a tooltip in other skills, not king’s skill 
Again, this is just a suggestion, made in like 10 minutes. Feel free to suggest your ideas.
RNG is bad because it can take winning or losing out of the player’s hands, and Social Deduction depends on predictable interactions to make the game winnable for both sides.
The less RNG the better.
6 Likes
Holy shit. You actually took my suggestion XD. I feel like I am the only one who actualy knows why this is so good.
No, we can see why it’s so good
I’m just not sure I want a King with two kills lol
Alright
https://forum.imperium42.com/t/king-rework-icibalus-edition/40652/1
https://forum.imperium42.com/t/king-rework-orangeandblack5-edition/40698/1
The most frequent reason I’ve heard for allies being a bad thing or a “crutch” is that there is no counterclaiming against it. I think this is a bit of a crappy argument, since you cannot counterclaim a sheriff/paladin in a very similar way. Neutrals took the brunt of this. I think having allies show the following for the following type of kings will be sufficient to fix this:
Good king uses allies on:
BD: ally
neutral: ally
scum: not an ally
Neutral king uses allies on:
BD: BD
neutral: neutral
scum: scum
Evil king uses allies on:
BD: not an ally
neutral: ally
scum: ally
In this way, neutrals no longer have large claiming problems. If it works better the neutral result for evil king can also be not an ally. Evil king can still find his allies and do something as evil king, aside from decide fating prince/sheriff. Starting king can prove its usefulness, so he won’t be exed immediately for a royal blood BD. Neutral king is naturally a bit stronger as his win condition is harder. If we don’t like allies, reduce its usage to 3 and it is still in a good spot in my opinion. I personally have nothing against allies.
But Neutrals aren’t even the huge issue. Personally, I never cared at all if Neutrals got killed because King. Hell, I was the first to put them on the stand.
The issues with Allies are much larger than that. They turn the game into “follow the King” for the entire early game. That’s not particularly fun to play with or against.
6 Likes
Interesting… Not sure how this will pan out, but I’m more than happy to give it a try.
But you could say the same thing about any investigative role. Like, if a Sheriff or Observer outs themselves and says they have info, it’s the same thing, no? That people will follow and protect them because they have info, and it can’t be counterclaimed or anything, just like King’s check. I’m not getting what the difference between Allies and Sheriff/Paladin/Observer in that regard.
People are going to follow whoever has info and can find evil, regardless of who that role is. You’re just changing the “who” is all. So, that’s really an argument against investigative roles in general, and obviously the game wouldn’t work if you got rid of all of them.
Like, I mean, if a Sheriff posts “N3 - Check 5 UNSEEN” in chat, people don’t line up the exact same way as they do for King’s checks? They do, because it’s all about info. So, w/o Allies, all your doing is changing the game from “Follow the King” to “Follow the Sheriff” or “Follow the Observer.” I don’t understand why King is supposed to be so special in that regard. The problem, if you insist is one, still exists in either case because people are going to follow investigative roles regardless (even if the info could be fake, just like it could be even with King’s Allies due to Evil King) just to move the game along and prevent nothing from happening.
But all this is off topic anyway. This is about the change the King’s night ability being Killer Guards, not Allies, so whatever.
1 Like
He is the king. He should be a power player and it’s a matter of opinion if each role should be equally powerful. Note I don’t think they have to be. Prince is also a more powerful BD and if he’s outed, everyone follows prince. The same now even holds for sheriff. That is not a problem in your case then? If you’re not an investigative, you typically have to follow someone’s claim anyways. You expect to lead the court as an unconfirmed physician in the early game? This is a game of social deduction and you are bound to have to rely on other people. Having that person be designated at the start to get the early game rolling is to me not an issue.
One of the unique traits of this game is that king is a central role, but his faction is unknown. Crippling him by taking away his main use is ludicrous. You might as well delete the king class.
The neutsout meta, created due to king’s allies, is a problem if you are a neut. Obviously not, the other way around.
Observer can be converted. Scorned can claim observer. Fool can claim Observer. Observer claim is not confirmed and can be scum. The accused can have some level of counter play where they convince the court.
King is…King.
If you reveal as the Sheriff, you are in danger.
The King was already revealed and much more sturdy, plus evils will know that you could be on their side.
That’s a huge difference.
Then you must disagree with the new patch as well, because they funneled all that allies power into conversion immune, not counterclaimable, sheriff, who is confirmed good, as opposed to king whose faction was at least still up in the air.
Fool and Scorned exist. Pretty much every game I ever play as Fool I just claim Sheriff and wait to be cc’d. Scum can also claim Sheriff.
The game literally used to be like this, with a normal King and nonconvertible Sheriff. Everyone new is acting like it is some sort of revolution. It is not. It is just reverting the game back to it’s original state as it gives a much healthier dynamic.
2 Likes