Dead Can't Taunt the Living

[PterryDactyl]

When you die, you are out of the game

so how do you still win, when your out of the game?

Exactly, if you leave and your faction or team wins, you lose. You're not entirely out of the game. Jester still needs to haunt, Medium can still seance, or dead players can give information to a medium. Doesn't matter if its a slight chance, you're only out of the game if you leave.

I think the big point here isn't whether or not you're technically still 'in the game', I think that this would be a better way of explaining it:


After a player death, dead can talk to med at night, med can seance, ret can revive, and jest can haunt. This is true.

That being said, the normal communication from town to town directly, that, by law of the game, is expected to stop. In a way, using a taunt as the dead to identify someone's role and 'mark' them for the team, well...that's almost similar to how people will sometimes communicate information over discord. It just seems like people are ruining the fun, tbh.

[RedHotPepper]

It is really a huge deal that some of you are ignoring.

It is not necessarily a big game changer in high elo ranked games but... Hey that is only 3 to 5 percent of the games! In the remaining majority of games, towns sometimes do feel the need to kill the taunted, and it is affecting gameplay.

You might argue, saying "but maf can use it to confuse people" and, yes, you are right. EXACTLY!

Can't you see how this is something that is slowly becoming an in-game mechanic that people are using to prove someones guilt, where they really shouldn't be able to? This is a purchasable that is changing how the game is played. Which makes it a pay-to-win style purchase. It does not necessarily prove someones guilt or innocence, but the mere fact that people are using it for this reason should alarm you.

This game has certain and set roles with certain and set abilities. This adds to the player another ability, which is to frame someone over the grave when you shouldn't be able to. Which IS game changing in town of salem.

What you actually say there is, when you defend taunts, that taunts should INDEED be a mechanic that players who payed for it can use. And that means not-paying players are not able to achieve a certain mechanic, which can be used. So some of you basically argue towards a p2w town of salem, which is not what this game is about.

[Brilliand]

What you actually say there is, when you defend taunts, that taunts should INDEED be a mechanic that players who payed for it can use. And that means not-paying players are not able to achieve a certain mechanic, which can be used. So some of you basically argue towards a p2w town of salem, which is not what this game is about.

I feel happier than I should be that someone managed to string together a multistage chain of logic that makes sense.

Yes, to the degree that taunts affect the game they are p2w, although that might not be much in an absolute sense.

That said, we've been arguing about that same point for most of the thread, with kyuss in particular arguing that some p2w is a good thing.

[kyuss420]

Just had a game where I, as evil, taunted the same player 3 days in a row. Town didnt ask their role, town didnt vote them up, TIs didnt even investigate them.

Its hardly pay 2 win, when using them doesnt guarentee a win, it doesnt even guarentee a lynch. The mentality that taunted people are evil is much more dangerous for town, as maf can cause a mislynch with a simple click.

Saying its slowly becoming an in game mechanic to proove someones guilt is hilarious, because as soon as that happens, town will just mislynch galore as soon as evils start taunting. Like I said, I love a game when gullible fools lynch at the sight of a frog, keeps the chat distracted and the heat off of my faction for a day.

[JacksonVirgo]

I've got to agree with kyuss here

[Brilliand]

Saying its slowly becoming an in game mechanic to proove someones guilt is hilarious, because as soon as that happens, town will just mislynch galore as soon as evils start taunting. Like I said, I love a game when gullible fools lynch at the sight of a frog, keeps the chat distracted and the heat off of my faction for a day.

But then the evils are paying to win (or using up limited freebies to win), which is the same thing isn't it?

[JacksonVirgo]

Am I not allowed an opinion? Lmao

[PterryDactyl]

Am I not allowed an opinion? Lmao

Not in this town

[JacksonVirgo]

Am I not allowed an opinion? Lmao

Not in this town

Wow, neither are all of you then.

[Brilliand]

Am I not allowed an opinion? Lmao

Not in this town

Wow, neither are all of you then.

You do know they're joking right?

[JacksonVirgo]

Yeah, lmao.
Also I just realized how absolutely hilarious looking this thing is ->

[kyuss420]

Saying its slowly becoming an in game mechanic to proove someones guilt is hilarious, because as soon as that happens, town will just mislynch galore as soon as evils start taunting. Like I said, I love a game when gullible fools lynch at the sight of a frog, keeps the chat distracted and the heat off of my faction for a day.

But then the evils are paying to win (or using up limited freebies to win), which is the same thing isn't it?

Well if anyone has been around for longer than a year, theyd know that you get minimum 30 free taunts for lowest ranked end of season rewards. The fact that they have become ''Pay 2 Win'' is because BMG decided to drag this season out for well over a year, so instead of everyone crying about something being a ''pay 2 win'' mechanic (when BMG USED TO give away more than enough for free), maybe they should put that energy into hassling BMG to end the ranked season, then everyone can enjoy using their freebies as they see fit.

[RedHotPepper]

Saying its slowly becoming an in game mechanic to proove someones guilt is hilarious, because as soon as that happens, town will just mislynch galore as soon as evils start taunting. Like I said, I love a game when gullible fools lynch at the sight of a frog, keeps the chat distracted and the heat off of my faction for a day.

But then the evils are paying to win (or using up limited freebies to win), which is the same thing isn't it?

Well if anyone has been around for longer than a year, theyd know that you get minimum 30 free taunts for lowest ranked end of season rewards. The fact that they have become ''Pay 2 Win'' is because BMG decided to drag this season out for well over a year, so instead of everyone crying about something being a ''pay 2 win'' mechanic (when BMG USED TO give away more than enough for free), maybe they should put that energy into hassling BMG to end the ranked season, then everyone can enjoy using their freebies as they see fit.

So.. you are willing to accept this mechanic (which devs were not planning for them to be a mechanic, btw) as a mechanic? Despite the fact that it is really like a stab in the back for the med role and can be a great and unnecessary nerf to that role?

Also, you have been saying that you don't see this happen in your normal plays, so that it doesn't really exist. I understand that. You see, I have always felt that children in Africa were bunch of whiny kids, you know. I mean, I feel full every day and I am well fed, and people around me are well fed. So the children in Africa cannot be hungry, because everyone I can see is well fed!

[JacksonVirgo]

Also, you have been saying that you don't see this happen in your normal plays, so that it doesn't really exist. I understand that. You see, I have always felt that children in Africa were bunch of whiny kids, you know. I mean, I feel full every day and I am well fed, and people around me are well fed. So the children in Africa cannot be hungry, because everyone I can see is well fed!

Way to be passive aggressive, but literally removing dead players ability to taunt is just... ugh

[kyuss420]

Saying its slowly becoming an in game mechanic to proove someones guilt is hilarious, because as soon as that happens, town will just mislynch galore as soon as evils start taunting. Like I said, I love a game when gullible fools lynch at the sight of a frog, keeps the chat distracted and the heat off of my faction for a day.

But then the evils are paying to win (or using up limited freebies to win), which is the same thing isn't it?

Well if anyone has been around for longer than a year, theyd know that you get minimum 30 free taunts for lowest ranked end of season rewards. The fact that they have become ''Pay 2 Win'' is because BMG decided to drag this season out for well over a year, so instead of everyone crying about something being a ''pay 2 win'' mechanic (when BMG USED TO give away more than enough for free), maybe they should put that energy into hassling BMG to end the ranked season, then everyone can enjoy using their freebies as they see fit.

So.. you are willing to accept this mechanic (which devs were not planning for them to be a mechanic, btw) as a mechanic? Despite the fact that it is really like a stab in the back for the med role and can be a great and unnecessary nerf to that role?

Also, you have been saying that you don't see this happen in your normal plays, so that it doesn't really exist. I understand that. You see, I have always felt that children in Africa were bunch of whiny kids, you know. I mean, I feel full every day and I am well fed, and people around me are well fed. So the children in Africa cannot be hungry, because everyone I can see is well fed!

The ''mechanic'' has been in use ever since i started playing, and Its never been a problem for me, getting taunted doesnt mean youre insta - lynched. If youre normal plays involve lynching people on the sight of a frog, then youre playing with noobs. If you have nothing to back up your claim when youre taunted, then thats on you, not on the guy who taunted you. Anyone can ask you for a role claim and will, at any time in the game, not claiming and not showing a will is what gets you lynched, not the taunt alone, unless, like i said, youre playing with a bunch of noobs

[James2]

Just had a game where I was lynched for no reason other than the fact that I was taunted by one of my victims the day after I killed him. The dead shouldn't be able to interact with the living at all (aside talking to Medium), including taunts. Requesting that using taunts be disabled when dead.

Taunts should be removed because they make the game pay-to-win. There are no valid arguments against this.

[JacksonVirgo]

Taunts should be removed because they make the game pay-to-win. There are no valid arguments against this.

Taunts won't be removed, that's not a question. It's revenue for BMG, why would they remove that lmao.

[Brilliand]

Just had a game where I was lynched for no reason other than the fact that I was taunted by one of my victims the day after I killed him. The dead shouldn't be able to interact with the living at all (aside talking to Medium), including taunts. Requesting that using taunts be disabled when dead.

Taunts should be removed because they make the game pay-to-win. There are no valid arguments against this.

Good job with your "no true scotsman" argument.

[kyuss420]

Just had a game where I was lynched for no reason other than the fact that I was taunted by one of my victims the day after I killed him. The dead shouldn't be able to interact with the living at all (aside talking to Medium), including taunts. Requesting that using taunts be disabled when dead.

Taunts should be removed because they make the game pay-to-win. There are no valid arguments against this.

They give them for free tho, so its not pay 2 win, The arguement is that they are used for communicating from the graveyard

[Brilliand]

Thus, to look only at valid arguments is not a "no true scotsman" fallacy because we do not and should not care about invalid arguments.

The word "valid" is vague. To announce upfront that "there are no valid arguments" is to telegraph that you will consider any arguments invalid regardless of the content. This is abusing the word "valid" in essentially the same way as the man in the "no true scotsman" story abused the word "scotsman".

That is my reasoning for calling his statement a "no true scotsman" argument, and I think it fits.

[kyuss420]

I think you missed my post about taunts being free from season rewards, the fact that BMG decided to not end the season for over 12 months, is what has made taunts only accessable by spending TP, hence it was BMGs decision to make taunts only available for TP. Therefore saying that taunts are pay2win, contradicts what you are saying about BMG being anti pay2win.


Also - just had a game as maf, I taunted a quiet townie as soon as the LO died cos LO had a dead guy in his will. the quiet guy was lynched, maf ended up winning with 3 members alive.

[James2]

Taunts should be removed because they make the game pay-to-win. There are no valid arguments against this.

Taunts won't be removed, that's not a question. It's revenue for BMG, why would they remove that lmao.

Of course they won't be removed. But they should be, which is the point.

Just had a game where I was lynched for no reason other than the fact that I was taunted by one of my victims the day after I killed him. The dead shouldn't be able to interact with the living at all (aside talking to Medium), including taunts. Requesting that using taunts be disabled when dead.

Taunts should be removed because they make the game pay-to-win. There are no valid arguments against this.

They give them for free tho, so its not pay 2 win, The arguement is that they are used for communicating from the graveyard

It's pay-to-win because people who pay money are given a distinct advantage (ability to obtain more taunts on demand) over those who don't.

I have never hated a forumer more than James2, and the feeling is almost certainly mutual.

Aside from FM and Suggestions, I've barely ever interacted with you. This obsession is entirely one-way.

[Brilliand]

I have never hated a forumer more than James2, and the feeling is almost certainly mutual.

Aside from FM and Suggestions, I've barely ever interacted with you. This obsession is entirely one-way.

I think what he meant was more "everyone in this thread hates James".

[MysticMismagius]

If that's the case, then he misused "the feeling is mutual" because that's not what that means.

[kyuss420]

It's pay-to-win because people who pay money are given a distinct advantage (ability to obtain more taunts on demand) over those who don't.

Using taunts doesnt guarentee a win tho. Taunts arent neccessarily an advantage either.