"Double Bluff"

[Ellye]

Why is so many people (including Haley in the comics) calling the stone pillar with the gate inside it a "double bluff"? If that gate is real, this looks like a straightforward bluff.

It would be a double bluff if the gate was, indeed, in another pyramid.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/double_bluff

An action which is intended to be perceived as a bluff, but which is not.

[hamishspence]

There's an explanation in the main 895 thread:




This is a double bluff, not a single bluff.
They first bluff is the false bluff that the gate is not there, and the second is the gate being there.

Details:
It was originally obvious to the observers (the OOTS) that the gate was in the pyramid. This contains no bluff.
When they reach the gate room, it says the gate is not there. This makes the evidence that the gate was in the pyramid into bluff.
The gate is actually in the pyramid, despite the sign. double bluff.

Simpler:
All evidence says the gate is in the pyramid, but once inside, it appears the entire pyramid is a bluff (#1).
In fact, the sign saying that the pyramid is a bluff is a bluff (#2), and the gate is within the pyramid.

[Ellye]

This is a double bluff, not a single bluff.
They first bluff is the false bluff that the gate is not there, and the second is the gate being there.Unless that gate is false, the gate being there isn't a bluff, I think.


Well, I guess we can count the pyramid as a whole as a double bluff, though. That would do.

[Shale]

Single bluff: You tell a lie.

Double bluff: You tell the truth, and then claim it was a lie.

In this case, the initial truth is that the pyramid is so well-defended because the Gate is there. Girard never put up a "GATE HERE" sign so it's an implication rather than a statement, but it counts.

[Ellye]

Yeah, my question and my confusion were due to me believing that people (and Haley) were calling the stone, by itself, a double bluff.

But I see now that it makes sense to call the pyramid as a whole a double bluff, and that this is what Haley and Roy likely meant.

[Syncro]

Could be a triple bluff and just another illusion or a fake gate :wink:
I mean the blood empire is filled with rougish players so itd seem obvious to screw with them too

[Fish]

I find it convenient (for the triple bluff theory) that we cannot see inside the gate. We cannot see if the Snarl is there (which is what Girard might assume) or the world which Blackwing saw.

[Amarsir]

If the entire pyramid was built around protecting this center room, and then the gate wasn't there, that would be a (single) bluff. To point everyone there, and then say it's not there when it actually is? That's a double.

[Sylthia]

I think it's more a bluff or triple-bluff. A double bluff would be if the gate was in fact in another pyramid. A triple bluff is expecting it to be a double bluff.

Bluff: It's in another pyramid

Double-Bluff: It's in another pyramid (Expect people to think you're lying and waste time trying to find it in this pyramid.)

Triple-Bluff: It's in another pyramid (Expect people to think you are telling a double-bluff and wouldn't be so obvious to let them know it's somewhere else and think it is foolish for Girard to think he could trick you into wasting further time in this pyramid.)

[jere7my]

I think it's more a bluff or triple-bluff. A double bluff would be if the gate was in fact in another pyramid. A triple bluff is expecting it to be a double bluff.

Bluff: It's in another pyramid

Double-Bluff: It's in another pyramid (Expect people to think you're lying and waste time trying to find it in this pyramid.)

Triple-Bluff: It's in another pyramid (Expect people to think you are telling a double-bluff and wouldn't be so obvious to let them know it's somewhere else and think it is foolish for Girard to think he could trick you into wasting further time in this pyramid.)

If you have nothing in your hand but you convince your opponents that you have pocket aces, that's a bluff. If you have pocket aces, but you convince your opponents that you're bluffing and have nothing, that's a double bluff.

Girard has pocket aces, and convinced Nale that the entire pyramid was a bluff. That's a double bluff.

[Porthos]

If you have nothing in your hand but you convince your opponents that you have pocket aces, that's a bluff. If you have pocket aces, but you convince your opponents that you're bluffing and have nothing, that's a double bluff.

Girard has pocket aces, and convinced Nale that the entire pyramid was a bluff. That's a double bluff.

From wiki:


double bluff (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/double_bluff) (plural double bluffs)

An action which is intended to be perceived as a bluff, but which is not.

So, pretty much what you said. Best explanation I've seen so far.

[The Giant]

The first bluff is not the text on the pyramid; it's the entire pyramid itself. The bluff is, "Hey, look, here's a pyramid filled with traps and illusions, don't you wonder what we're guarding with all this?"

The text on the pyramid, if taken in that context, is not a bluff—it's the "truth" that gets revealed when the bluff has been exposed. In the same way as the message that Girard recorded in the desert was not a bluff; the fake coordinates were. The message was just the reveal that the fake coordinates had been a bluff.

The default assumption is that if you go through a dungeon purporting to guard an artifact, that artifact will be there. When it's not there, then the builder of that dungeon "bluffed" you into exploring it. And when, after making you think you got bluffed in that manner, it turns out it really IS there, then that's a double bluff.

The message is critical because without the message, Nale would be far less likely to think that the Gate simply wasn't there at all. He would just think he hadn't found the right room yet. The main reason he accepts the words on the block is that it's the exact same set-up as the desert message: Here's a bluff, you fell for it, sucks to be you. It relies on the assumption of the target that Girard is likely to pull such a trick, which is a good assumption after you've seen him pull the exact same trick in the desert.

[Vinsfeld]

In short, it's like he's bluffing about a bluff. In that case he's lying about a lie (the lie being the text about the gate)


Ninja'd by the Giant

[Vaylon]

The so-called double bluff doesn't make any sense to me. Why, when presented with words inscribed on a big pillar from an illusionist, would you simply accept what it said at face value? More importantly, the labor required in getting through all the traps is more likely to make people emotionally invested in believing that something is there -- despite the message that there isn't -- due to the sunk cost fallacy.

In other words, if you've made it that far into the dungeon, you have very little to lose by disregarding what's inscribed on the pillar and continuing your search.

[Siosilvar]

The so-called double bluff doesn't make any sense to me. Why, when presented with words inscribed on a big pillar from an illusionist, would you simply accept what it said at face value? More importantly, the labor required in getting through all the traps is more likely to make people emotionally invested in believing that something is there -- despite the message that there isn't -- due to the sunk cost fallacy.

He did it before (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0694.html), why wouldn't he do it again?

[Porthos]

The so-called double bluff doesn't make any sense to me. Why, when presented with words inscribed on a big pillar from an illusionist, would you simply accept what it said at face value? More importantly, the labor required in getting through all the traps is more likely to make people emotionally invested in believing that something is there -- despite the message that there isn't -- due to the sunk cost fallacy.

In other words, if you've made it that far into the dungeon, you have very little to lose by disregarding what's inscribed on the pillar and continuing your search.

What does Girard have to lose by attempting a double bluff?

If he does nothing, there is a giant gate sitting out in the open. (0% success rate at hiding)

If he encases it in a stone he runs the risk of someone hacking at it in frustration. (X% success rate at hiding)

By making a double bluff he gets Y percentage of people to buy the bluff and leave (And in so doing hope that Y is larger than X). He may hope for 100% success rate. He may only expect a 25% success rate. But even the latter is better than a 0% success rate at hiding it.

[orrion]

The so-called double bluff doesn't make any sense to me. Why, when presented with words inscribed on a big pillar from an illusionist, would you simply accept what it said at face value? More importantly, the labor required in getting through all the traps is more likely to make people emotionally invested in believing that something is there -- despite the message that there isn't -- due to the sunk cost fallacy.

In other words, if you've made it that far into the dungeon, you have very little to lose by disregarding what's inscribed on the pillar and continuing your search.

Well, Nale didn't accept it at face value right away. He had his casters cast Divinations on it, remember?

Roy and Haley are a bit more inclined to think beyond that because they were present when Girard pulled the same trick.

Xykon and Redcloak wouldn't fall for it either because they have the true coordinates of the Gates (something neither the Linear Guild or the Order has at this point).

Also, it could be that Nale is going to come back in the short term with a "Gotcha, morons. Everyone's been spewing that "let the heroes do it for you" stuff that I totally had to get in on it."

[Bird]

The so-called double bluff doesn't make any sense to me. Why, when presented with words inscribed on a big pillar from an illusionist, would you simply accept what it said at face value? More importantly, the labor required in getting through all the traps is more likely to make people emotionally invested in believing that something is there -- despite the message that there isn't -- due to the sunk cost fallacy.

In other words, if you've made it that far into the dungeon, you have very little to lose by disregarding what's inscribed on the pillar and continuing your search.
Agreed about the sunk cost fallacy. Girard probably knew that this bluff was unlikely to work. However, why not throw it in there anyway? If it would convince even 10% of the folks who might potentially get to it, it'd be worth having. Once you erect the stone it costs nothing further to maintain, and there's something nice about a trick which involve no magic, unlike many of the pyramid defenses.

And from Nale's perspective -- well, Nale is rash, and a doofus, and quick to panic, and he falls into that 10%. So is Belkar, for that matter. But it didn't fool Roy, who has a decent wisdom. Not for a moment. It didn't fool Haley. I don't think it fooled Malack, either. So: yeah, it's not the highest percentage bluff, but that doesn't make it useless.

Edit: ninja'd

[Vaylon]

He did it before (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0694.html), why wouldn't he do it again?

There are a couple reasons I disagree with this reasoning.

1. There's a difference between me falsely telling someone I've buried a treasure in the desert, which is easy to do and costs me nothing, and me building an expensive deathtrap guarded by my family that contains nothing.

2. One pyramid is easier to search than an entire desert.

3. As I said before, people who make it that far into the pyramid will be emotionally invested in believing that something is in the pyramid due to the sunk cost fallacy (i.e., "We've sacrificed so much -- there has to be something here!").

4. He's an illusionist. Why take the stone pillar at face value?

[Porthos]

There are a couple reasons I disagree with this reasoning.

1. There's a difference between me falsely telling someone I've buried a treasure in the desert, which is easy to do and costs me nothing, and me building an expensive deathtrap guarded by my family that contains nothing.

2. One pyramid is easier to search than an entire desert.

3. As I said before, people who make it that far into the pyramid will be emotionally invested in believing that something is in the pyramid due to the sunk cost fallacy (i.e., "We've sacrificed so much -- there has to be something here!").

4. He's an illusionist. Why take the stone pillar at face value?

Again, what does he lose by the attempt?

[Vaylon]

What does Girard have to lose by attempting a double bluff?

Like Haley says in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0697.html), "The message would actually increase the chances of someone finding the gate."

[Jay R]

In short, it's like he's bluffing about a bluff. In that case he's lying about a lie (the lie being the text about the gate)


Nale just doesn't trust Girard enough to believe that he lied. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0179.html)

[Bulldog Psion]

Meh, I just set it down to a verbal slip on Haley's part and left it at that. Our mouths don't always fire off finely crafted verbal perfection, after all. :smallwink:

[Bird]

4. He's an illusionist. Why take the stone pillar at face value?
If you've got all the time in the world, and you're thinking clearly there's no reason to. But: imagine your party is wounded, and disoriented/confused by whatever the Draketooths have thrown at you, and that there are still some defenders running down the hall ready to get you. You might just panic and retreat in a fit of exasperation, giving the Draketooths time to rejigger their defenses.

[Vinsfeld]

Nale just doesn't trust Girard enough to believe that he lied. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0179.html)

Nice catch, there. Made me laugh hard.

[Porthos]

Like Haley says in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0697.html), "The message would actually increase the chances of someone finding the gate."

But Haley could be wrong. She isn't omniscient after all.

Again:
X percent of people would be fooled by a giant block with no writing.
Y percent of people would be fooled by a taunting message on a block.

Is X > Y? Unknowable. Completely and utterly unknowable. Girard is taking a calculated risk that people attempt to discover what is in the rock and fail (like Nale did) or leave completely.

Remember, it was Roy's knowledge of architecture, and not trying to figure out if Girard was lying or not, which sealed the deal.

Either way both X and Y are > 0. Sooner or later you just gots to go with what brought you to the dance. With Girard, that is trickery and misdirection. Thus he chose to go for Y. Which is perfectly in character for him.

After all, Girard isn't omniscient when it comes to what motivates people, either. :smalltongue:

[rodneyAnonymous]

:haley: "Double bluffs work best when your target is so prepared for you to be lying that they never think to question your admission that you're lying." (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0697.html)

Nale did question the admission, but he assumed magic would give him an accurate answer, and accepted the lie.

[Vaylon]

Girard is taking a calculated risk that people attempt to discover what is in the rock and fail (like Nale did) or leave completely.

That isn't smart, nor is it consistent with what an epic-level Illusionist would do. Refer back to Haley's explanation of shell games (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0428.html).

Why have something in the rock at all? Why not, say, have the gate under the floor instead of in the rock?

[Porthos]

Nale did question the admission, but he assumed magic would give him an accurate answer, and accepted the lie.

This is the important part. When Nale was confronted with the message the very first thing he did was demand everyone attempt to see if it was real or not.

The only thing he didn't think of doing was hitting it with a stick.

Does that show he is unimaginative and/or over reliant on magic? Sure.

But that just means Nale falls in the Y% of people who will either accept the message at face value or attempt to figure out what is in the rock and fail.

[Warren Dew]

Like Haley says in this comic (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0697.html), "The message would actually increase the chances of someone finding the gate."
She was talking about the message in the desert, not the message on the stone.

The message on the stone can only increase the chances of someone finding the gate if that someone is wandering through the pyramid looking for the gate, but somehow doesn't suspect that it might be inside this huge, heavily guarded block of stone in the exact center of the pyramid. Such people are likely a vanishingly small fraction of the people who make it to the gate room.

[Porthos]

Why have something in the rock at all? Why not, say, have the gate under the floor instead of in the rock?

Because he wants to be able to access it easily on some level? He wants to have a central location for a latch ditch defense?

Because he thought of the rock defense AFTER he built the ziggurat?

Because he isn't omniscient?

Because it's a story and the heroes have to be able to find the MacGuffin? :smalltongue:

Remember, he didn't have to build a heavily defended ziggurat. He could have just buried it in the sand somewhere (by pouring a metric ton of sand over it) and kill anyone who entered the valley.

Functionally this isn't all that different from sealing a gate in a Sapphire Gem. If the paladins hadn't decided to name themselves the Sapphire Guard and if they hadn't mouthed off about it where scrying sorcerers could overhear, things might have gone differently.

As it was, Girard's message worked on Nale. And it was irrelevant toward Roy, since he figured it out through other means.

Sooner or later, people are going to find your Gate no matter where you put it. This was simply a last ditch attempt at one final throw of the dice. That it worked on anyone proves that it wasn't done in vain.

[rodneyAnonymous]

What does Girard have to lose by attempting a double bluff?

I agree. It is not a risk at all; it is a last-ditch effort, if the many other defenses are defeated. The stone and lead layers is a pretty clever set-up, and hey, it worked.

[Vaylon]

Because it's a story and the heroes have to be able to find the MacGuffin? :smalltongue:

At last, a plausible answer that satisfies me.

[The Giant]

That isn't smart, nor is it consistent with what an epic-level Illusionist would do.

I was going to write a long defense of this, but then I got to this line and decided, "Screw it." Whatever perfect mental image you have of a flawless epic character who can predict every response and outwit it before it happens with three dozen spells, that's not the character I created. I don't care whether this is what you think an epic-level illusionist would do. It's what Girard did, for a dozen reasons. Go ahead and hate it if you want.

Girard was not infallible. He was deeply, deeply fallible. That's kinda the point. If you want to write a story where the NPCs are ultra-competent so the actual protagonists don't have to do anything because the MacGuffin is safe before they begin, feel free. It's not the story I'm telling, though.

[Sunken Valley]

I was going to write a long defense of this, but then I got to this line and decided, "Screw it." Whatever perfect mental image you have of a flawless epic character who can predict every response and outwit it before it happens with three dozen spells, that's not the character I created. I don't care whether this is what you think an epic-level illusionist would do. It's what Girard did, for a dozen reasons. Go ahead and hate it if you want.

Girard was not infallible. He was deeply, deeply fallible. That's kinda the point. If you want to write a story where the NPCs are ultra-competent so the actual protagonists don't have to do anything because the MacGuffin is safe before they begin, feel free. It's not the story I'm telling, though.

Well I thought it was the best defended gate of them all (haven't seen the last gate though). I think all the gates are good but they all have flaws because the scribble were all fallible and didn't team up to guard gates.

Edit: although only Soon really prepared himself from undead spellcasters. The other 3 we saw didn't really do that. I assume they must be rare.

[Halaku]

I was going to write a long defense of this, but then I got to this line and decided, "Screw it." Whatever perfect mental image you have of a flawless epic character who can predict every response and outwit it before it happens with three dozen spells, that's not the character I created. I don't care whether this is what you think an epic-level illusionist would do. It's what Girard did, for a dozen reasons. Go ahead and hate it if you want.

Girard was not infallible. He was deeply, deeply fallible. That's kinda the point. If you want to write a story where the NPCs are ultra-competent so the actual protagonists don't have to do anything because the MacGuffin is safe before they begin, feel free. It's not the story I'm telling, though.

I would love to hear (well.. read) that. Not because I think you have to defend anything, but because I always like the new insights on the characters' minds.

[Liliet]

I think people forget that the main purpose of hiding and guarding the Gates wasn`t to fight off those who know about them and seek them out deliberately. The main purpose was to prevent someone incidentally finding them, like it was when the rifts first appeared. The main purpose was to hide, to make them "private", not "public". If you put them just somewhere in the sand in the middle of the desert, there`s always a chance that someone will dig there and find the Gate without ever intending to. But if you put the Gate in your secured pyramid, there`s only a small percentage of people who would risk to burst through it. Only few people actually have the mentality of adventurers: "Protected --> something interesting", the majority goes more like "Protected --> not my business".
The default assumption when hiding the Gate was that almost nobody knows about them. Order of the Scribble took care to destroy all avaliable information about the Gates. They were supposed to be the only once who know about them.
Girard, when protecting his Gate, had a specific enemy in mind, even two enemies. One was just ordinary people who may have stumbled upon it were it left unsupervised. This one was fixed by the Windy Valley enchantment, invisibility of the pyramid and people actually living there. The other was Soon and his paladins, and the defence of the Gate was mostly build to throw them off, and Girard must have though that the bluff would work on them. Especially if, as someone proposed, there was an illusion of Gate on the stone, and the bluff was not so obvious.

It turned out there was one more source of information left, specifically goblins and the Dark One. Paladins tried to take care of that, but failed. Girard could not have known this. This was an unlikely event, and even then, the defence would most likely have worked if not for Familicide which could not be predicted and accounted for by any means. This is indeed the most protected Gate.


The idea of "hide it somewhere else where no-one would think to search for it" works only if there`s some specific person or group that will find it important, and everyone else just doesn`t matter. If you want to hide, for example, a major artifact that looks like an ordinary rock, and you don`t need access to it for yourself, the best strategy would indeed be leaving it somewhere random, assuming that the chance of someone capable of realising that this is a major artifact stumbling upon it there is much smaller than the chance of someone seeking for the artifact finding it in your lair. But the Gate does not look like an ordinary rock, even if disguised it`s an unusually large rock which cannot be relocated. So it just wouldn`t work. The Gate MUST be somewhere guarded. Choosing the strategy of how to guard and hide it is Girard`s decision, and we don`t know much about his choice since most of the defence is already destroyed without a trace.

[tomandtish]

The first bluff is not the text on the pyramid; it's the entire pyramid itself. The bluff is, "Hey, look, here's a pyramid filled with traps and illusions, don't you wonder what we're guarding with all this?"

The text on the pyramid, if taken in that context, is not a bluff—it's the "truth" that gets revealed when the bluff has been exposed. In the same way as the message that Girard recorded in the desert was not a bluff; the fake coordinates were. The message was just the reveal that the fake coordinates had been a bluff.

The default assumption is that if you go through a dungeon purporting to guard an artifact, that artifact will be there. When it's not there, then the builder of that dungeon "bluffed" you into exploring it. And when, after making you think you got bluffed in that manner, it turns out it really IS there, then that's a double bluff.The message is critical because without the message, Nale would be far less likely to think that the Gate simply wasn't there at all. He would just think he hadn't found the right room yet. The main reason he accepts the words on the block is that it's the exact same set-up as the desert message: Here's a bluff, you fell for it, sucks to be you. It relies on the assumption of the target that Girard is likely to pull such a trick, which is a good assumption after you've seen him pull the exact same trick in the desert.

I've found the bluff/double bluff discussion interesting, because personally I would have called it a bluff.

Clarification: For purposes of his comic the Giant can use any definition he pleases. It's a great story, which is always what's important!

From several dictionaries:

double bluff (plural double bluffs)
1. An action which is intended to be perceived as a bluff, but which is not.


double bluff noun [C]
UK
Definition
› a clever attempt to deceive someone, especially by telling them the truth when they think you are telling lies

double bluff
- definition
NOUN [COUNTABLE]
singular double bluff
plural double bluffs
a situation in which you tell someone the truth but hope that they will not believe you because they will think that you are lying

In short, the whole point of a double bluff is to tell someone the truth, but to convince them you are lying/bluffing. It's not two separate bluffs, it's making you think someone is trying to bluff you when they aren't. I'm not sure the idea of the dungeon existing itself constitutes part of the bluff, because it was never advertised to exist. Gerard didn't put up signs, etc. to tell people about it and did his best to keep it a secret.


To use poker terms, Gerard would certainly not rather play. When someone finds his dungeon however, he's forced to ante in. (I know he's dead, but bear with me). The cards come and the pot raises until the final hole card, at which point he bluffs (your princess is not here). Nale and company fold (by walking away). Our heroes call the bluff.

A true double bluff (IM humble O) would be something along the lines of a big flashy box holding the actual gate saying "Congratulations, here's your gate. Press here to enter". At which point everyone says "Wait, it can't be that easy" and walks away. That's a double bluff.

Using the part of your quote above, he simply bluffed you into thinking you were wrong in assuming it was there in the first place.

Again Rich, great comic. I think some of the bluff discussion may have been because of differing definitions of double bluff.

[rodneyAnonymous]

It is a double-bluff according to the definitions you gave. If the writing on the pillar were true, then the whole trap-filled pyramid is a single-bluff. It's not true, though, so double.

Or: The truth is that Girard set up this pyramid and all its defenses to guard a Gate. The lie is written on the pillar: sorry, no, the Gate is not actually here, there is more than one pyramid. The first thing was true though; Nale was fooled partly by expecting lies.

Nobody is using different definitions of double-bluff.

[Fish]

Why have something in the rock at all? Why not, say, have the gate under the floor instead of in the rock?
Rule 1: The Gate is where it is. It cannot be moved (except, in theory, by Redcloak and Xykon acting together). Girard can't say, "It would be better if the Gate were in a secret cave somewhere else." Girard can't say, "This location isn't ideal because someone could easily find this." As in golf, he's got to play the ball where it lies.

We know from the Crayons of Time that the Gate was above ground, in a desert. That's where the Gate is. No fooling, no "what if," no Girard-should-be-more-epic-than-that. See Rule 1. Wherever the Gate is, that's where he has to guard it.

So you can say, "Why didn't Girard lead the adventurers somewhere else?" You could ask, "Is this in fact the real gate?" You could ask, "Why didn't Girard do a better job of protecting it?" Those are good questions; perhaps there are false locations, false pyramids as honey traps; perhaps there are false Gates elsewhere in Windy Canyon; perhaps there are ways Girard could have done better.

But when you get down to it, the Gate must be somewhere. Must be. You just can't evade Rule 1: wherever the Gate is, that's where he must guard. Girard will do whatever it takes to divert people from it. There won't be a big welcome sign, or instructions how to destroy the universe, or a craft services buffet, or a souvenir stand with a sexy nymph hostess to greet travelers. And the Gate won't be standing out in the open, because Rule 1.

Even if the Gate were under the floor, it would still have a sign on it saying "this is not the real Gate." Because once the invader has got past everything else, what have you got to lose by trying?

[Rack]

It is a double-bluff according to the definitions you gave. If the writing on the pillar were true, then the whole trap-filled pyramid is a single-bluff. It's not true, though, so double.

Or: The truth is that Girard set up this pyramid and all its defenses to guard a Gate. The lie is written on the pillar: sorry, no, the Gate is not actually here, there is more than one pyramid. The first thing was true though; Nale was fooled partly by expecting lies.

Nobody is using different definitions of double-bluff.

The pyramid itself is a double bluff, since it is intended to look like a decoy but isn't.

The text is not a double bluff since it is intended to be perceived as the truth, but isn't. It's the payoff of the double-bluff of the pyramid itself but it still isn't a double bluff and can't be because it isn't telling the truth. There IS a definition of double bluff that says a double bluff is just a clever bluff which does apply here. But "something which is intended to be perceived as a bluff but isn't?" There's just no way, it's intended to be perceived as truth and it isn't.

[rodneyAnonymous]

...it is intended to look like a decoy but isn't. [...]

There IS a definition of double bluff that says a double bluff is just a clever bluff which does apply here. But "something which is intended to be perceived as a bluff but isn't?" There's just no way...

The pyramid is not intended to look like a decoy. By all appearances (traps, defenders...) it is really built around a Gate. The sign on the pillar at the end ("SORRY YOUR GATE IS IN ANOTHER PYRAMID") claims the pyramid is a decoy. The intention of the sign is for the pyramid to be perceived as a bluff, but it isn't.

[Liliet]

Rule 1: The Gate is where it is. It cannot be moved (except, in theory, by Redcloak and Xykon acting together). Girard can't say, "It would be better if the Gate were in a secret cave somewhere else." Girard can't say, "This location isn't ideal because someone could easily find this." As in golf, he's got to play the ball where it lies.

We know from the Crayons of Time that the Gate was above ground, in a desert. That's where the Gate is. No fooling, no "what if," no Girard-should-be-more-epic-than-that. See Rule 1. Wherever the Gate is, that's where he has to guard it.

So you can say, "Why didn't Girard lead the adventurers somewhere else?" You could ask, "Is this in fact the real gate?" You could ask, "Why didn't Girard do a better job of protecting it?" Those are good questions; perhaps there are false locations, false pyramids as honey traps; perhaps there are false Gates elsewhere in Windy Canyon; perhaps there are ways Girard could have done better.

But when you get down to it, the Gate must be somewhere. Must be. You just can't evade Rule 1: wherever the Gate is, that's where he must guard. Girard will do whatever it takes to divert people from it. There won't be a big welcome sign, or instructions how to destroy the universe, or a craft services buffet, or a souvenir stand with a sexy nymph hostess to greet travelers. And the Gate won't be standing out in the open, because Rule 1.

Even if the Gate were under the floor, it would still have a sign on it saying "this is not the real Gate." Because once the invader has got past everything else, what have you got to lose by trying?

+1
Words taken out of my mouth.

[Medic!]

Am I the only one that just read the comic, laughed at the Mario reference, and had a nice day?

[Throknor]

Am I the only one that just read the comic, laughed at the Mario reference, and had a nice day?
I think work made it not that nice a day, but you're not the only one that just enjoyed the comic without over-thinking.

[Akari Itagami]

The first bluff is not the text on the pyramid; it's the entire pyramid itself. The bluff is, "Hey, look, here's a pyramid filled with traps and illusions, don't you wonder what we're guarding with all this?"

The text on the pyramid, if taken in that context, is not a bluff—it's the "truth" that gets revealed when the bluff has been exposed. In the same way as the message that Girard recorded in the desert was not a bluff; the fake coordinates were. The message was just the reveal that the fake coordinates had been a bluff.

The default assumption is that if you go through a dungeon purporting to guard an artifact, that artifact will be there. When it's not there, then the builder of that dungeon "bluffed" you into exploring it. And when, after making you think you got bluffed in that manner, it turns out it really IS there, then that's a double bluff.

The message is critical because without the message, Nale would be far less likely to think that the Gate simply wasn't there at all. He would just think he hadn't found the right room yet. The main reason he accepts the words on the block is that it's the exact same set-up as the desert message: Here's a bluff, you fell for it, sucks to be you. It relies on the assumption of the target that Girard is likely to pull such a trick, which is a good assumption after you've seen him pull the exact same trick in the desert.

Well that works too! I just thought it wasn't considered a lie in the first place if Girard never says anything about this place before the the protagonist arrive. :smallbiggrin:

[dtilque]

Could be a triple bluff and just another illusion or a fake gate :wink:
I mean the blood empire is filled with rougish players so itd seem obvious to screw with them too

The only "rougish" players around are .... right here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0711.html)

Personally, I'd go with a quadruple bluff. The gate Roy just found would be a decoy1, but inside that (and inside more lead sheathing) would be the real gate. An illusion of the gate outside the stone block could be another layer of bluffing. Perhaps there was one but, like most of the illusions in the pyramid, it expired before anyone got there.


1 With a sign saying something like "We told you it's in another pyramid. Why don't you believe us?"

[androkguz]

Am I the only one who would have acted the way Nale did?

I mean, I assumed it was a double bluff because of metastory reasons: "Double bluffing" had already been mentioned and it made no sense to have this long ziggurat arc for nothing. As the reader of a comic you know it is a double bluff

But, if I was looking for the biggest MacGuffin hidden by the most epic illusionist of history I would really not put it past him to make this kind of mind games.

I mean, I could be optimistic and naive and assume that the gate is guarded by illusion spells, in which case Mind Blank would protect us all from the phantasms, True Seeing would thrump all the glamours/figments and vampirism/golems/etc. would be inmune to a bunch of other crap.

But really, I would imagine that an Epic illusionist would hide behind non-magical as well as magical illusions. Mind games. Tons of decoys and false stories.

And I (I mean me, the hypothetical character in the Oots world. The guy who could very well be wrong) would imagine he would have many layers of lies. First everything is just a secret society. If you find out that the secret society exist, the rumors about them are false. They would have 2 other headquarters just as guarded by illusions and illusionists, and the clan themselves might have purposefully forgotten which is the real deal (except for the leaders) just so that if one gets captured they can't spill things out.

And the three ziggurats thing would work because not all draketooth eggs would be in the same basket. Or maybe it would be best to put all your troops where the gate really is? I wouldn't be sure.

So when I got to the stone pillar, if the Draketooth were after me or if some figment was to tell me that the place was about to blow up or some other thing was putting me on the clock for my life... I would have thought "Shiiit! The bastard did it! Holy crap! That Girard was seriously prepared!" And then get the heck out.

And maybe latter I would have realized my mistake. Or I would have just searched the rest of the valley for a gate hidden below the sand. Or hell, if nothing was putting me on clock, I may have searched the rest of the pyramid first and died in a trap.

[Throknor]

I'm not sure I followed that, but I have two points: 1) he knows the illusions are missing as they found the dead Draketooths. 2) he wasn't bluffed by the words only, but by the lead sheet that stopped their magic from seeing the gate. If he had been bluffed by the words alone he wouldn't have bothered with magic.

Also, his original plan before his father made him follow the OotS was to search the windy canyon on their own. He didn't really think they were in the right place to begin with as he didn't agree with his father's dramatic views that the heroes would find the gate first.

Roy was more convinced they were in the correct place because of the canyon passage illusion and the traps on the stairs, as well as the message in the dessert. Since he thought they were in the right place to begin with, and was suspicious of the column, he decided to follow through and make certain. After all, it would be more Girard's style to put that message in another illusion and not on a stone wall.

[CowardlyPaladin]

I for example thought that the pillar was a triple bluff, or just a regular bluff depending on how you see things, and it turns out I was wrong. I see now reason why this isn't the real gate unless its a really epic illusion, which is doubtful. Essentially if all else failed, (which since nobody predicted famlicide it should have taken longer and many more illusions), its the illusionist equivalent of the last stand

[tomandtish]

So I think I see where some of the confusion on this comes from (including mine). It depends on whether you’re using Double Bluff in the poker sense or the sarcasm irony sense.

Irony/sarcasm sense (from Urban Dictionary): A specific type of of irony. When someone bluffs a bluff, if the person who originally bluffed falls for the second bluff it is a double bluff. When someone makes a sarcastic remark, if you make your own sarcastic remark believable enough to get the person to think you didn't pick up on the sarcasm.It is a double bluff:

"Hey Steve, that fish shirt you’re wearing is pretty sweet. You should wear it every day."
"Thanks Tage, I know. I love it and I am tempted to wear it every day."
"No Steve, that shirt sucks. I was just kidding."
"Obviously, DOUBLE BLUFF"

If a bunch of college guys pull a prank on some girls by staging a fake robbery in a house and the house actually gets robbed while they are joking about it being robbed. It would be a double bluff.

In Poker you have:

Bluff: Pretending you have a strong hand when you have a weak one. For example, pretending you have the flush when you have junk.

Reverse bluff: Pretending you have a weak hand when you have a strong one. For example, betting like you have junk when you have the flush. (until the end where you trap your opponent with big bets).

Double bluff (subset of reverse bluff): having the strong hand (flush) and acting like you do have the flush, but in such a way that people assume you are bluffing. For example, saying: “ahh, that 5 of hearts completes my flush” (which it actually did).

The important thing to remember is: In a reverse bluff and a double bluff, you WANT your opponent to call. You have (or believe you have) the winning hand, so when they call, you get their money.

So by poker terms, Gerard is bluffing. He doesn’t have a winning hand and definitely doesn’t want people calling. More importantly he never did. He’s never advertising he had the gate (building a temple to help hide it doesn’t count in my book since he hid the temple as well). He’s never told anyone he had the gate other than his descendants. Those who know he has it were either with him when they were found or learned from other sources. All the defenses we have seen (and presumably most of the defunct ones) were geared for “nope, no gate here”. The message is just the final part of this. Showing that he has the gate equals showing that he has a weak hand (that is, that his defenses failed). Thus, his bluff worked on Nale, Z, and Malack, and failed on our heroes. Roy called and won the gate. (What he did with it is another matter entirely).

However, since Rich seems to be using the other definition (which I’d never heard of before now), it’s all moot. It meets that definition quite easily.

And of course the final test: it was cool. Nothing else matters.

[Mollez]

Hmm...it's been about a month, I'm pretty sure this is cutting it close to thread necromancy. :smallconfused: