You have to be suspicious enough to be hung but not so susp that one of the numerous BD killers nightkills you. It is not the hardest win-con but it is not brainless. I imagine the alchemist win-rate is far higher than that of fools.
Itās not that hard to balance out providing that you donāt have a trigger-happy King or BD-Killing role. If youāre basically confirmed as evil and one of the killer roles are alive, youāre dead. But if youāre only suspicious with an extremely flakey claim, then most Princes and Knights will probably approach you with caution as they donāt want to be slapped with the penalties of killing a BD. Kings and Hunters are less forgiving as they donāt receive any mechanic punishments from killing a BD.
I was confirmed as evil.
But we hanged king so we couldnāt do anything.
The next day I accused the pally who accused me.
I donāt know how I didnāt die at all I NEVER DIED
Yes, but if youāre a CW claim with no confirmed swaps, who happens to have claimed d5 and has been silent the majority of the game, while having a scum-like voting pattern, and thereās already a CW in the graveyard then eliminating the CW claim is not a big loss as it also gets rid of a prime suspect, allowing BD to focus on other scummy players.
This is basically assuming that BD has yet to lose majority and that the remaining BD players donāt have the collective IQ of 80.
But the punishment is arbitrarily set by the devs
Things that others decide to punish you for are not always incorrect, not by a long shot
Itās kind of confusing since you are getting punished for doing the right townie thing but at the same time itās your fault for getting that fool hung
Itās like a paradox
Thatās not the point, the point is that just because you get punished for it does not make it the wrong choice in all circumstances - especially when the punishment is for doing something that would otherwise be of tangible benefit to you and others.
Itās called bad game design.
RTSDGs can get away with using it to cover up deeper, more foundational balance issues. This is made even easier if they cater to a primarily casual audience.
However, that does not make it a good idea.
I also think you overstate the paradoxical nature of the role these mechanics play. It turns eliminating a player that may act against you (and is actively encouraged to do so), which is otherwise a good thing, into a relatively bad thing, while making it hard to distinguish between the two beforehand. There is no cycle, the logic ends there.
It does not punish eliminating your enemy, it punishes eliminating your enemy in a specific way which could often easily be avoided by eliminating them differently.
2 Likes
If the Prince is dead and the Hunter non-existant you have no reliable way to distinguish a suspected Fool or Mastermindā¦
1 Like
It doesnāt make people doubt already confirmed investigatives though, at least not like fool does.
Not often enough. People still randomly accuse.
They have to gain the trust of the BD first.
Not always. Just donāt execute them and leave them to the prince/king/knight.
Thereās nothing wrong with that. It makes people doubt confirmed investigatives.
Actualy exactly scorned does that exactly like fool does. And for the same reason too. Scorned has a frame. More uses than foolās infact.
This is in a world where the fool exists.