The Unknown Character

Could we not actually? Let's just let things stay boring

Wait I was thinking you meant soother for loyalty as in vote soother at the cost of loyalty, I understand you now I know how the Smuggler works. I'm just saying they can pretty much always increase their loyalty when they hit neutral

You're confusing the Smuggler with the Rebsk I think Smuggler is a redirect

That was an overview without thinking too hard about it tbh. After looking into it more, it looks worse than I thought, but still fine if people actually utilize the generic action. I think the Rebsk, Bonded, and Smuggler (once not in the negatives) will maintain themselves just using their actions. A banker can be to our advantage as well. The other roles will be able to raise loyalties quickly when they hit negative, which they would likely have to do for the elims to win.

Yes, Illwei's name is so fun to pun E!wei, Vilwei, Lilwei, Wei Sports, Chillwei, etc Sounds like Illwei circa now tbh Ooga booga I SE player no need fancy ideas I vil read high active players and murder everyone else Rude Bold: I think the roles more or less balance out, maybe slightly in the villagers favor maybe just straight even, but every villager can change their own loyalty. This means we win on action economy imo Italics: This is a good argument. I disagree, but it's definitely valid. If the above (response to bold) wasn't true, I would think the info is probably better off hidden. Generally though, public info is better for the village than private info. The elims already know more about loyalty amounts than we do, and they can learn even more through PMs, might as well even the playing field. Underlined: This is true, and normally I'd be anti this sort of argument, but I think this is different. This is me saying "don't play against your wincon just for a powerful role." The elims will take advantage of that, but I have the power to head it off, so I will.

This is a point Village people who can affect loyalty should boost Illwei. Cause either they're an elim and boosting their loyalty screws their plan or they're village and boosting them keeps them village cause we don't want to deal with e!wei

I'd guess swap the Banker for a vanilla highguard, but that's a solid guess otherwise Nice of you to cover for the Elims by pretending you didn't pick that distro General rule of thumb is 20-25% of the player count. For 20 players, that's exactly 4-5, which conveniently is essentially exactly what 4 with a Mavset-elim (I'm way too proud of that pun) adds up to Edit: I know this is kinda asking a lot, but those of you who are roleplay only, could you somehow demarcate Roleplay only posts from posts in character? This is purely a personal request so feel free not to, but I very well might not notice in character analysis otherwise

This is a good enough reason for me, let's not kill Myst c1 two games in a row Mint I agree with a lot of this except the Bonded. Bonded shouldn't be negative, it's a very slight power boost, and they're most powerful at neutral anyways. If I were Bonded, I'd just use my ability and let the pluses and minuses from that do the rest Smuggler should definitely be at 0 or less loyalty imo. Other than that, everyone should probably try to be at 2+ imo. 3 ideally. This is true I've co-GMed with Jo and role presence and quantity is definitely not random. When we co-GMed together (it was Tyrian and the AG, so theoretically different from this, but I doubt it), we made a list of possible distros with different amounts of each role and alignment. Roles were attached to alignments, only players were randomized. Every role being present is probably a reasonable assumption (not including a role you made is like not taking your child on the family vacation).

To be fair to everyone who is distrusting me for this, I'm pretty sure I'd still be advocating for a n1 deposition as an elim. It's useful information for both sides. I probably wouldn't be advocating raising your own loyalty as much if I was Elim though The underlined was exactly my reaction but phrased better It's just, a lot of the times you ask questions that I feel like are common sense to me, but when I think about them for a second I realize how they make sense to ask as someone who isn't as ingrained here as I am That is actually insane I still feel guilty about last game, so I will vote with you to save you if I need to

I perfectly understood you. I'm saying that increasing our loyalty is good. There are very specific circumstances where decreasing loyalty is better, but increasingly loyalty is always good I am. Plus, somebody's going to do it. It only takes one person to Motion, and even if I'm exed, I'm sure someone else will do it ( @Alvron, you listening? This is basically random chance at this point ) In response to Mint's Myst vote, I don't like the way Myst backtracked after pressed on the Mavset not being in the game, but I killed them d1 last game so I'd rather not

Sometimes I'm like, why is Illwei asking these questions? These questions are so weird Then I remember that Illwei has played in other places and also wasn't a part of the whole approval process

Playing negative loyalty here is anti-village. I understand the desire to be more powerful, but come on. It's really only worth it for the Parliamentarian imo. Are you really going to complain about being forced to do something that is completely beneficial to the village? Here's another thing: Anyone who calls for a deposition after n1 is 100% an elim. That means that we have a choice between calling for a deposition tonight and never getting that info for sure. I'd rather have something than nothing when it's pretty low risk and has other positive benefits

Just addressing both of you at once 1. It gives us an idea of where we're at. It lets village loyalty manipulators know who they need to help. It might seem like it gives the elims a list of who to target, but tbh everyone's a good target to decrease loyalty for one reason or another. We have more village loyalty manipulations than the elims do. 2. It sets a baseline. Started with losing loyalty or even close to losing loyalty would be like starting with only one elim. It's way too swingy and you can't start with one alignment that close to their win con. Then, when someone inevitably triggers it again, we can know who has been fudging their loyalty over time. 3. It encourages villagers to not play with low loyalties and makes it harder for elims to use that as an excuse. If I'm explicitly going to depose, you can't use your action to make yourself lose loyalty. In fact, now all of you need to increase your loyalty with your action (unless you're already at +2 or -2) so that you can't be subtracted into a negative vote by an elim.

I'm 100% percent going to move to depose come nighttime unless PMs lead be to believe there's vastly more disloyal players than I expected

Alvron, I want to be like you when I grow up