Scorned targets die N1!

Feedback/Suggestions
#41

Ok, here’s why this is bad for the game.

It will often make being a Scorned’s target a good thing. Realistically, Scorned will use this the first few nights, and most of the time, with two Scorned targets, it’s going to save someone. This will mostly be random, since it’s so early, so you’re randomly blocking kills and other visits.

And that matters. You’re adding chaos to the game in a way that doesn’t seem to increase depth at all. Do you understand why your suggestion is so much worse than mine, here? You talk about “fairness”, but what you’re suggesting has far more impact, far more arbitrarily, and therefore it is much less fair in the ways that really matter.

The game will always have some randomness, that’s unavoidable due to people acting with minimal information in the first few nights; what matters is trying to prevent it from being too “swingy”. Replacing the Scorned’s targets is “safe” because it reduces this randomness without substantially changing how the rest of the game plays out.

Whereas your suggestion would increase randomness, in ways that matter much much much more than the Scorned’s individual outcome. BD would randomly get saved from death. Conversion and killing would randomly be blocked.

I just… I honestly don’t know how to explain it better if you don’t get it. Stop obsessing about the outcome for the individual Scorned. That doesn’t matter. I mean, as I outlined above, choosing new targets N1 wouldn’t affect Scorned gameplay meaningfully at all beyond removing occasional random losses, but what matters is the impact they have on the larger game. If we can make the Scorned play a bit more smoothly without disrupting the game, that’s good (and keeping the Scorned from getting dropped from gameplay at random is good), but throwing in the ability to protect their targets, who are, remember, chosen at random at the start? That’s ridiculous.

I should add, stepping back a bit. Both Scorned targets dying N1 is not a big problem. It happens very, very rarely. Doing nothing at all would be vastly superior to giving Scorned the ability to protect their targets. But do you understand what I’m saying about how picking new targets N1 is “safe” - in that I can’t see how it can introduce any problems or disrupt the game for anyone else - while giving the Scorned three shots of protection, or even just one, is definitely not-safe?

1 Like
#42

Hopefully you agree that the scorned shouldn’t commit suicide when they win.

#43

@Aquillion why not give more scum scum frames and remove it from Scorned?

Fool shouldn’t have it either way tbh

1 Like
#44

Also don’t worry about repicking targets

Just don’t give them out until the end of N1

Easy

1 Like
#45

Orange this is what I believe even if others don’t

Every class should have atleast one day ability (that’s why my court wizard rework had 2)

Every class should have something they can do at night

Every class should be cool

#46

That’s fair but what does that have to do with removing frame from Fool or giving Scorned their targets later

#47

Ehhh. I don’t think it’s a huge problem. And I think it’s good for them to have it just to generally give BD reasons to sometimes doubt otherwise-solid results. It also makes pretending to be a Fool or a Scorned target at least a theoretically viable claim (I don’t think it ever works on its own, but IMHO even weak reasons to doubt are good to have in the game because they can fit together with larger plays.)

If you flip it around… what’s the advantage of removing it? Making things harder for the Fool or Scorned? I don’t care about that, and I don’t think anyone else should, either. They’re not easy to the point of being unfun, which is all that matters when considering an individual outcome for a Neutral IMHO, and I feel that frames do also work well with more in-depth or intelligent strategies (ie. trying to get people to investigate people on the nights when you frame them, or predict when they will be investigated - or yourself, as Fool.)

#48

Fool aside, I’m merely suggesting moving frames to scum

I agree it’s not a big deal on Scorned, I just think it’s more challenging and fun to not have the ability to let an investigative class do your job for you.

It’s much more fun to convince others of your target’s guilt.

#49

Ehhhhh.

This is one of those “fun vs. gameplay” arguments. And unfortunately in this case the damage potentially done by a Scorned who sticks around (potentially severe if they become a kingmaker or use TB randomly to troll) far outweighs the benefit (fun for one person at the expense of literally everyone else.)

I say this as someone who has definitely enjoyed being a victorious scorned / executioner - it’s one of the most fun things you can be. But I don’t think it’s worth the cost, in this case.

(And remember, people say “only dumb courts leave the Scorned alive” - but Scorned can and do win at random, simply by having their target lynched for other reasons, without ever being exposed.)

I mean, I enjoy being a victorious Scorned, so I’m not going to be upset if they stick around (and emotionally I’ll miss TB on them), but approaching it logically, having them leave is probably the best choice, and unlike my arguments over dead-communication, I don’t feel that I can justify it on “fun” grounds given that it’s just one person’s enjoyment, often directly at the expense of everyone else.

#50

Nothing you suggested removing the night abilty

#51

I mean, you only get two shots of Frame. Using it successfully is pretty rare. So I think we have the best of both worlds already, where it’s an option (and something BD has to worry about), while not crowding out other strategies. You can use it as part of a strategy, or you can use it semi-randomly and hope to get lucky (just like anyone can use their abilities at random and hope to get lucky, mind), or you can focus on another plan, but either way it’s not crowding out other options, and I think that like with most things, “use it randomly” is the weakest thing to do with it anyway, as it should be.

I don’t see the need to remove it from them. It can be given to other people and they can still have it. If anything, Sheriffs / Paladins are a bit too reliable right now - BD should have to think more rather than auto-lynching whoever a Sheriff / Paladin claim tells them to.

1 Like
#52

Don’t get mad at me

:cat: get mad at the cat

#53

Fun>gameplay

No one plays a game that isn’t fun

#54

I actually agree (I argued as much in another thread). But the gameplay is also essential to the fun, so you have to be careful not to sacrifice too much of it when making this kind of trade-off.

My problem here is that the degree of this particular trade-off isn’t worth it. Staying alive as a trolling Scorned who gets to decide the game with their swing vote is very fun for the Scorned, but generally makes the game less fun for everyone else; and if we’re talking one person’s fun vs. everyone else’s, it’s obvious which we have to go with.

I mean, if we just want to make a fun role, that’s easy, make it overpowered. The hard part is making a role that’s fun while also keeping the game fun for everyone else.

#55

I was going to edit my statement to say Also that if everyone was OP no one would love it

#56

And this gave me a actual paper cut D:

#57

What I mean is, a victorious Scorned is, mostly, pretty overpowered - they’re invincible at night, immune to basically everything, and win no matter what. From everyone else’s perspective, that’s not a fun role to have around.

(I mean, as an evil, you might find it fun if it hands you the win, but I’m not usually a fan of winning that way myself, and I think most people end up disliking it when it happens too often. Kingmakers aren’t fun.)

#58

I was a jester in town of salem ww tried to gamethrow cause the evils died… I couldn’t win so I decided to cause chaos… I kept saying random stuff made everyone indesicive made them pretty much Ignore the ww

#59

I don’t think it was fun for him

#60

It might be interesting to have a new category people can be shifted to, “audience” or the like - someone in the audience is in the living chat and not the dead chat, but is otherwise out of the game in every way (ie. they can’t vote on anything, can’t target or be targeted, etc.)

Victorious Scorned would become part of the Audience. They can still talk and contribute in the living chat (but people might ignore or even /ignore them if they’re ridiculous), but can’t vote or otherwise interact with the game.

That way, winning wouldn’t feel like a penalty, but you also wouldn’t be a kingmaker. Hm. Maybe I’ll make a suggestion for this.

1 Like