but I like mechanics =(

Anyway, we can do it the other way around: Direct the Hunter shot, then if they go off-prompter try and catch them in a massclaim later. In this world, what's happening is we're sealing off Hunter as a possible witch claim.

The question is whether it's worth directing what is essentially now a vigilante in order to take one specific claim away from scum. It's fairly marginal either way, as Elders have at least two more claims than they do members so...

...oh wait hang on, LW!Hunter has like no fakeclaims available.

Hmmm.

---------- Post automerged at 04:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:58 PM ----------

I feel kinda cruddy about Miner but not for any reason I can really quantify.

 

Yeah I'm right, it's at will, like it replaces the regular NK if they want.

 

Angels can only protect from the Witch Night Kill now, IIRC.

"Hunter should shoot the second biggest wagon" isn't strictly correct, either - we can base it off of tons of stuff besides that. Contingencies and etc.

Hunter claim would be fun and interesting, but we should wait until half the day is over if we want that, maybe?

 

Contingencies aren't super useful when there won't be extra info following the lynch. Like, who would we be directing at if not "the scummiest consensus player"?

---------- Post automerged at 05:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:06 PM ----------

(By which I mean, the usual contingency is "depending on the lynched player's flip" and there's none of that here)

 

Wait, what? What's the point then? :?

 

Well, if they guess the role wrong the kill fails entirely.

 

Oh, nevermind. I thought the role kill was extra, ignore me.

---------- Post automerged at 03:15 ---------- Previous post was at 03:14 ----------

Yeah, I thought it was a double kill like Last Stand but it's just the regular kill but kills the same person twice.

Don't need to derpclear me, I don't need it Newcomb

 

Man you are just super committing to the derpclear.

 

I think everyone in the game has posted after this post by Wei which was a pretty direct request for UT to claim.

There's basically 3 worlds we could be in here

1. Witches illusion & rolekilled Rubicon for wine / reasons.

2. Witches rolekilled Rubicon and Angels protected him because:

a. The angels (dyachei / maybe mal) made a mistake / didn't understand rolekill
b. As a signal that Mal is town / UT is Elder / UT is dead / ???​

I don't really think speculation on this helps us much at all, especially in the absence of a UT claim or other info.

-

Directing hunter kill is bad too because of Demons having access to a protect now. So directed hunter kill can only kill town unless there's a list of players to shoot that includes multiple scum.

Whereas if it's Hunter's choice & no claim, Demons don't even know who they're supposed to be looking at to consider their options.

We could get the Hunter to claim or give directions to shoot into a pool of players (or both), but the more we do to mitigate scum hunter, the less effective a town hunter is.

I'm personally more on the side of 'give players more freedom to do well' but I know that's not what everyone likes.

 

/tencharacters

 

I might actually.

You could still be a LW though, so there's always that!

 

Wait, Demons have a protect now?

shit we probably shouldn't have been talking about this at all ._.

 

Oh, that reminds me, I have a very strong town read on Miner for ~reasons~ and I'm not explaining unless his lynch is imminent.

 

Silver was already voteclear...

I mean, this is the point where we all down a keg and go to "Silver is LW" town if we want.

But. Yeah.

 

I mean, I said that yesterday, but Newcomb asked for Miner reads.

 

Demons have a protect now???

 

I don't really think that's avoidable given the setup.

 

I don't remember us ever talking about that when you were laying out the changes

 

Yeah...I just went and looked it up:

 

You were expecting there to not be a list?

Also, I think... even in these rules, Protection is only from the Coven NK, regardless of alignment. If you meant it to be different from that, then it isn't stated, and you should probably fix that...