FoL Feedback Thread

Oh right, they are. When I was host, I considered that as a simple mistake, since other symbols were used wrong as well, and I saw no reason why especially these two are the only non-unique

ā€˜Letā€™s just have four altered lynch flips. This is fun and balanced.ā€™

2 Likes

That assumes they are all successful. Bit unlikely. Fool + Scorned would have a similar effect or if a Possessor was there.

Itā€™s fun that ToL sees Scorned as that problematic that it has to be unique there, but here its the opposite, while harmless classes are unique.
Any idea why?

Fool + Fool doesnā€™t work well, since they are both jesters and directly inconvenience one another then. At least other neutrals donā€™t directly incentivize getting lynched themselves.

Making Sellsword and Warlock unique lowers the pool of getting a purely scumsided neutral and they are the same archetype, so less interesting if both spawn.

Inquisitor + Inquisitor is too much killpower.

What are you seeing as a class thatā€™s harmless but nevertheless unique?

Also making Fool non unique would be an uphill battle. :^)

Donā€™t know why Mercenary or Scorned should be unique.

Meh maybe double mercenary getting the same target is kind of meeh. Scorned I donā€™t really see a big problem with though.

Making more unique neutrals also means you have a harder time fakeclaiming a neutral. Just an observation, not really a value judgement. Some like to fakeclaim neutral.

Fool is harmless
Inq must be unique obviously, since the concept of having three heathens
Merc is Contract Merc and therefore harmless
Scorned must be unique because of his wincon ā€œsee two targets lynchedā€
Sellsword and Warlock are harmless (although they are arguably the same class)

Why would one come from the other?

You have a strange definition of ā€œharmless.ā€

2 Likes

A fool getting lynched themselves, which is still a part of their kit, would directly harm the other Foolā€™s win condition.

Well, if you allow a Sellsword and a Warlock to exist in the same game already, why not also a SS+SS, or a WL+WL?
(you might want to forbid it all tho)

I am in fact somewhat iffy on that being a possibility but the issue is that removing it would extremely restrict possible neut spawns

Because that increases the pool of that spawning.

I see the problem too. We just have not enough ā€œneutralā€ neuts, only 3 of them are not ā€œmake BD loseā€ or very similiar
SS and WL are quasi the same class, Fool is almost exactly the same (with the exception that there is a rare possibility to win with BD)

then we only have Inq, Merc and Scorned left, which all are neutral neuts

Which are both non unique, so that should please you then right? More likely to spawn. :upside_down_face:

Did we remove alch?

Iā€™d actually suggest to think about

  • making 2-3 neuts spawn (which sounds completely fair in an 18 player game)
  • adding a new non-unique neutral class (since the neutral class pool is a bit too low for actually having 2-3). Itā€™ll be an EFoL anyways, and EFoLs are good to test interesting ideas

We replaced Neutral Alch with BD Alch