- Location
- the netherlands
[X] Give him the firecracker.
Looking over it, his injuries aren't anything immediate. His face is burnt and his ear blown up. We take him back, they'll just wrap it up in herbs and hope it doesn't get infected, but otherwise the damage is done.
Could we maybe lure the bird into ground that hosts the worms? Then they'd attack it.
Looks to be Haast's Eagle, or very strongly inspred by it. A creature of New Zealand in our world, along with the Moa. Described in the legends of the Māori under the names of Pouakai, Hokioi, or Hakawai. Interesting
n addition to the concerns others have already bought up, a single firecracker against a monster prehistoric eagle doesn't seem like good odds to me. Particularly when the ones wielding it are five or six at the most. Picking one's battles is a virtue - if if will come back, we can meet it better prepared. Multiple grenades would be nice.
I think you'd need to make them as smart as ravens for people not to exterminate them. Eagles that specifically hunt bipedial things are kind of a threat.Although the Haakwai are obviously not going to be scared off by some firecrackers, if he can hit it then the smell of burning feathers will trigger a flight reaction for the bird. Unlike Haast's Eagle, Haakwai have a long history of interaction with humans and have a basic awareness of the danger of human weapons.
I think you'd need to make them as smart as ravens for people not to exterminate them.
Another interesting datum about the Moa and Haast's Eagles of New Zealand: they grew as large as they did thanks to the evolutionary process of island gigantism. Are we in an archipelago empire or what?
Oh, and I stand by my reasoning: we have only one shot against the monster bird. If something goes wrong (a miss or a premature detonation, say), that's it.
As a 22 year old, I still know very little about medicine and injuries. This isn't meta-expertise (of which I have none), it's just a snap judgement. Must we pick one over the other, is it possible to get both?I'm sure as a 3 year old we are an expert on medicine and injuries, and thus well positioned to make an accurate diagnosis of our brother's condition.
As a 22 year old, I still know very little about medicine and injuries. This isn't meta-expertise (of which I have none), it's just a snap judgement. Must we pick one over the other, is it possible to get both?
Either we save our brother and definitely lose the meat, or we save some meat and the chance of our brother dying goes up a bit.
After the GM's post, I'm more inclined towards saving big bro, but given a choice between one or both, I certainly tried my best to pick both.
That said, the votes are almost overwhelmingly for refusing, so I don't particularly feel a need to change my vote anyways.
The meat will affect perceptions too. Boros is pretty deadset on saving some part of the moa and the bird may very well come back later if you don't scare it off.
Not to mention what the rest of the village will think, not so much of you but of your family. That was the largest moa, after all.
No, we can't do both, I'm aware.As Boros himself mentions, we can't really do both. Splitting off into two groups, one taking your brother away and the other cutting the meat will take too long.
Absolutely. And one of the things people will learn about us is whether we panic, or if we can stay calm during an 'incident' and do what has to be done.What's so important to Vashti about saving the meat? So what if we lose the meat? Sure, there will probably be consequences, but would a 3 year old consider that?
There's also more than just the material benefits which we aren't going to see; this vote will shape others' perceptions of us depending on which way we choose.
That's effectively pointless. We're 3. Our character is hardly established, and more importantly, both options are things our character could do! Hence having the options! We determine our character, not the other way around.I am voting on what I think would be in character though.
We just tried to cheer up our sister, after all.
No, we can't do both, I'm aware.
But Boros also says our brother will live, and the meat will be stolen. We could conceivably do the meat and then tend to his injuries and have him be okay, but it's exceedingly unlikely that we could tend to his injuries and then come back for the meat.
I am voting on what I think would be in character though.
We just tried to cheer up our sister, after all.
Absolutely. Considering I know approximately as much about his injuries as our character, you can point to me as somebody who has been convinced, rather than somebody who is certain of the outcome.The main issue is that Boros is not a rational actor here. He says that because he's trying to convince you. He really doesn't know anymore than you do whether your brother will live.
That's one argument for it, yes.If it was unreasonable and OOC I wouldn't have put it as a fucking option
That's one argument for it, yes.
But voters tend to not trust GMs. Traps, traps everywhere.
"You're a magical witch, and a girl with a bloody sword is standing right in front of you, prepared to attack you. Do you
[] Fly away on your broom
[] Use magic to attack
[] Punch her in the face!"
Protip, some of those actions are better than the others.
"You're a magical witch, and a girl with a bloody sword is standing right in front of you, prepared to attack you. Do you
In the very quest you bring up, I begged the voters not to be stupid.That cuts a little close to a currently running quest. I dunno if it's intentional, but it does sound a bit derisive.
Anyway,
[X] Refuse
Just an example of options presented not always being reasonable, in response toLet's not get into a discussion about another quest as much as I like the pageviews
If it was unreasonable and OOC I wouldn't have put it as a fucking option
[X] Uncork the Moa Pee, cut into the top of the container to open it up, and throw it at the Hakwaii's eyes
Like, even if we die, it's a good trade for the village for us to kill this thing.