FoL Feedback Thread

In SFoL18 I rolled one Neutral Support, one Neutral Anti-BD, and one slot was Blue Dragon/Neutral. Let me just grab this from the Host Chat:

Rolling Classes

I don’t know how you normally roll FoL games @Ashe, but here’s how I am going to roll them.

First I will build the classlist. This will be done based off of the following template:

King (66% Good, 33% Evil)
Prince
Sheriff
Physician
Mastermind
Assassin
Neutral Killer
Neutral Offensive/Social
Neutral Support
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon/Neutral Non-Killing

The way I will be rolling for this game will be using a list of all possible classes and then eliminating them as they are picked. For example, there is guaranteed to be one Sheriff (because duh) and one Physician (because I buffed Assassin so much). When I am rolling the first Random Blue Dragon slot, I will roll out of all possible Blue Dragon roles, so there will be two Court Wizards, two Priests, etc., but only one each of Physician and Sheriff. If the first Random Blue Dragon were to roll Court Wizard, the next roll will only have one Court Wizard. In this way, the game is weighted to provide a bit more class variety over the typical way you may roll, and helps to slightly decrease the chances of unique roles appearing. This applies to Neutrals too.

Once I have a completed class list, I will simply match players to a slot by rolling each player a number and assigning them to that class.

If I were to do it again, I’d change one RBD to a RBD/NNK, leading to the following list:

King (66% Good, 33% Evil)
Prince
Sheriff
Physician
Mastermind
Assassin
Neutral Killer
Neutral Offensive/Social
Neutral Support
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon
Random Blue Dragon/Neutral Non-Killing
Random Blue Dragon/Neutral Non-Killing

Although I did not include Cult, Physician wouldn’t be required without my updates to Assassin, and you could theoretically just guarantee a healer, I think you get the general idea of what I was going for.

And I probably just pinged Ashe oops

1 Like

Unfun fact: Your proposal 1 is still incredibly swingy on the neutrals/possible neutrals
King
10BD
1 NK
1 Scorned
1 Alchemist

vs
King
9 BD
1 NK
2 Fools
1 Merc contracted to Mastermind
Proposal 2 is more swingy:
King
10BD
1 NK
1 Scorned
1 Alchemist
vs
King
King
8 BD
1 NK
2 Fools
1 Merc contracted to Mastermind
1 Merc contracted to NK

1 Like

remove merc too?

I’m only half joking tbh as I genuinely think the only good neutrals are neutral evils which have to be against town in some way - Scorned, Baron, Fool, whatever. Anything else is far too swingy and unfun.

3 Likes

We already have King as pretty large factor of swinginess in TOL and FOL, we do not need much more; I have to agree with you

I start to think that the alchemist and the merc are worse for the game than the fool, and that is not an easy thing to accomplish.

lmao I don’t have Fool in the pool

:frowning:

Cowardly is a neutral, BD should not be penalized for killing a neutral king. I agree with this change.

3 Likes

Also we should remove the No King on Cowardly King lynch.

Then cowardly king is ‘Lol, you lose scrub’

except it isn’t at all, really

It’s just another Neutral

And if it can only be crowned from Alch, how is that bad???

That’s only if we are saying remove it as a starting king type. Which I’m not sure is the way to go.

I think it would be.

1 Like

And why is that?

It’s basically just Good King until either it isn’t or it’s dead.

1 Like

But then you don’t give scummy play space to evil kings :thinking:

No because a scummy neut should be killed too.

1 Like

We should do 66% Good 33% Evil, just like ToL

If we really want to fit a neutral King, it shouldn’t be Cowardly.

1 Like

The poll resulted in the change being agreed upon.

Butler:

No longer commits suicide when they kill a Cowardly King with Nightshade Wine.

3 Likes