff.

Chaosraven · Post by **Chaosraven** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:16 pm

Grund needs a new watch.

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:36 pm

stessier REJECT
RMC REJECT
Holman ACCEPT
Chaosraven ACCEPT
Isgrimnur ACCEPT
Moliere ACCEPT
Scoop20906 REJECT
bb2112 ACCEPT
Remus West REJECT
El Guapo REJECT

REJECT: 5
ACCEPT: 5

The party is not approved. The failed vote counter is now at 1/5.

Chaosraven is the new Leader. Please form a party of 4 for Quest #2.

bb2112 · Post by **bb2112** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:43 pm

Can anyone explain why this was rejected? I thought Stess was pushing for a whole new party? And Scoop, why did you reject your own party? I must have missed something for 5 people to say no to a party we know nothing about.