As an ardent follower of The Implacable Detective and an anarchist who wish that the powerful lose their privilege, i will still continue to pursue monster and mysteries. As such, i warn the current mayor that i will be constantly ready to strike with every tool that the law (and maybe not only the law) offer. You may have win the battle but you haven’t win the war !
PS : it would be fun that they create cards that allow to disrupt or support mayor activities along the year and give the result in a storylet before the next election. edited by Noz WOLF on 7/10/2017 edited by Noz WOLF on 7/10/2017 edited by Noz WOLF on 7/10/2017
[quote=Kukapetal]If nothing else, this proves beyond a doubt that the election is just popularity contest for who is "coolest" and things like candidates’ actions and platforms ultimately don’t matter, because they have no consequences.[/quote]I hate having to break the bad news to you but that is how elections usually work the world over…
Also, this was an election in a city ruled by eldritch horrors from space, so how can you be surprised at the win of an "evil cackling monster"? ;)
It’s a game, and most people will go for the option that promises the most excitement, cos that’s what most people play games for. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I’ve seen a few people say Feducchi is evil. I really wouldn’t say that, he’s many things but evil probably not. I dislike him because he’s an agent for the presbatriate, but outside of that he really doesn’t seem like the person to kick puppies and eat kittens giggles.
As to the person who commented that fallen london developing a tradition of putting a foreign agent as mayor, that would be hilarious.
oh, hello, i remember you from the debates! see, I told you Feducci is gonna win. It’s a matter of biology. A man with unnatural vitality is always popular- particularly with the ladies ;)
It’s a matter of biology. A man with unnatural vitality is always popular- particularly with the ladies ;)[/quote]
I agree with the "unnatural vitality" part but I still think that ladies and men may prefer someone a bit more "fleshy" ;-P. Even the Implacable detective and the campainer are more "fresh" ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°).
Thanks for the debate too, it was fun even if i think that result depend too much in luck ><. I may be a sore loser too : one loss, one draw… edited by Noz WOLF on 7/10/2017
Some fellow anarchists abstain from the vote, and I curtsy deep to their own brand of commitment…but I’m of a different stripe. My anarchist heinie will get to threatening he who I helped elevate to the throne post-haste. Feducci knew he’d be precariously placed upon winning when he entered the race, so all said and done? Fair Play, Fair Game, Fair Bomb Throwing!
All daggers drawn against authority point ever at the throne, whatever head be mounted there. Electing those who hate the constabulary interfering in their business as much as I do is almost as delicious as thwarting Mayoral power and the constabulary alike! I’d rather have a revolutionary on my side than anyone else…but criminals are a distant second in an "enemy of my enemy" kind of way. Should Feducci make criminals the enforcers of governmental power in the constabulary’s stead, that’ll change right quick though let me tell you!
Non-discardable, negative opportunity cards because the election didn’t go your way? LoL, talk about sour grapes. You’d be screaming injustice to the rooftops if that was done to YOUR precious candidates.
It’s funny, people seem to be taking this as badly as if it were actually a real election, rather than an election to see whose face gets put on an opportunity card for a year in an online role-playing game.
I know this is a game, you guys. My point was that this election revealed that candidate reputations and platforms make absolutely no difference in how the players vote and so if FBG wants a more even election in the future, they should concentrate less on candidate beliefs and revealing lore about them during flash lays and more on making sure each candidate is a cool bad*ss.
It’s a matter of biology. A man with unnatural vitality is always popular- particularly with the ladies ;)[/quote]
I agree with the "unnatural vitality" part but I still think that ladies and men may prefer someone a bit more "fleshy" ;-P. Even the Implacable detective and the campainer are more "fresh" ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°).[/quote]
A dashing killer with immortal vitality? A proper social lady with a fiery spirit? A cold yet kind intellectual with a sweet hair bun? Oh no, you’re meeting all my standards!
[quote=Sir Joseph Marlen]
A dashing killer with immortal vitality? A proper social lady with a fiery spirit? A cold yet kind intellectual with a sweet hair bun? Oh no, you’re meeting all my standards![/quote]
what, all three of them at once?! :D … gotta admit though, the hair bun is pretty sweet
I’m not so sure about this. If Feducci (for some unfathomable reason) campaigned for temperance and austerity, you wouldn’t catch me dead (heh) anywhere near his supporters, and I would be the first one to support Dauntless Bloodsports Campaigner. However, the candidate platforms are directly influenced by their personality. Feducci happens to be both cool-ish stabby guy and have a platform that is in tune with general dog-eats-dog criminal-ish feel of the underground London.
This could perhaps be slightly hm, what’s the word, like "avoided" but less final- anyway, if new candidates were introduced, not met in-game previously, a blank slates of sorts. But then, I suppose the elections wouldn’t be such impactful events- knowing the candidates from previous interactions, one tends to be emotionally tied to them. edited by gronostaj on 7/10/2017
I think it’s disingenuous to say that candidates’ reputations and platforms make absolutely no difference. People (some people, not necessarily all - I wouldn’t want to speak for everyone) can and have made perfectly informed decisions to vote for who they have voted for based entirely on a candidate’s beliefs and campaign platform. Some of them did so and voted for Feducci. Whether one can feel out one’s way to agreeing with them, or seeing why they did so, is another matter entirely, but the fact is that not everyone who voted for the winner did so simply because they might think he’s a badass, and definitely not because they or their characters are evil, an implication which I’ve seen once or twice and which I find quite unsettling. Some people simply liked his promises.
I find it helps assuage the bitterness or disappointment of one’s candidate not winning to look at it as Plynkes says - FBG will not punish players for taking a story option they themselves provided and gave equal platform to. The election is less about governance and significant reform of our little browser game and more about a side-character getting a little more bonus content. Sure, it’s a shame to some - I’m still sad we didn’t get more of the Jovial Contrarian out of last year - but ultimately it means we will see more of an extremely interesting individual as a supplement to future festivals. As someone who loves to RP, this is one time where RPing one’s severe disappointment is not so fun; better to see it from a player’s perspective.
EDIT - gronostaj made broadly the same point a little faster than I could type. edited by Barse on 7/10/2017
Again, that’s my point. People don’t care about platforms, so don’t bother with presenting us a variety of candidates with different personalities and goals. Just give us three badsses, with three badss platforms, and we might get a more even election.
yes but yours is better formulated and certainly written in better English, so let’s say you win here ;D
[quote=Kukapetal]
People don’t care about platforms, so don’t bother with presenting us a variety of candidates with different personalities and goals. Just give us three badsses, with three badss platforms, and we might get a more even election. [/quote]
[color=rgb(194, 194, 194)]Actually no, I just said people do care about platforms, they just don’t care about the moral higher ground platforms. You could as well say "just give us three reform-oriented bores and we will have an even election". Just because your candidate’s views don’t align with mainstream players choices, it doesn’t mean that people don’t choose based on platforms. They do. They just value different sort of platforms than you do.[/color] edited by gronostaj on 7/10/2017
Barse, the game made it completely clear that Feducci didn’t HAVE a platform. He was just flinging crap against a wall to see what stuck. I don’t see how anyone could have voted for him based on a platform that didn’t exist :P
Yet he won, and if that doesn’t prove that a candidates platform doesn’t matter, I don’t know what does.
But they evidently do. Last year, Sinning Jenny won, despite of the Bishop being both more badass and having a more badass platform.
The way I see it, people care about platforms. They just don’t use the same value function as you to determine which platform is best.
Fantastic! I congratulate all my fellow Feducci supporters for a job well done! Away with laws, restrictions, and morals! In with adventure, and excitement, and fountains of hot thick blood! Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to numb my face with laudanum and try to ride a fungus-column like a horse.[li]
