Llama Llama Duck 2 - Game Thread - The Return of Insanity

[Talic]

Because if it's foggy and you drive too fast you may drive over a cliff!!

I'm a good driver, trust me.

If you just go around assassinating people without the slightest clue as to what their role is, you may well end up helping your enemy more than you help yourself.

Thinning the herd reduces variables, and makes it harder for Ducks to hide.

Suppose we had 20 players, 8 ducks, and 5 assassins. Suppose all 5 assassins cluelessly use their kills on day one and by chance kill 5 Llamas. Ignoring the lynch, at the end of the day we will have 7 Llamas and 8 ducks and the ducks have won!! Great going assassins!

Let's start with the odds of each assassin blindly picking a distinct and different Llama, in your above example. 2.97%. I suppose that using emotionally evocative phrases and exclamation marks to emphasize the risk of incredible longshot odds wouldn't qualify as fearmongering, now would it?

Now suppose as an assassin you kill a duck on day one. Great going! And absolutely bloody useless. The best thing about killing ducks is going back and reviewing their voting history and using it to find other ducks, but on day one there is no voting history to speak of, so it's no real help at all.

Really? By killing a duck, you've increased the margin that the ducks need to win by one, adding one day to the game, and increasing the amount of data you get by one step, while simultaneously reducing the number of players to track. But now, rather than looking at the end game, you focus on a tertiary benefit, and use it to try to discredit my reasoning. It's a shame that the reasoning is still sound, even after you try to expand the emphasis of losing 1 person's history over gaining an additional day on everyone else's.
Especially since both sides have masons. As the only function of a mason is to know the identity of fellow masons, it stands to reason that if some of the ducks are NOT masons, then some of the ducks don't know the identity of the others. Which lowers the value of researching their voting history.

So basically you are lashing out killing people willy nilly for the hell of it, without any consideration for A) winning the game, and B) Removing people from the enjoyment of the game for no reason other than your own selfish delight in your own powers.

Flawed conclusion based on flawed data.

So to recap, we've got fearmongering. Overstating of long shot odds, and understating of game winning concepts. Misunderstanding or intentional misapplication (you all be the judge, based on Jontom's experience in this game) of the basic rules of this game, and their meaning.

I'll switch my point to Jontom Xire, for the above reasons.

[Dr. Bath]

Llamas! Llamas! Llamamen! Llend me you ears!

PirateMonk hides in pllain sight whilst mocking our noblle Llama King with his Llama llogic. Terriblle!

[Murska]

Aww. Nobody noticed my careful assassination at, by the current rules, only Happyturtle but also, if we use the old ones, at Shadowcaller.

What's with you people, pay ATTENTION! It'd have been noticeable just by quoting my post!

Of course, I'm not really an assassin.

[Talic]

Of course not. :)

[Murska]

You got to admit that if signatures had been counted for assassination like they were in the old rules, my way of the Assassin would've been the best of them all. At least I could not, after a while of thinking, come up with a more effective strategy of destroying my opponents, especially since one apparently cannot whitefy links anymore.

But since now the text has to be in the real post, it's no longer as fun since I can't hide the text properly, anyone quoting it will see it. Now it's just letter games or plaintext usage and thus I switched my role from Assassin to Beast.

[Jontom Xire]

Thinning the herd reduces variables, and makes it harder for Ducks to hide.

So let's take that to it's logical extent: Let's kill all the Llamas and then we'll know exactly who the ducks are!

Let's start with the odds of each assassin blindly picking a distinct and different Llama, in your above example. 2.97%. I suppose that using emotionally evocative phrases and exclamation marks to emphasize the risk of incredible longshot odds wouldn't qualify as fearmongering, now would it?

It was obviously a worst case example.

Really? By killing a duck, you've increased the margin that the ducks need to win by one, adding one day to the game, and increasing the amount of data you get by one step, while simultaneously reducing the number of players to track.

If you think about it, or if you had read certain of my posts in this forum, you would know that I believe that too many bad guys makes them too easy to find while too few makes them too hard to find. You also say you increase the amount of data you get by one step - how exactly? It's the same situation as if there were one less player and one less duck at the start of the game. Hence you have not increased information AT ALL.

I'm also not sure, given the number of assassins around, that you do increase the game's duration by one day at all.

As the only function of a mason is to know the identity of fellow masons, it stands to reason that if some of the ducks are NOT masons, then some of the ducks don't know the identity of the others. Which lowers the value of researching their voting history.
Flawed conclusion based on flawed data.

This is actually the only valid point you made in your entire post.

So to recap, we've got fearmongering. Overstating of long shot odds, and understating of game winning concepts.

Where? Where? I don't see any fearmongering. I criticised you for acting in your own selfish interests without considering the impact of your actions. That's not fearmongering. Fearmongering wopuld be if I said "We're all going to die horribly if we don't lynch Talic right now!" I didn't say that, I just said that I thought you were selfish and unthinking.

I also didn't overstate longshot odds. I merely proffered a possible scenario that might result from such actions. It was the extreme case, but not that extreme, allowing people to judge the probabilities themselves. I was just showing how relatively close the margins might be, in my opinion.

So to simplify my opinion in a few quick points, consider this:

1) If you assassinate a person on day one or two, that person doesn't get to play what should be one of the most fun and enjoyable games in any sort of meaningful way.
2) The information gained from said assassination is absolutely minimal, regardless of whether the person is a duck or a Llama.
3) The odds are against assassinating a Duck.
4) Even if you do assassinate a Duck, it doesn't help us that much this early in the game.
5) If you just wait a day or two before starting to assassinate people, you will:
A) Have a better idea who might be a duck.
B) Allow us to get more information about who might be a duck by said assassination.
C) Allow that person to have played a little longer.

To me point 5 is the most important. Do you really intend to assassinate one person per day? Really? If you do then you should be lynched immediately just for being an egomaniac determined to ruin as many people's fun as possible in the shortest possible time. If you don't, then why not use the first two or so days as the days when you don't assassinate somebody.


As a quick other note, you may see from other threads that I am more than happy to not lynch someone on the first day. I don't feel it gives us any proper information. Other people disagree and I have to say that I value their opinion and honestly accept the possibility that they may be right. I question my conclusion every time I come across such a situation. But the reason for the daily lynch is simple - it gives us clues to the identities of ducks, whether on day one or subsequent days.

Assassinations don't.

No-one wants to lynch an innocent, but we participate in daily lynches where we don't know who is guilty and who isn't because it is the voting that is useful, NOT the lynch itself (except very occasionally when we get a bad guy who's been voting in a revealing way).

The same cannot be said of assassinations because only a single person carries out the assassination. It is not a process that everyone partakes in. Hence with a lynch you get a dead body and some useful information. With an assassination you just get a dead body. The knowledge of that body's role can be useful, but ONLY when linked to a voting history, and on the first couple of days there will be no useful voting history. And by your own argument, even on subsequent days their will probably be nothing useful about the voting histroy because most ducks don't know other ducks.


Anyway, I now am ending this conversation. If you don't understand what I am trying to convey then it is either because I am too stupid to express myself clearly, or you are too stupid to understand what is being said. Either way I don't wish to get embroiled in yet another argument with someone who doesn't actually counter any of the points I make while either re-iterating their original, already countered, argument or coming up with yet more meaningless points that are trivial to logically refute.

[Murska]

1) If you assassinate a person on day one or two, that person doesn't get to play what should be one of the most fun and enjoyable games in any sort of meaningful way.
2) The information gained from said assassination is absolutely minimal, regardless of whether the person is a duck or a Llama.
3) The odds are against assassinating a Duck.
4) Even if you do assassinate a Duck, it doesn't help us that much this early in the game.
5) If you just wait a day or two before starting to assassinate people, you will:
A) Have a better idea who might be a duck.
B) Allow us to get more information about who might be a duck by said assassination.
C) Allow that person to have played a little longer.

To me point 5 is the most important.

I'd rate point 1 as the most important, actually. I'm for day-1-lynches but I'm against day-1-lynching the same person multiple times at least in a short time span. I deem the fact that someone is lynched from the day 1 lynching a necessary evil, but I don't like robbing someone of their chance to play needlessly.

[Trixie]

1) If you assassinate a person on day one or two, that person doesn't get to play what should be one of the most fun and enjoyable games in any sort of meaningful way.

Hear, hear. It seems that *ahem* certain (not all) persons disliking me for out-of game reasons are trowing grudge points around, despite being show to be wrong [edit] several times

[edit]

So, I won't oppose it - if you want to kill me, do so, but at least not in all games I'm currently playing, okay?

I'd like to keep at least one. You'll be only weakening team good, anyway.

Oh, and guess what - [edit], I took appropriate role to counter [edit] a first day lynch if that happened again. Oh, someone will be sorry that he pointed on me after all

You know, I'm tempted to point at Jontom Xire (to ensure my survival) now, but I'm playing these games for fun, not to ruin enjoyment for everyone else, like certain people

[edit - you know why]

[UncleWolf]

Using logic, we see that Wolfbane is quoting the movie Red Dawn, clearly indicating that his name should be in red in people's posts.

Also, he is quoting the part of the hidden faction in the movie, much like the ducks here, and clearly he is trying to pass secret messages to other ducks.

Ergo, Wolfbane is a duck.

*points his BassetGun^TM at Wolfbane*

Awesome movie. But I had a different reason for posting that.

And besides, I am not a duck.

Red October, standing by.

[Talic]

So let's take that to it's logical extent: Let's kill all the Llamas and then we'll know exactly who the ducks are!

Again, with the absurdity. The logical, and most likely outcome, in your above example, is:
20 players, 8 ducks, 5 assassins.
3 llamas dropped, 2 ducks. Overall balance relatively unchanged.
BUT, now ducks have less choices, making each of their choices more meaningful, so that when the duck is gotten (note, the overall ratio isn't likely to change much, in the long run), the information you get will be compared against a smaller pool of variables, and will thus be MORE significant.

It was obviously a worst case example.

And yet, was not marked as a long shot. In fact, it was hyped much like your "kill all the llamas" comment above. Absurdity in an attempt to rouse the masses, as sarcasm and emotional pleas tend to work when dealing with public masses. Unless, of course, they're opposed by fact and common sense. Like it is now.

If you think about it, or if you had read certain of my posts in this forum, you would know that I believe that too many bad guys makes them too easy to find while too few makes them too hard to find. You also say you increase the amount of data you get by one step - how exactly? It's the same situation as if there were one less player and one less duck at the start of the game. Hence you have not increased information AT ALL.

See above for why you're wrong. You're looking at the small picture. By this logic, there's no point in ever eliminating a duck, because it's just going to make them that much harder on both sides. No, both sides will take random casualties, and no amount of shading from you will change that. Once the overall numbers are thinned, then people can start looking at what information they do have, and then it does become strategy. The 1st turn point kills someone essentially randomly. So does the 1st turn assassination. If you threw out a random point? You're guilty of the exact same thing. So get outta my cheerios, padre.

I'm also not sure, given the number of assassins around, that you do increase the game's duration by one day at all.

Statistical probability points to an even ratio spread in duck to llama death, which means at early stages, assassins don't alter the game much when they're firing blindly.

This is actually the only valid point you made in your entire post.

And yet it derails your entire point on the value of statistical probability, and why it's important to keep all those ducks alive until they've had a few turns to kill us llamas.

Where? Where? I don't see any fearmongering. I criticised you for acting in your own selfish interests without considering the impact of your actions. That's not fearmongering. Fearmongering wopuld be if I said "We're all going to die horribly if we don't lynch Talic right now!" I didn't say that, I just said that I thought you were selfish and unthinking.

Actually, your long shot pretty much implied exactly that. LOL. Thanks for restating it though.

I also didn't overstate longshot odds. I merely proffered a possible scenario that might result from such actions. It was the extreme case, but not that extreme, allowing people to judge the probabilities themselves. I was just showing how relatively close the margins might be, in my opinion.

Not that extreme? 37 to 1 odds, is what you stated. That's not far off of Betting on 00 on a roulette spin. Pretty longshot, if ya ask me. And you marketed it as a valid and plausible outcome, when it was based on statistics and numbers entirely pulled out of your head. How's that for a well thought out, reasoned refute of my tactic?

Take 4 imaginary statistics. Season to taste. Serve another player.

That your recipe for success, Jontom?

So to simplify my opinion in a few quick points, consider this:

1) If you assassinate a person on day one or two, that person doesn't get to play what should be one of the most fun and enjoyable games in any sort of meaningful way.

And if you random point them off, the same is true, pot. Or is it kettle?

2) The information gained from said assassination is absolutely minimal, regardless of whether the person is a duck or a Llama.

Not much better than turn 2 or 3, judging by the double blind nature of the game.

3) The odds are against assassinating a Duck.

But statistical probability will keep the spread more or less balanced, in all likelihood.

4) Even if you do assassinate a Duck, it doesn't help us that much this early in the game.

Even if you lynch a duck, it doesn't either. Should we try to lynch a llama, then?

5) If you just wait a day or two before starting to assassinate people, you will:
A) Have a better idea who might be a duck.
B) Allow us to get more information about who might be a duck by said assassination.
C) Allow that person to have played a little longer.

Speculative, not based in proof. Not Likely, again, due to double blind. And yes, but people have to be eliminated for the game to go on. Sad, but true.

To me point 5 is the most important. Do you really intend to assassinate one person per day? Really? If you do then you should be lynched immediately just for being an egomaniac determined to ruin as many people's fun as possible in the shortest possible time. If you don't, then why not use the first two or so days as the days when you don't assassinate somebody.

Do you intend to vote to lynch someone every day? Really? See above. Everyone wants to be the last one standing. Or at least, on the winning side. The only way to do that is to eliminate people. Make no mistake, and don't try to fool anyone. You'll be trying to eliminate people too. Everyone should be. To claim that I'm the evil bad guy trying to ruin everyone's fun, and you're the poor noble Jontom, trying to be the saviour of fun? Hardly.

As a quick other note, you may see from other threads that I am more than happy to not lynch someone on the first day. I don't feel it gives us any proper information. Other people disagree and I have to say that I value their opinion and honestly accept the possibility that they may be right. I question my conclusion every time I come across such a situation. But the reason for the daily lynch is simple - it gives us clues to the identities of ducks, whether on day one or subsequent days.

again, double blind. Hard to get meaningful information when the ducks don't know who they're killing.

Assassinations don't.

See above.

No-one wants to lynch an innocent, but we participate in daily lynches where we don't know who is guilty and who isn't because it is the voting that is useful, NOT the lynch itself (except very occasionally when we get a bad guy who's been voting in a revealing way).

And by limiting the vote spread, we get a simpler pool of information. Which means it's easier to sort through, and harder to hide foul motives.

The same cannot be said of assassinations because only a single person carries out the assassination. It is not a process that everyone partakes in. Hence with a lynch you get a dead body and some useful information. With an assassination you just get a dead body. The knowledge of that body's role can be useful, but ONLY when linked to a voting history, and on the first couple of days there will be no useful voting history. And by your own argument, even on subsequent days their will probably be nothing useful about the voting histroy because most ducks don't know other ducks.

Exactly. If the voting history is less than useful, then your entire argument above holds no water. Because the voting history is useless, then the voting ISN'T useful. If the voting ISN'T useful, then there's next to no difference between a lynch and an assassination. Because the voting is NOT useful, when the bad guys don't have information to act on that would give them away.

Anyway, I now am ending this conversation. If you don't understand what I am trying to convey then it is either because I am too stupid to express myself clearly, or you are too stupid to understand what is being said. Either way I don't wish to get embroiled in yet another argument with someone who doesn't actually counter any of the points I make while either re-iterating their original, already countered, argument or coming up with yet more meaningless points that are trivial to logically refute.

Every point countered. And neither of us are stupid. You're trying to pull a fast one, and I'm saying "no". Pretty simple.

And by the past game performance of JX, what does everyone think the "probability" of JX trying to manipulate a win are? Hmm?

[Hyozo]

The frozen llama would like to request that Talic and Jontom Xire stop filling pages with day 1 logic. However,he is still incapable of speech, so he can only watch as their argument moves closer and closer to his line of being stuck pointing in that direction.

[Jontom Xire]

Every point countered.

Actually not. Almost everything you posted to try and counter my points is either countered by something else you posted in the same post, or is countered by something I said in my previous point with the result that you didn't actually counter any of my arguments.

But I'm not going to waste my time pointing out all the flaws in your logic. I will say that half your arguments are specious, trying to pretend that things I said that clearly specifically apply only to day one or two were actually meant to apply to the game throughout. And you clearly don't understand the use of a logical extension to an extreme, but then not many people do.

[Fin]

Talic, because senseless violence is bad!

[UncleWolf]

To those who care. You know who you are.

*takes out an electric guitar and starts to play*

Every time I look in the mirror
All these lines on my face getting clearer
The past is gone
It went by, like dusk to dawn
Isn't that the way
Everybody's got their dues in life to pay

Yeah, I know nobody knows
where it comes and where it goes
I know it's everybody's sin
You got to lose to know how to win

Half my life's
in books' written pages
Lived and learned from fools and
from sages
You know it's true
All the feelings come back to you

Sing with me, sing for the year
Sing for the laughter, sing for the tear
Sing with me, if it's just for today
Maybe tomorrow, the good lord will take you away

Yeah, sing with me, sing for the year
sing for the laughter, sing for the tear
sing with me, if it's just for today
Maybe tomorrow, the good Lord will take you away

Dream On Dream On Dream On
Dream until your dream comes true
Dream On Dream On Dream On
Dream until your dream comes through
Dream On Dream On Dream On
Dream On Dream On
Dream On Dream On, AHHHHHHH!

Sing with me, sing for the year
sing for the laughter, sing for the tear
sing with me, if it's just for today
Maybe tomorrow, the good Lord will take you away
Sing with me, sing for the year
sing for the laughter, sing for the tear
Sing with me, if it's just for today
Maybe tomorrow, the good Lord will take you away......

*puts away the guitar*

(Link to the song)

[Murska]

I'm waiting, in my old school, when the bell begins to chime.
Reflecting, on the past day, and it didn't take much time.

Cuz at three'o'clock, they let me go back home.
The sands of time, for me are running low.
Running low.

When the teachers go make their last rounds,
I take a look through the glass at the school grounds,
at the world calling me so temptingly.

It appears I've made some sort of error,
hard to stop the surmounting terror.
Do I get to go out or will I stay?

Somebody please tell me I'm dreaming,
it's hard to stop from screaming.
The words escape me, when I try to speak.

Tears try to flow, I am reeling,
had to stop myself from fleeing,
is this really the end, do I have to stay?

As my mates start leaving the classroom,
through the door one shouts 'God be with you!'
If there's a god then why won't he let me go?

As I walk, all my chances lost, I feel,
the teachers rally, they want to speak to me.
'Eat my shorts, I'm willing to go away!'

'Mark my words, I believe I've done nothing wrong,
you'll worry when you've let me go,
I shall avenge the affront to my personal freedom!'

'Now, young boy, your time's close at hand,
maybe soon you'll begin to understand,
you're never leaving, the school's your home now.'

Cursed be the teachers' names!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2za92DQOCw

Might've gotten it a bit wrong...

[UncleWolf]

We seem to have a challenger!

Good.

*counters with metal of his own*

Can't you see what you have wrought here?
Bloody battles will be fought here

May the mountains rise against you
May the forests block your path
May your axes chip and shatter
And know it is my Wrath

I would mount your heads on the bloody spears
Outside your palace gates
And watch as crows peck out your eyes
And your cities are laid to waste

Can't you see what you have wrought here?
A curse on you and all your kin
Bloody battles will be fought here
Await your doom at empire's end

May the Rivers rush to drown you
Nay the earth swallow your hosts
May the winter's wolves surround you
And rip the life from your throats

*howls and a chorus of wolves join in*

(Winter's Wolves by The Sword)

[Dallas-Dakota]

I see much to much debate!
Much to long posts!

So in honour of



I will leave no room for debate!
I declare my allegiance!

You could say that the llama dominates the picture in size.
You could say that the bunny rides the llama, thus clearly being rider and master.
You could say that the duck is in a hat-position, thus clearly superior.

[Haruki-kun]

*twirls mustache*

"Oh-hoho!"

The chef Llama opens the front doors to the restaurant and flips the "closed" sign so it reads "desolc", which means "open", as opposed to "nepo", which means "closed".

"Welcome! Welcome a-to my restaurant! It's-a-me! The Chef Llama, the best Llama chef in the Llamaverse! May I show you a-some of my skills? Sir? How about you, madam? Or you, sir Jontom?"

[Talic]

Actually not. Almost everything you posted to try and counter my points is either countered by something else you posted in the same post, or is countered by something I said in my previous point with the result that you didn't actually counter any of my arguments.

But I'm not going to waste my time pointing out all the flaws in your logic. I will say that half your arguments are specious, trying to pretend that things I said that clearly specifically apply only to day one or two were actually meant to apply to the game throughout. And you clearly don't understand the use of a logical extension to an extreme, but then not many people do.

Yes. I do understand the taking of a logical extension to an extreme. The vast majority of true and valid logical statements fail when taken to the very extremities. For example, let's take the logical example that gravity causes objects to fall. By that logic, airplanes shouldn't work, balloons shouldn't fly, and space shuttles should never reach orbit. But, because you take one aspect to an extreme, you fail to take into account other unknown variables. And the resulting argument is flawed, incorrect, without merit or worth.

Let's be honest. The most valuable role in a double blind game?

Mason.

In the land of the blind, the man with one eye is king. And in the land of those with no information, the man with some is at an advantage. Moreso than any other role. Because he has a statistically higher probability of guessing a duck.

Look at the 20 player analogy. Let's assume 8 ducks, 12 llamas.
Let's assume that the llamas have 5 masons now.
Let's assume that the ducks have 3 masons.

Well, most players have 19 choices. If you're a llama, you have a 8/19 chance of being right. (42%) If you're a duck, you have a 12/19 chance of being right. (63%)

If you're a mason llama, you can eliminate 4 others. So now you have an 8/15 chance of being right. (53%) If you're a mason duck, you have a 12/17 chance. (70.5%)

So now, you have a leg up on the competition, right off the bat. If you make those good guesses? Then your odds stay good. If you make bad ones? They get better faster. Regardless, as the pool diminishes, as long as masons stay in the game, they get stronger and stronger.

Now that masons know what I am, it is my sincerest hope that they divine a way to identify whether I am a llama or a duck, and make every attempt to use my services to gain additional points at a higher probability of success. I'll point blind if I have to, but I much prefer being aimed by a leader, with more information than I.

That'd be so much better than relying on my own, suboptimal chances. After all, no matter what I am... I'm no mason.

Talic, because senseless violence is bad!

Dear Fin... there is no other kind of violence. So if there is to be violence, let us call a spade a spade, and realize that it's all senseless.

[Selrahc]

Let's be honest. The most valuable role in a double blind game?

Mason.

No. Not really.

For information gathering nothing beats a Seer.

Then there is the fact that masons are reliant on other people. If lots of people pick mason, it has the potential to be a useful role. If only a scant few people do, then it's near useless. If other people die then the role loses usefulness. There are too many external factors in play.

Then there is the fact that in this game, the masons don't even have very good potential as a voting block. So many roles can utterly screw up the voting that even if they can make guesses that are slightly more likely to be right, they don't really have the power to enforce their choice, since a vortexer or Howard could invalidate their points. You have less ability to influence the game as a mason.

[Cristo Meyers]

Hold it hold it hold it!

If there's going to be a singing contest I'm damn well going to be in on it! I've got a reputation to uphold, dammit!

*grabs guitar, but realizes he has no thumbs*

err...AH!

*grabs CD player*

I Must Have Dreamed A Thousand Dreams
Been Haunted By A Million Screams
But I Can Hear The Marching Feet
They're Moving Into The Street

Now, Did You Read The News Today?
They Say The Danger Has Gone Away
But I Can See The Fire's Still Alight
They're Burning Into The Night

There's Too Many Men, Too Many People
Making Too Many Problems
And There's Not Much Love To Go Around
Can't You See This Is A Land Of Confusion?

This Is The World We Live In
And These Are The Hands We're Given
Use Them And Let's Start Trying
To Make It A Place Worth Living In

Oh, Superman, Where Are You Now?
When Everything's Gone Wrong Somehow?
The Men Of Steel, These Men Of Power
Are Losing Control By The Hour

This Is The Time, This Is The Place
So We Look For The Future
But There's Not Much Love To Go Around
Tell Me Why This Is A Land Of Confusion

This Is The World We Live In
And These Are The Hands We're Given
Use Them And Let's Start Trying
To Make It A Place Worth Living In

I Remember Long Ago
When The Sun Was Shining
And All The Stars Were Bright All Through The Night
In The Wake Of This Madness, As I Held You Tight
So Long Ago

I Won't Be Coming Home Tonight
My Generation Will Put It Right
We're Not Just Making Promises
That We Know We'll Never Keep

There's Too Many Men, Too Many People
Making Too Many Problems
And There's Not Much Love To Go Round
Can't You See This Is A Land Of Confusion?

Now, This Is The World We Live In
And These Are The Hands We're Given
Use Them And Let's Start Trying
To Make It A Place Worth Fighting For

This Is The World We Live In
And These Are The Names We're Given
Stand Up And Let's Start Showing
Just Where Our Lives Are Going To

[GoC]

Shadow, not for making him a day one lynch or anything. But if I picked anybody else, I'd get accused of pointing at newbs(who apparently are supposed to be killed off later, even if they are ducks....) or other things and get lynched....

I am not a llama.

[Murska]

Hmm. Of course, only those songs are accepted which, in real life, you can sing and play with at least one instrument, right?

If I had a perfect day,
I would have it start this way,
Open up the fridge and have a tall boy,
Yeah.

Then I'd meet up with my friends,
Head out to the game again,
We don't even really care who wins.

Now excitement seems to grow,
When we're hangin' with the bro's,
When we're chillin' and we pound a case of Stroh's.
Now the game is cool to see,
You can "High 5" on TV,
Count the riot on the one, two, three.
Operation is in sight,
And the field is open wide,
When you break it then you know you're still alive.
If the cops don't make you pay,
And you make your getaway,
Then you know,
That's one fine day.

On that day before we're through,
We could torch a car or two,
Then have ourselves another tall boy,
Yeah.

Water hoses and batons,
That's the real game that's on,
I don't really give a **** who wins.

Now excitement seems to grow,
When we're hangin' with the bro's,
When we're chillin' and we pound a case of Stroh's.
Now the game is cool to see,
You can "High 5" on TV,
Count the riot on the one two three
Operation is in sight,
And the field is open wide,
When you break it then you know you're still alive.
If the cops don't make you pay,
And you make your getaway,
Then you know,
That's one fine day.

I believe it's my god-given right,
To destroy everything in my sight,
Cause it never gets dull, it never gets old,
The only thing it gets is more bold.
Drinkin', Fightin', goin to the game,
In our world it's a way to stay sane,
If your asking me,
To have it my way, I'd say that's,
One fine day.

Now excitement seems to grow,
When we're hangin' with the bro's,
When we're chillin' and we pound a case of Stroh's.
Now the game is cool to see,
You can "High 5" on TV,
Count the riot on the one, two, three.
Operation is in sight,
And the field is open wide,
When you break it then you know you're still alive.
If the cops don't make you pay,
And you make your getaway,
Then you know,
That's one fine day.
Yeah,
Then you know,
That it's a one fine day.

[Dr. Bath]

I am not a llama.

I knew it!

@Selrahc: Considering all the seers could actually be fools in this game, having the seer role may or may not actually help in this game (they probably will, but still). Masons are most useful in conjunction with a seer, anyway.

[Reinholdt]

Singing? Ahem. Memememe.
Spoilered for your convenience.

Spoiler

Show

I love the mountains.
I love the clear blue skies.
I love big bridges.
I love when great whites fly.
I love the whole world.
And all its sights and sounds.

Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!

I love the ocean .
I love real dirty things.
I love to go fast.
I love Egyptian kings.
I love the whole world
And all its craziness

Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!

I love tornadoes.
I love arachnids.
I love hot magma.
I love the giant squids.
I love the whole world.
It's such a brilliant place.

Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!
Boom De Yada!

[Cristo Meyers]

Gah! Reinholdt dropped a Boom on me!

Eat Stone Sour! Come, chorus, to me!


Wish I was...to dead to cry
Self-affliction fades
Stones to throw at my creator
Masochist to which I cater

You don't need to bother
I don't need to be
I'll keep slipping farther

And once I'm done,
I won't let go 'til it bleeds

Wish I was...to dead to care
If indeed I can at all
Never had the voice to protest
So you fed me **** to digest

I wish I had a reason
My flaws are open season
For this I gave up trying
One good turn deserves my dying

You don't need to bother
I don't need to be
I'll keep slipping farther

And once I'm done,
I won't let go 'til it bleeds

Wish I'd died...instead of lived
A zombie hides my face
Shell forgotten with its memories
Diaries left with cryptic entires

You don't need to bother
I don't need to be (I don't need to be...)
I'll keep slipping farther

And once I'm done,
I won't let go 'til it bleeds

You don't need to bother (You don't need to bother...)
I don't need to be (I don't need to be.....)
I'll keep slipping farther

And once I'm done, (Once I hold on...)
I won't let down my deceit...

[PirateMonk]

It strikes me that using JX's arguments would be great cover for an assassin.

Just saying.

[UncleWolf]

*starts to play a song*






















*bows when he is done*

(Orion -METALLICA )

[Murska]

Aegnor steps up and, seeing Wolfbane's performance, takes out his guitar.

* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55nAwmVLQSk * happens.

[Reinholdt]

Reinholdt absolutely refuses to be outdone by these wannabes.

He starts singing again.