Suggested Fool Change

“everyone abstain I’ll be the only one to vote execute in case of Fool”

2 Likes

Yes, Jammy, so that is why I suggested a change that hits BD and Unseen/Cult nearly the same way(1 night all occupied 1 day all occupied, and no lynch) if neither has majority or equality only, and that hits BD only if they have majority or equality of votes(or Unseen/Cult only if those have the majority or equality)
This way, lynching a fool cannot be a reliable weapon for BD, quite the opposite.

Fool doesn’t need changing
Fool doesn’t need “fixing”
Fool doesn’t need any sort of buff or nerf or anything

Leave Fool alone!

1 Like

And then remove it from the game because it’s bad role design at its core.

I just changed it so abstainers are also punished.

The Fool isn’t going to be changed.

There’s nothing wrong with it.

1 Like

Fool is fine just the way it is.

1 Like

Fool-esque roles are highly disliked by some people in these types of games. Partly because they just act as the uninformed majority getting a punishment for “correctly” lynching a person who isn’t of the majority’s alignment. Any “Village Idiot” could get themselves lynched. And that’s discounting the fact that lynching a Fool gives the majority a debuff, in addition to basically just wasting a lynch. So it’s existence can completely screw over BD, and allows scum to have 2 days to be unable to be lynched. Scum can still be exe’d/cold steel’d however. I think Fool is okay-ish as is.

The only (rather unnecessary) “change” of the top of my head to Fool is that in return for BD mistakenly (or scum votes guaranteed a Fool got lynched, so BD can’t lynch for two days) lynching a Fool, is that BD gets some sort of minor/major benefit in exchange for being unable to lynch for 2 days. I don’t know what that benefit could be though. Maybe the last BD to vote guilty gets a one-use night kill, though that seems really weird and could cause problems. I don’t think that idea is that necessary IMO, though my mind changes like the weather.

Fools getting lynched has an opportunity cost, because BD misses out on the ability to lynch someone else that day who may have been the “real” bad guy and the Day ends. They also miss out on being able to lynch at all for the next 2 days.

However, that means BD Killer roles may need to start just killing scummy people indiscriminately if they’re losing majority, which can balance out the penalty sometimes. Also, Day 2 there’s like 9 BD vs 5 non-BD anyway, so the massive penalties for lynching are proportionally less severe. I suppose that relates to my ramblings about VFC (scumhunting) and how both sides benefit to be proactive, as if one faction is being passive/reactive they are at a significant disadvantage.

Ultimately, I still think the Fool is okay as is, and has a lot of ways to force himself to get lynched anyway using his awesome(or potentially game-breaking, depends on your perspective I guess) abilities.

3 Likes

+1 Repect to you again good sir.

1 Like

Take one of the most popular social deduction games in the genre, ToS.

While I hate the jester otherwise (the cool thing about it is it’s goal, not abilities), the jester did one thing right: no one wants to lynch the jester.

In ToL, scum want the fool lynched, as if the prince has no executes, they have cover for 2 days.

In ToS though, while mafia does want jester lynched, they don’t want to be the ones to vote guilty; they can’t throw the vote by voting unanimously, as they will likely be killed by the jester.

My suggestion is not that different from the current system. Players will be unable to participate/cause trials if they abstain/execute, so even scum don’t want to vote execute.

I see no problem with having a “self interested” subject be separated from the main antagonist faction.

1 Like

Fool doesn’t need to be changed. It’s not broken at all.

2 Likes

I never said it was broken. I just said I want scum to feel the pain of the fool potentially as well.

To fix something implies it is broken.

1 Like

great job nit picking how someone constructed an argument. Just because I am bad at wording it doesn’t mean I am wrong.

But you are wrong. Fool doesn’t need fixing or changing or editing or altering or anything.

Boslof told me himself there’s not going to be any changes to Fool.

Also, everybody likes Fool the way it is.

Why try to change something if it’s already perfect?

1 Like

Not me, clearly.

it is not perfect. It is beta, I don’t expect it to be perfect.

Its not COMPLETELY perfect. There are some flaws in it. But that is with his abilities

1 Like

One person doesn’t like Fool. Quick, everybody grab your sketchbooks and come up with new ideas to please Norm.

Also, it is perfect.

1 Like

Perfect implies something is flawless. I would say it is fine the way it is.

1 Like

I am not asking for ideas. I put forward on idea.
Plex, you suggest classes all the time. No one had those classes in mind before you did.

I am muting the thread because apparently boslof won’t change fools affect.