Quote:
Originally Posted by tp
The reason for accusing her is her first post, in which she says "What the Hades is going on here?"
|
Yes. And it is interesting that from all the 20 characters she picked up one of the two God-wolfs who had to really desperately contact their lover as early as possible. To be fair, Hades as a random-choice is not too bad (look at the carnage that is coming!). But Zeus would be the most understandable (as the King of the Gods), and also Ares (there's a war brewing on here!), Pallas Athene (We need your wisdom to solve this!), Apollo (We need your keen eyes to help us!), Eros (Oh, let love prevail insterad of anger!)... you see it?
So the choice could be a random-one an innocent takes (count in name-recognition and relevance of the God's abilities to the situation), but it is one of many choices an innocent might have had - and the pick just happened to be the one wolf who needs to send a message to his lover!
Quote:
Originally Posted by tp
When that statement was pointed to yesterday, she responded with these statements-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerwen
I realise now that the usual themed Day One bantering was possibly ill-advised in this game, because pretty much anything you can say relates to one of the roles.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerwen
If I had defended myself more you'd now be calling me "defensive" right now, Nogrod. Besides, what was there to say? I tried to adapt an idiom to the setting, just as we'll say "What the Utumno?" in an M-e based game.
|
These explanations are essentially the same thing that Mac gave to me today- a complete and utter denial of having intended anything at all.
The fact is, Hades would have known going into the day whether or not he was going to hint, and also would have been aware that such hinting was likely to be pointed out. There would be a plan in his head for that eventuality, surely? He would have an explanation ready! So, why didn't Nerwen give a more graceful and intelligent explanation (i.e. claim that she was helping the village by giving Persephone false leadings for instance)?
No- I place her explanation and Mac's in the same boat. Both make me feel better. I may be wrong, but there it is. You may not agree, Nog, but do you see my reasoning?
|
I see your reasoning but I must say I do disagree, at least partially. It's true they both utterly deny any suspicions on the basis of "I didn't think it that way" - and both are as bad in that, as every wolf would have answered similarly. But I do not think they are essentially the same. Especially your point about how Hades would have done gives me a pause. I mean you might have done all those preparations but I'd guess most of us wouldn't. We all don't have pages of scenarios ready before starting a game or masterplans and their variations for every possible occurence. So from time to time the wolves need to just come up with "an explanation" - graceful or not - and comparing thpose two I find two main differences: a)
Mac's explanation looks more or less honest (if you can say that in this game) and
Nerwen's looks more like avoiding (especially that what was there to answer about?), and b) comparing the relative merits of the hints they're claimed to have made, you (well I at least) have a believable case with
Nerwen and quite a fabricated one with
Mac.
Okay. I hope that is it from my part on the issue. I'll try to read something else just to freshen my mind.
ADD: just saw
Nerwen's latest... until
phantom's post on the issue a moment ago, no one addressed the argument - and even he kind of went just bedside it. Read up above what I'm after (or #390, or my Gods, any post I've made on the issue). I can adjust my mind if someone shows me where my point goes wrong, but as long as no one even considers it, I'm just going to get more and more frustrated. But who cares.