Town of Salem Game Forums

I like jester tbh. This could be a totally different role that co exists with jester maybe? That would be cool
Not sure what the name would be though

marlony1 wrote:

Villagerlover wrote:

marlony1 wrote:

Villagerlover wrote:

Parallax7 wrote:Your point doesn't prove current Jester is good, it proves its intended purposes is, my change preserves said purpose and improves upon.

Your dynamic for this role change doesn't preserve the jester. It changes it into a entirely different concept. (For the improvement of game balance? Absolutely)
But the original jester still has a personal attack feeling that's a lot less wanted over a team attack.



That's why I think this idea should be a new role of its own instead of just replacing the current jester. I think it would be a lot better to be honest cause not only do you have to fear a personal haunt from a mislynch, but you have to look out for a team attack as well. It's a nice blend of to help further discourage careless lynching.

Town is already punished for careless lynching, losing a townie.
If town lynched scum, they deserve to live. Scum shouldn't live because "oh he might be a jester", as it promotes bad play and is an undeserved win

Having a jester in-game doesn't "promote bad play". It makes people more careful about who they want to lynch. Regardless of their faction.
Which promotes bad play. It makes people avoid obvious scum... there's a big difference between making people be careful and legit letting someone who claims GF live.
Also, if you're able to trick people into lynching you without being an "obvious jester" than you totally deserve the win.
You deserve to win as a jester, but if you're a scum and trick town into you being an obvious jester, by literally sucking at the game, you don't deserve it.

Uh.
That's the great thing about Town of Salem dude.
There are plenty of people that get away with their deeds all the time by acting like a jester.

You claimed godfather as The Godfather, trying to pass yourself off as an obvious jester?
And a Vigilante nor Jailor did anything about it? Well...that's the town's fault for letting you live. Therefore, you deserve the win for taking advantage of reverse psychology.


There is nothing wrong with using a "reverse psychology" tactic. Especially considering how common and unusually successful it is...
I don't think this particular Mafia game should always be centered around this bold idea of acting like Town as scum in order to win.


I think this role would fit neatly in its own little world if it coexisted with the jester instead of blatantly replacing it

I personally love the idea. But I think this role should be it's own role and not taking over the Jesters already existing role. I love playing Jester (And it's honestly one of my favorite roles to play) It also doesn't really bother me playing against one either. It's all part of the game. But like I said .. I do like the role idea otherwise.

Probably will be an unpopular opinion and that's quite alright with me.

Villagerlover wrote:

marlony1 wrote:

Villagerlover wrote:

marlony1 wrote:

Villagerlover wrote:

Parallax7 wrote:Your point doesn't prove current Jester is good, it proves its intended purposes is, my change preserves said purpose and improves upon.

Your dynamic for this role change doesn't preserve the jester. It changes it into a entirely different concept. (For the improvement of game balance? Absolutely)
But the original jester still has a personal attack feeling that's a lot less wanted over a team attack.



That's why I think this idea should be a new role of its own instead of just replacing the current jester. I think it would be a lot better to be honest cause not only do you have to fear a personal haunt from a mislynch, but you have to look out for a team attack as well. It's a nice blend of to help further discourage careless lynching.

Town is already punished for careless lynching, losing a townie.
If town lynched scum, they deserve to live. Scum shouldn't live because "oh he might be a jester", as it promotes bad play and is an undeserved win

Having a jester in-game doesn't "promote bad play". It makes people more careful about who they want to lynch. Regardless of their faction.
Which promotes bad play. It makes people avoid obvious scum... there's a big difference between making people be careful and legit letting someone who claims GF live.
Also, if you're able to trick people into lynching you without being an "obvious jester" than you totally deserve the win.
You deserve to win as a jester, but if you're a scum and trick town into you being an obvious jester, by literally sucking at the game, you don't deserve it.

Uh.
That's the great thing about Town of Salem dude.
There are plenty of people that get away with their deeds all the time by acting like a jester.
Which shouldn't be given an unfair advantage, it's literally impossible to tell the difference between evil or jester. No that's not skillful to say scummy garbage. So don't say "It takes a lot of skill DUDE"

You claimed godfather as The Godfather, trying to pass yourself off as an obvious jester?
And a Vigilante nor Jailor did anything about it? Well...that's the town's fault for letting you live. Therefore, you deserve the win for taking advantage of reverse psychology.
And if there's no killing roles...


There is nothing wrong with using a "reverse psychology" tactic. Especially considering how common and unusually successful it is...
I don't think this particular Mafia game should always be centered around this bold idea of acting like Town as scum in order to win.


I think this role would fit neatly in its own little world if it coexisted with the jester instead of blatantly replacing it
It really wouldn't. If it added fear in lynching combined with killing, it'd be a mess. Maybe as an NC, but it doesn't fit in with all the other roles.

You really shouldn't take away town's only killing tool (Without killing roles) and they shouldn't be punished for doing their job, lynching scum.
You failed at successfully tricking the town, so you don't deserve to be passed off as "obvious jest". Even then, it also doesn't help evils at all, as the role's goal is to die. That's ALSO bad. It could care less about scum and it's even a strategy to reveal as jester and help town kill the scum, while on the last day, you get lynched and kill scum. Witch can't do this and Executioner can do this, but that's for another story.

Also, it's fun to play as jester, but annoying to play against one. So nah, it's not fun for everyone either. Especially when im scum.

SkyyRawrr wrote:I personally love the idea. But I think this role should be it's own role and not taking over the Jesters already existing role. I love playing Jester (And it's honestly one of my favorite roles to play) It also doesn't really bother me playing against one either. It's all part of the game. But like I said .. I do like the role idea otherwise.

Also the voting is pretty unfair.. There should be an option for no also. But again that's just my opinion.

Probably will be an unpopular opinion and that's quite alright with me.

It's a petition

Parallax7 wrote:

SkyyRawrr wrote:I personally love the idea. But I think this role should be it's own role and not taking over the Jesters already existing role. I love playing Jester (And it's honestly one of my favorite roles to play) It also doesn't really bother me playing against one either. It's all part of the game. But like I said .. I do like the role idea otherwise.

Also the voting is pretty unfair.. There should be an option for no also. But again that's just my opinion.

Probably will be an unpopular opinion and that's quite alright with me.

It's a petition

I know this. I was just giving my opinion as I stated a few times. But if you're referring to the whole voting comment? I still think it'd be fair to have yes & no. Whether it does/means anything or not..

No(s) can be stated in the responses.

I wouldn't put no on a petition. That makes absolutely no sense.

Wouldn't it be weird being Executioner (which is NE) to turn to Jester (if it is NB)

Raven1207 wrote:Wouldn't it be weird being Executioner (which is NE) to turn to Jester (if it is NB)

it doesn't need to if this change is made

Raven1207 wrote:Wouldn't it be weird being Executioner (which is NE) to turn to Jester (if it is NB)

Executioner

Neutral(Chaos)

Still, excluding Amnesiac possibly some of Mafia, most roles that that change to one another role like Vampire Hunter to Vigilante or Mafioso to Godfather usually are in the same alignment

Raven1207 wrote:Still, excluding Amnesiac possibly some of Mafia, most roles that that change to one another role like Vampire Hunter to Vigilante or Mafioso to Godfather usually are in the same alignment

Not always, roles like Framer -> Mafioso or Jailor -> Vampire is different. It'll be the same

If you're killed at night while pulling a prank, the party responsible will not be able to kill the following night. Regardless of their role.

Werewolf:
Will fail to kill visitors of next person it attacks, because holy crap this thing is weak enough.

isnt WW immune to this though he doesn't kill the following night the jester penalty would be over by the time he can kill again

if you're being consistent with the debuff happening the night after the kill occurs

Mystoc wrote:

If you're killed at night while pulling a prank, the party responsible will not be able to kill the following night. Regardless of their role.

Werewolf:
Will fail to kill visitors of next person it attacks, because holy crap this thing is weak enough.

isnt WW immune to this though he doesn't kill the following night the jester penalty would be over by the time he can kill again

if you're being consistent with the debuff happening the night after the kill occurs

No, WW will only kill the person they target.

im not saying that isn't how it is now

im saying WW should be immune and not get a debuff cause the night after he kills a person he's not allowed to kill anyway so the debuff should be meaningless to him since it overlaps with his i can't kill night

i was saying based on logic it should be changed to he gets no penalty

Mystoc wrote:im not saying that isn't how it is now

im saying WW should be immune and not get a debuff cause the night after he kills a person he's not allowed to kill anyway so the debuff should be meaningless to him since it overlaps with his i can't kill night

i was saying based on logic it should be changed to he gets no penalty

The next full moon, he can only kill his target. Please, use common sense.

Shilster wrote:

Mystoc wrote:im not saying that isn't how it is now

im saying WW should be immune and not get a debuff cause the night after he kills a person he's not allowed to kill anyway so the debuff should be meaningless to him since it overlaps with his i can't kill night

i was saying based on logic it should be changed to he gets no penalty

The next full moon, he can only kill his target. Please, use common sense.

Darn that common sense; the complete opposite of logic. >:x

(i was being serious actually. Common sense is just being able to spot no-brainers without overthinking it.)
((this is what i sound loke when i DONT try and sound smarticles))

One could argue, if Werewolf doesn't face a pentalty, the Jester's interaction is inconsistent. Werewolf will not be immune.

you should change the wording to the following night they are able to kill then (the penalty happens then)

not just the following night

Mystoc wrote:you should change the wording to the following night they are able to kill then (the penalty happens then)

not just the following night

"If you're killed at night during a prank, you diminish their next attack."
"If you're lynched during a day prank, you kill someone who voted you up."

Shilster wrote:

Raven1207 wrote:Still, excluding Amnesiac possibly some of Mafia, most roles that that change to one another role like Vampire Hunter to Vigilante or Mafioso to Godfather usually are in the same alignment

Not always, roles like Framer -> Mafioso or Jailor -> Vampire is different. It'll be the same

I meant to AND between Amnesiac and POSSIBLY some of Mafia

Raven1207 wrote:

Shilster wrote:

Raven1207 wrote:Still, excluding Amnesiac possibly some of Mafia, most roles that that change to one another role like Vampire Hunter to Vigilante or Mafioso to Godfather usually are in the same alignment

Not always, roles like Framer -> Mafioso or Jailor -> Vampire is different. It'll be the same

I meant to AND between Amnesiac and POSSIBLY some of Mafia

What's the '&' got to do with it? I'm pretty sure everyone knew what it meant.

And what do you mean Possibly? Are you talking about Mafia role ideas that could convert themselves to other factions?

kookeekwisp wrote:

Raven1207 wrote:

Shilster wrote:

Raven1207 wrote:Still, excluding Amnesiac possibly some of Mafia, most roles that that change to one another role like Vampire Hunter to Vigilante or Mafioso to Godfather usually are in the same alignment

Not always, roles like Framer -> Mafioso or Jailor -> Vampire is different. It'll be the same

I meant to AND between Amnesiac and POSSIBLY some of Mafia

What's the '&' got to do with it? I'm pretty sure everyone knew what it meant.

And what do you mean Possibly? Are you talking about Mafia role ideas that could convert themselves to other factions?

I think he meant Mafia roles that can be a Mafioso.

Damn! 27 votes? I'm loving it.

So all things considered. I still haven't truly found a good way method of handling Executioner. Because making it Neutral(Chaos) is me sweeping it under the rug.

I suppose we could implement Kirize's Executioner, though.

Parallax7 wrote:Damn! 27 votes? I'm loving it.

So all things considered. I still haven't truly found a good way method of handling Executioner. Because making it Neutral(Chaos) is me sweeping it under the rug.

I suppose we could implement Kirize's Executioner, though.

Also Parallax the role tourney started if you were wondering, if you don't care I can remove you and auto continue the other 2 people you're fighting against.