Well yes but you see…
It’s Butler
Well prince is it’s own issue.
If Fool is to be removed, we probably need a replacement neutral that’s not Unique
1 Like
You can’t be reasonably sure there isn’t another. That’s gambler’s fallacy. Also 3 neuts being confirmed isn’t something you can rely on at all
Doubt in the form of “we could be majorly punished despite yeeting a non-BD” is extremely unhealthy. Scorned is much different, as it’s actually possible to use deduction to find out if a Scorned is afoot. Whether that be finding the investigator is lying, or seeing that maybe that BD got framed.
This is utterly impossible in a timely manner. Fools have the capacity to act 100% like an evil, and an evil a fool. Why do you think people always say Fool is extremely easy?
you can’t 100% confirm people’s alignments with social deduction anyway, that’s not how it works.
Leaving it alone means you’re allowing a non-BD with a vote against you to live. Knight can’t reliably kill it because Hide. Hunter’s Mark is actually pretty unreliable.
1 Like
amelia i’m beginning to think you hate every neut at this point lol
this isn’t necessarily a bad thing tho lol
I definitely… overplay my dislike of neuts
but unironically though I think alch and fool badly need reworks
there is no point in suggesting to remove half the neutrals from the game without providing replacements because even as it is people complain about the lack of neutral variety
same goes if you’re suggesting for them to be reworked
you would have to say how
1 Like
fool is simple
FoL Fool yeet
Alchemist… I legitimately don’t know what I’d to do it at the moment, hence you don’t see me talk about it much