Remove ads

Marked for Death: A Rational Naruto Quest

Voting is open for the next 11 hours, 30 minutes
Reader mode
Vecht said:
I mean, a consensus protocol that doesn't allow consensus to change based on new information or new arguments is a poor consensus protocol?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Based on my experience in questing, I consider meta-behavioural incentivising between players very, very unlikely to result in the desired results.

At best, you end up with toxic forced engagement a la Rihaku, where sides cannot stop arguing without risking the consensus steamrolling their objections while they are afk.
 
Vecht said:
Erm. Does writing into her character bio, "She is fiercly loyal to Leaf and never hesitates to protect her allies, even if that means literally throwing herself between them and danger if necessary" count?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well, that was you, and not Hazou :p
 
Origami Clock said:
Based on my experience in questing, I consider meta-behavioural incentivising between players very, very unlikely to result in the desired results.

At best, you end up with toxic forced engagement a la Rihaku, where sides cannot stop arguing without risking the consensus steamrolling their objections while they are afk.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

*sighs in frustration at lack of ability for others in general to superrationally coordinate for global benefit at local expense of self*
 
Last edited:
I guess we should start with the obvious Schelling point. Uplift: yea or nay?

Would we vote to... I'unno, murder Akane, if it meant ensuring the safety of a civilian settlement for the next decade?
 
Vecht said:
You guys give up too easily! Who says a hivemind can't be of one mind?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It can and it has, but only when pushed against the wall. The problem is not so much agreeing to some abstract principle but bearing the costs of it. What if we decide not to kill any more civilians, and then Jiraiya orders us to do so for good reasons? Will we stick to our principles in the face of that kind of pressure? That's something that came back again and again in Jiraiya's explanation, that identity is realized by bearing costs and making sacrifices. We collectively don't like sacrifices, we want everything, conquering death included.
 
MadScientist said:
I guess we should start with the obvious Schelling point. Uplift: yea or nay?

Would we vote to... I'unno, murder Akane, if it meant ensuring the safety of a civilian settlement for the next decade?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I dont think such hypotheticals are going to be accurate for situations we might find ourselves in.

Rarely is it so cut and dry, yknow.
 
MadScientist said:
I guess we should start with the obvious Schelling point. Uplift: yea or nay?

Would we vote to... I'unno, murder Akane, if it meant ensuring the safety of a civilian settlement for the next decade?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
She could ensure the safety of more civilian settlements than that just in the amount of income she brought in through strategic use of Elemental Mastery, so no.
 
Cariyaga said:
She could ensure the safety of more civilian settlements than that just in the amount of income she brought in through strategic use of Elemental Mastery, so no.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Fine. Omega promises to save exactly one village of civilians more that Akane's net-good would have been if we murder her in cold blood. Do you think the thread would near-unanimously agree to Omega's offer?

(Omega in this example is lawful neutral and will honor his agreement.)
 
MadScientist said:
Fine. Omega promises to save exactly one village of civilians more that Akane's net-good would have been if we murder her in cold blood. Do you think the thread would near-unanimously agree to Omega's offer?

(Omega in this example is lawful neutral and will honor his agreement.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Actually I just precommit to making every universe inconsistent in which Omega presents me with a choice that makes me sad.

Roomba said:
We collectively don't like sacrifices, we want everything, conquering death included.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
MadScientist said:
Fine. Omega promises to save exactly one village of civilians more that Akane's net-good would have been if we murder her in cold blood. Do you think the thread would near-unanimously agree to Omega's offer?

(Omega in this example is lawful neutral and will honor his agreement.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's an awful lot of utility coming from nowhere. I wonder if there's any way we could capture that power and make a weapon out of it fueled by the death of woobie girlfriends.
 
The chapter was well written and executed, even if I disliked what the actual plan had us do. I didn't have the time to read through all the player comments, but was there a deeper point behind fooling around with exactly the kinds of questionnaires that neurotypical people love to make fun of?

OliWhail said:
as are chuunin representatives from almost all the clans
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Almost all... Any exceptions of note?
Dissonance said:
The HMS NaruKane.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hazou will immediately have a reason to dislike Naruto. I love it!
Vecht said:
Ask Jiraiya for more information about competitors in the tournament. It seems that Leaf would probably have dossiers on them.
  • Prioritize the teams' first round-competitors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What happened to this section @Velorien? Off-screen or hasn't happened yet?
 
MadScientist said:
Also, my own hivemind has asked me to relay the following answers:
  • No.
  • Yes.
  • Why can't we just have everyone be alive and happy?! IS THAT SO FUCKING HARD?!
  • NO.
  • YES.
  • *sobbing*
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

FWIW, mine has about the same responses.

...But they at least can agree to all get behind a single option when it's determined to be the winner. :p
 
We already have tags on "Rolodex of Doom" for all Hotsprings kiddos.

We're not fighting the Sand Genin, and we wont have to fight the Sand Genin. Lets not bother wasting effort on this until it becomes relevant in some unlikely future universe.
 
@Cariyaga I guess the Senju is a given as well. I was more curious if there are any unexpected exceptions.

@MadScientist Me not being a true utilitarian my answer would be that, no, a random civilian settlement or two is not worth a person who is "ours". In that way I am more similar to Jiraiya than to the MC.
 
MMKII said:
Thats not what TYS points are though. Those are solely just for witnessing absolutely terrible stuff, to the point where you become jaded about things and the lesser horrors scare you a bit less.

These often seem to be written off as "general badass points" or something, but thats not what they are.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

@Velorien has Insightful-ed this FWIW
 
Rafin said:
@MadScientist Me not being a true utilitarian my answer would be that, no, a random civilian settlement or two is not worth a person who is "ours". In that way I am more similar to Jiraiya than to the MC.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So just so we're on the same page. Let's say you had full control of Hazou, and hypothetically Pein came by and presented you with this choice over and over. Is there a point at which you'd say "no, just kill them," or would you keep going, happily agreeing the whole time until you've decided to eradicate the entire human race?
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Voting is open for the next 11 hours, 30 minutes
Remove ads
Back
Top