No I didn't. I said something she did, that is all.
A kindness
And a reminder. For those who seem unwilling to hear. Or perhaps willfully blind.
We only promised being interested in her. There are different kinds of interest. She seems interested in our fillies for example. If we trust that her intentions are positive then there is sure no problems with befriending her.
Idea with bait was that we will have option to decide eat or not to eat at the last moment, with few Names just guarding prisoners while others preparing to go on some other task if we don't signal them to interfere. Mareinette would not be able to guess our intentions if we themselves are not aware about them. If it comes to such vote I'll be fine with any outcome and I find it sufficiently Mothy to potentially work. Moth beats Grail after all.
People find courage to risk their lives in real life, sometimes with worse odds. I don't know why Velvet being properly heroic for once is such incomprehensible thought.
Well primarily I don't want for people to decide that they did not have a choice and it is not Velvet fault that she just need to eat this pony for power. Thus I feel compelled to at least propose alternative. If we decide on being villain we should be proper Villain and forget about not leashing ponies for additional actions and so on. Or be paragon of justice and vanquish a monster. Also please don't be so surprised about people not wanting to have a cannibalistic protag, it is not some outrageous idea, really.
Currently yes, but actual goal would be decided during expedition vote. More objectives is why we send more Names.
and of course that's when Velvet wakes up.
keep in mind that lvl 4 artifacts are RARE. we didn't even have those when Bird first commented on us not being WILLING (and not able, he never said we wouldn't be ABLE to pay) to pay the 3rd price.
considering taking her sacrament is now basically unanimous, with the main disagreement being on the main dish, that's true and fitting.
also true. We can't signal interest and friendship and STILL not let her in our home.
That's putting it midly.
...it's not an insult when it's true and both know and acknowledge it.
You know, I can't quite tell what the joke is here. That DOES sounds like a legitimate and reasonable question... well, except that it would be a violation of guest rights, I suppose.
well, yeah, We'll definitely work on it.
interesting.
...I'm calling it now, if Cherenkov is Pinocchio, she's making a Jiminy Cricket!
thank you Axe we LOVE you!
fuck
quite a decent incentive NOT to do that, really.
honestly Mareinette has been a PERFECT Guest to us specifically.
Yeah I'm sure the Name that can literally smell how we feel about her wouldn't notice the desire to kill her when we invite her to dinner. Surely there's no way that this would just create an enemy out of the Name with arguably the greatest ability to screw us over ten ways to Sunday.
Not unanimous by any means (see: the number of voters for Plan: Cannibalism is Cringe). But probably the majority, for one reason or another.
And I'm sure that under Velvet's circumstances desire to kill Mareinette would be completely natural and something that Velvet will consider even if she goes with Sacrament option.
Names would be unable to help us in Malleary , except Cherenkolt of course and so we need artifacts and to study higher levels of Lore. Especially as it was implicated that we would need to run Malleay right after All-in. Unless you know of a way to turn other Names into artifacts?
Then even less reasons to worry about it. It may be clusterfuck but not ours. Let Pride deal with it.
There's also Plan: Prisoner Chomping, which also gets us a random prisoner and scries a Forge 6 reagent but instead focuses on getting usable infrastructure out of the Bureau so we can actually get a cadre and ritual space to summon more AP in a realistic timespan instead of a one-off moment of glory.
...Forgive me, but I believe I have been very careful with my words.
My problem is not with people's offense.
Would you rather have a random prisoner or Hill?
Well I was not the one asked but my opinion is if we take Sacrament don't be cheapskate when it come to sacrifice. Power have price and willingness to pay it. If we were sending Biedde after said criminal and were willing to postpone his Sacrament for it I would have been more positive about it as catching criminal is in Biedde's job description and he knows what he is doing. With DoA I can easily imagine her misunderstanding some modern slang and capturing entirely unrelated pony. Higher chance of failure than Hill mission in general.
I think losing the Servants AP in exchange for an extra Name AP is a pretty good deal, if we're looking at just AP gain/loss
Until you compare to a Plan where you gain a Name AP don't lose a Servant AP, of course.I think losing the Servants AP in exchange for an extra Name AP is a pretty good deal, if we're looking at just AP gain/loss
Hill, but we i don't want to assume that we have the leeway to just delay things more by causing an even bigger mess when the doomclock is ticking.
I thnik you shouldn't double post.
DoA only have +10 for social tasks and you think she can find criminal without talking or interrogating anyone even once? Her being bad with words and ponies also specifically written on her page
Eh, it's fairly rare, usually used when the two topics too.