Jester Overhaul #SeeNoNeutralEvil

[HereThereEverywhere]

You can see how many people disagree by seeing how many comment their issues. But if people just like it and have nothing to add, they're not supposed to post just /support or "I like this" because it's basically spam. If you dislike something on the forums enough to vote that you do, then you can say why.

[Villagerlover]

If you don't agree, don't vote, easy.

That's like if YouTube only had a like system.

It's better to know how much people Also disagree with it this could annoy a lot of people when they make big role changes.

I know it's only a idea but I don't think it's really worth changing Jester and Executioner into NBs

Executioner is not broken, and Jester only need a small change to fix it

I do get that Witch is a lot different to Jester and Executioner, and there should be more roles like Witch (like Warlock) and maybe categorise Jester and Executioner something other then NE.

I am on par with this actually.
Having a poll that only says "Yes" is bias against people who don't want this to happen. (And no, it's not a petition. It's a poll trap)

People should have a way to express concern from an easy standpoint too instead of the clickbait "Look at all of the people who say yes to this".

I've already stated why I disagree with this thread several times, and the only way people are going to see disagreements like mine are if they go through the hassle of searching through all of the pages which you know very well that almost no one will do. I can't make my opposition as public as all of your "Yes" votes. If there was a "No" option, I'd go right for it to express my standpoint just as easily as yours.

[Kirize12]

It’s literally a petition. Implying you know more about it than it’s creator is flat-out asinine.

[HereThereEverywhere]

Villager, you don't need people to read through this. There's only a handful that actually matter, and those are the Developers, for anyone else it literally doesn't matter if you can't see people's disagreement with the role. I'm not saying I support using the poll system which is meant for polls to make a petition but if it stops people from voting no, and not saying anything at all, then it's probably worth it.

[Villagerlover]

Villager, you don't need people to read through this. There's only a handful that actually matter, and those are the Developers, for anyone else it literally doesn't matter if you can't see people's disagreement with the role.

Then how will the Game Developers see the oppositions if it's buried all the way through these forums? If they're not gonna play their own game, even being called out by their own moderator team, then how could we hold them up to the expectation for them to thoroughly read through everyone's opinions on the forums about one thread before making a game-changing decision?

I'm not saying I support using the poll system which is meant for polls to make a petition but if it stops people from voting no, and not saying anything at all, then it's probably worth it.

It’s literally a petition. Implying you know more about it than it’s creator is flat-out asinine.

No Kirizie, it isn't a petition. Petitions do not have 2 choices that are the exact same option. It's a poll trap.
For a "petition", it is pretty damn convenient how it acts like a trap then, huh? You can't change your vote, and there's nothing to change it back to.
Two choices that both say Yes, just to trick people who disagree with the poll, but don't have anything to say in the actual comments, and swiftly vote "No" without realizing they're just hitting a second "Yes" option. People don't typically random vote no. They vote no for a reason (whether it's for a stupid reason or not is irrelevant). Heck, I'm sure there's plenty of people who vote Yes, and say nothing at all as well.
The way the poll is set up and worded to look like a "petition", when really it's just a disguised poll trap used to trick people into thinking there's more people who support this when they actually don't.

Proof of what I'm talking about:

Having a poll that only says "Yes" is bias against people who don't want this to happen. (And no, it's not a petition. It's a poll trap)

It is a trap. I voted on this the other day, and I thought the lower option was going to be "no." Only now do I realize it was another yes. How dumb I feel right now.

Jester is awesome the way it is now, and it should not be changed. It's one of my favorite roles in the game.
/nosupport from me on this.

If Parallax was right, and the developers are seriously considering to replace the current Jester with this role despite it's easily noticeable flaws, then I'm extremely concerned about how things are being done here. But I guess that's nothing new considering their reputation, is it?

[HereThereEverywhere]

Villager, there's a difference between voting yes and voting no without commenting.
Yes means "I agree with this, I like it as is!" there's no reason to comment, it's basically spam if all you're going to say is that you support it. Nothing is added to the conversation.
No means "I disagree with this, I don't like it for some reason." See, this is why we can't just let people vote no without commenting. What reason do they say no for? If they don't say, then their vote is literally meaningless. They want change, but they don't say what change, so we can't listen to them.

If you vote yes, you're saying you supprt it as-is, and you have no need to post. If you disagree with it, even if you just think the idea is terrible and should be trashed, you should say why or say nothing at all. Just saying "No, I don't like it" is not helpful in any way.

Oh, and it's not a trap. The only people who get tricked are the ones who don't read what they're voting, and those people are at fault for, again, not reading before they click. That's how mistakes are made.

[Villagerlover]

Villager, there's a difference between voting yes and voting no without commenting.
Yes means "I agree with this, I like it as is!" there's no reason to comment, it's basically spam if all you're going to say is that you support it. Nothing is added to the conversation.
No means "I disagree with this, I don't like it for some reason." See, this is why we can't just let people vote no without commenting. What reason do they say no for? If they don't say, then their vote is literally meaningless. They want change, but they don't say what change, so we can't listen to them.

If you vote yes, you're saying you supprt it as-is, and you have no need to post. If you disagree with it, even if you just think the idea is terrible and should be trashed, you should say why or say nothing at all. Just saying "No, I don't like it" is not helpful in any way.

Oh, and it's not a trap. The only people who get tricked are the ones who don't read what they're voting, and those people are at fault for, again, not reading before they click. That's how mistakes are made.

But see, that's just it HTE.
You have all of these people who look like they support a role idea, but when you go through the (hassle to most people) pages of conversations on here, there is clearly plenty of disagreement hidden within the pages. How often is that going to be spotted when on the surface, you have all of these "yes!" votes?
It won't be.

And there's where I have a problem with not being able to express you opinion at the same level the supporters can.
For supporters in this thread, all they have to do is vote Yes, and they're done. They don't need to say anything.

For non-supporters, you have no option on the thread to say No, and your disagreements are likely going to be buried under all of the clutter of why "your disagreements are totally wrong and you don't know what you're talking about".

There is a clear problem with the way this thread is working.

Oh, and it's not a trap. The only people who get tricked are the ones who don't read what they're voting, and those people are at fault for, again, not reading before they click. That's how mistakes are made.

Then explain to me why you cannot remove or change your vote to "No" when they do realize their mistake?


I wouldn't even be pointing any of this out if there was only 1 option to vote Yes. That would make a lot more sense, then.
But to have 2 options that both say yes?

That's a pretty scummy way to make it look like there's more people supporting it then there actually is.

[HereThereEverywhere]

You have to put two options. It's a poll mechanic, it requires two options. That's why I call it a "petition" because it's really not meant to be.

Villager, it's not a problem. If you have a problem, say it. Better yet, read through and then say it if nobody else has, but you don't have to do that. It's not hidden, it's plainly obvious if you look at the pages that some people disagree. Besides, tell me this, why the fuck do you need to know how many people disagree? You can apply that to how many people agree as well, but voting yes doesn't harm anything, allowing people to vote no without saying why does, because it means people think it's okay to just say it's a bad role without offering pointers and thus just killing it off. Nothing is hidden or buried, it just takes a bit of time to look for the disagreement. But you don't even need to fucking do that, knowing how many people do or don't like it means nothing, even if the Devs see it, they shouldn't give a damn about how many people do or don't like it, if they like it they should add it. Unless the yes or no votes are a majority of the entire community, it doesn't matter. So if anything, I say we remove the poll in general, since it's not doing anything. But just having yes and no no doesn't hurt, and you're making it out to be some problem it's not.

[Parallax7]

I actually read through all the pages, and there is very good discussion that I’d want the devs to see.

[Gooose26]

Definition of conspiracy theory - "a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for a circumstance or event." Keep that in mind.

So you are going to tell me that, despite the lack of evidence, that the people are all voting incorrectly and just can't change it back to what they want. A lot of the voters clearly just voted without speaking, and I would say that if I saw a role with a lot of support that I thought was bad, that I would be compelled to argue why it is bad. In a petition, you do not sign to disagree, there is no debate in a petition, merely just one side saying what they believe. It does not represent the people as a whole. If you want to disagree, then make an argument about why you disagree, the petition support does not mean that the role is good, although it should put it above others.

You do have a point on one thing though, what if you change your mind?

[Villagerlover]

You have to put two options. It's a poll mechanic, it requires two options. That's why I call it a "petition" because it's really not meant to be.

Villager, it's not a problem. If you have a problem, say it. Better yet, read through and then say it if nobody else has, but you don't have to do that. It's not hidden, it's plainly obvious if you look at the pages that some people disagree. Besides, tell me this, why the fuck do you need to know how many people disagree? You can apply that to how many people agree as well, but voting yes doesn't harm anything, allowing people to vote no without saying why does, because it means people think it's okay to just say it's a bad role without offering pointers and thus just killing it off. Nothing is hidden or buried, it just takes a bit of time to look for the disagreement. But you don't even need to fucking do that, knowing how many people do or don't like it means nothing, even if the Devs see it, they shouldn't give a damn about how many people do or don't like it, if they like it they should add it. Unless the yes or no votes are a majority of the entire community, it doesn't matter. So if anything, I say we remove the poll in general, since it's not doing anything. But just having yes and no no doesn't hurt, and you're making it out to be some problem it's not.

(Really?? Last time I checked, I thought you could put 1 option on the poll.....weird)

Anyways, I don't have a problem with people voting yes.
I have a problem with the fact that people who inadvertently vote yes cannot change their votes to express their true opinions. It stays as a "yes" forever.
You are literally taking advantage of people's ignorance for self-gain. That is where the issue lyes.

Unfortunately, the game developers have had an untrusted reputation, and have been known to make bad decisions with their game. And it is because of this reputation that I wouldn't believe for a second that they would bother to read what most of the pages and pages of forum users have to say in regards to the opposition about something like this "Jester Replacement". And it's ultimately because of this reason as to why I have an issue with the way these "petitions" are setup. The game developers are certainly going to only look at the surface level of something like this thread, and go from there.
And if all they see are these "Yes" votes without any clear oppositions (AKA, "No" votes), then how could we expect the developers to ever dig deeper than they usually do?

So you are going to tell me that, despite the lack of evidence, that the people are all voting incorrectly and just can't change it back to what they want.

I have never said anything remotely close to what you are trying to paraphrase out of me. No, I am not saying "all" of the people are voting incorrectly. I have an issue with the fact that you're on a forum where there's supposed to be polls, and not petitions. If you want a petition, go to a petition website and gain supporters there to show to the Devs. Because the way you are going about this "petition" is fooling people who typically expect Yes and No in a game forum poll.

You do have a point on one thing though, what if you change your mind?

Well then maybe someone should do something about that.




===================


None the less, I have suggested this before and I'll say it for the whateverth time.

I like the role idea. It's a neat role and could be something interesting to play as.
But in no way do I believe it's okay to replace the current Jester with. If you want to know why, refer to page 16, 4th to last response at the bottom.

[Villagerlover]

Spoiler:

You say both factions can manipulate the jester with this idea, which is true. But I thought the entire point of this rework was so that the jester wasn't used as a weapon when discovered? What is preventing the jester from simply revealing themselves, offering themselves as a weapon to either side? Sure, a Jailor and Vigilante might be obliged to kill them at night, but why would they do that if they know they might get pranked? And again, as I've mentioned earlier, if the town loses majority in voting, the non-town roles can easily lynch the revealed jester without any consequences, as it's lynch only hurts the town. This is a major flaw, as you're essentially turning the jester into an free-win weapon instead of giving it the premise of a role that's supposed to be challenging.

Mentioning that, another major flaw I have with this idea, as I've said before, is that it's goal is too easy. It is a role that has the ability to win by being killed at night. No role should ever have such an ability because it's too easy to pull off. Even if it is limited. No one should ever desire to die during the nighttime in order to have a way to win. Because at that point, it turns into a game of predicting when you'll die at night so that you can win, which takes much less effort than trying to trick an entire town into getting you on the ropes.

This role will be treated like a second veteran that opposes everyone.
No one wants to touch a revealed jester because everyone is afraid of touching it, or killing it at night because of the possibility of getting pranked. And due to that, in the event that the jester remains untouched, they become...a kingmaker! Sure, the current jester can fall under the same status, but this role would definitely be a kingmaker waaaaaaaaaaay more often. Cause literally no one wants to touch this prankster. And that's not a good thing.
I'll take the veteran for a great comparison. Once a veteran is revealed, no one is ever going to visit them again unless an evil role is foolish enough to believe they can snipe the veteran (a rare occurrence, as there is almost always better targets). This role is essentially a 2nd veteran that will eventually become a Kingmaker. Once a Jester is revealed to the public, no one is ever going to visit them again, or attempt to lynch them, which is quite awful.
People should have an ability to deal with a role that can threaten them instead of simply hoping they aren't about to double cross them. This role doesn't allow that. No one wants to suffer the consequences of lynching or killing it.

Now what about jesters that choose not to reveal?
Well then we can expect to see a lot more guessing-when-I-will-get-killed-at-night jester's instead of what we have now. This role is under no obligation to trick an entire town when all it has to do is (go on alert) pull a prank at night, and await to get killed. Am I saying it's going to be successful all the time? No. But the fact of the matter is, most humans playing this game are going to exploit the hell out of dying at night a lot more than trying to take the more challenging route. But in the instances where it does work (which would be a lot more frequent than getting lynched), the evil roles are going to suffer a lot more than the town's voting power.

This new role, as I've said before, does not fix anything as far as I can see. It still acts as a weapon. It can still receive free wins, it's still able to become a kingmaker(which would be a lot easier to do), and isn't nearly as challenging as the original jester.
The only thing that I think is possibly good is that it goes under Neutral Benign, which isn't even on the ranked role list anymore.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.
I think this role concept/idea is pretty neat. It could be it's own thing.

But it should not replace the current jester.

/No support

Very good points - perhaps pranks could solely be night based; you have 2 night pranks, as opposed to having 3 pranks to be used at either day or night. This means being lynched in the day gives the Jester the win ALL the time, and the Jester being lynched in the day will result in the Town not being able to vote the next day. This at least gives motivation for the Jester to try and get lynched, and if the Town suspects that they're the Jester in the day (and as a result don't lynch them), the Jester can also win the game if the Jailor/Vigilante try to kill them at night.

I could see why that would be a good idea, but at that point you might as well have the current jester if it's going to be a win "ALL the time" as far as the actual day goes.
I still think it's not that good of an idea to replace the Jester with because the role will still be able to win by dying at night, and it's still easily exploitable if the evil roles get majority, and decide to hand the Jester a free win while also simultaneously crippling the remaining townies.

[Kirize12]

Having a poll that only says "Yes" is bias against people who don't want this to happen. (And no, it's not a petition. It's a poll trap)

It is a trap. I voted on this the other day, and I thought the lower option was going to be "no." Only now do I realize it was another yes. How dumb I feel right now.

Jester is awesome the way it is now, and it should not be changed. It's one of my favorite roles in the game.
/nosupport from me on this.

That is on you for not reading the options.

That, madame, is bias.

[Villagerlover]

Having a poll that only says "Yes" is bias against people who don't want this to happen. (And no, it's not a petition. It's a poll trap)

It is a trap. I voted on this the other day, and I thought the lower option was going to be "no." Only now do I realize it was another yes. How dumb I feel right now.

Jester is awesome the way it is now, and it should not be changed. It's one of my favorite roles in the game.
/nosupport from me on this.

That is on you for not reading the options.

I actually read this. I didn't vote.

The way you're responding makes it sound like it's okay to make unjust opinions appear in the self-gain of the OP just because the viewers thought they voted No when they really voted Yes.
That's just blatantly taking advantage of people's ignorance in this type of setting, and it is damaging because it makes it look like there are more supporters than there actually is.

[Parallax7]

This is now the official TG Jester. Thank you for the support.

With the role's addition into the Testing Grounds, and the request for information regarding Coven, I updated the role and brought some much needed changes. There are several edits to the thread, role, and even the roll poll. Which I changed because of popular demand. Please vote again!

[Mystoc]

With the role's addition into the Testing Grounds, and the request for information regarding Coven, I updated the role and brought some much needed changes. There are several edits to the thread, role, and even the roll poll. Which I changed because of popular demand. Please vote again!

things i don't like about this i have brought up multiple times and haven't gotten a response from yet on

i just don't like the win condition being tied to a set amount of ability uses, it will feel horrible being on your last use of prank knowing if you dont get it off you just loose no other role in the game is like this i feel this role would be very unfun to play, perhaps add a way to get pranks back even if the cooldown is a long one

lastly this

Arsonist Will instant ignite upon dousing the Jester, and be unable to douse or ignite the following night.

that's unfair the asro isn't killing the jester the douse is not a lethal attack why should jestor turn into one? jester should be expecting and be the only told if they get doused and then they should have to predict when the asro is going ignite forcing asro to ignite is just counterintuitive the douse is not an attack and doesnt kill it should not count has jester getting a prank off

it would be like if jester got hexed and used a prank he still dies from a hex even though all the hexes aren't all the non coven players yet it just doesn't make sense

[Parallax7]

For the same reason Bodyguard fights off Arsonist when it douses it’s target.

[Soulshade55r]

I think this role is cool on it's own so honestly so I'm glad it's a testing ground role.

[Mystoc]

For the same reason Bodyguard fights off Arsonist when it douses it’s target.

bodyguard fights off deadly effects that will cause deaths, so it's considered an delayed attack,

jesters goal is to die when its pranked , dousing a person is an delayed attack but it doesn't kill till the ignite happens and asro can be killed before the ignite does happen, therefore since the jester hasn't died yet because no ignite has happened the jester shouldn't die

jesters goal is DIE while a prank happens not to be attacked when a prank happens,

by your logic with asro if a doctor heals jester and they pranked they should still die since they were attacked and pranked, this ofc is not the case since jester will not die from the attack since they were healed jesters goal has not been met since jester survived the attack

this just my opinion the changes role needs are

buffs
-some way to get prank charges back be it with an secondary ability when you gain when have run of pranks or it just replenishes charges over time (having a win condition tied to a set amount of button clicks just feels so unfun to play i would hate playing a role that was like that to add way to get charges back even its a very slow method)

- and add this passive has part of the prank ability - when pranking you will roleblock all visitors who are not attackers (but only if you are actually attacked if you don't get attacked while pranking you will roleblock no one (this stops Tp from saving you and taking away your victory when you prank)


nerfs
-remove this unitutive asro interaction jester should only able able to prank when it dies for when an asro ignites them othwerwise it makes no sense
- to make it more fair just add that jestor knows if its had negative status put on them as a passive ability like hexed doused framed poisoned ect.. this way it knows it needs to be on the lookout for when the asro might ignite

[Joacgroso]

I think jesters should be moved to NB without changing anything, because they are one of the funniest role imo and reworking them into NE would ruin them. They are not really needed as NE, since a witch is way better for mafia than a jester. And for people who say "There should be someone scaring town from lynching", well, that's the point of executioners! I also agree with HTE. Players shouldn't be rewarded for playing badly.
If this were added as a new role (NC, I assume), it wouldn't really mind me because I don't play chaos/custom, but I think it would be pretty boring and no rewarding. Just dying and seeing no deaths would be boring and not rewarding. And as some people say, they would never try to get lynched, since hoping for a free win in n1 is way easier. I also don't like the fact that no one can possibly kill them without taking any risks. Town, at least the jailor, should be able to get rid of an obvious jester. imo, if pranksters run out of pranks, they should turn into survivors without vests, just like GAs.

[Kirize12]

we did it reddit

[Aviel]

The new jester sounds more like it's own role.

The Prankster

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[Mystoc]

I agree with Villagerlover. This could do quite well as it's own role, but PLEASE leave the current Jester as it is. It's one of my favorite roles in the whole game, and I know it's the favorite of others as well.

if weren't for the rolelist i would say jester should be NC since its disrupts both sides, but if it was NC it would never appear in ranked.

also why people not mentioning if this is changed to NB it cant appear in ranked anymore that's a huge factor to consider

[Joacgroso]

And why does everyone want jesters to spawn in ranked?
Because they "make the town scared of lynching"? First of all, I totally agree with HTE. Town should not be scared of lynching obvious scum. Scum should not be rewarded for being obvious. If town finds someone who is obviously scum, they should have all the right to lynch him.
And secondly, we already have executioners for scaring town from lynching. In fact, changing jesters to NB would increase the odds of executioners spawning, so town would be really scared of lynching, especially in games where no one claims witched.

[Villagerlover]

And why does everyone want jesters to spawn in ranked?
Because they "make the town scared of lynching"? First of all, I totally agree with HTE. Town should not be scared of lynching obvious scum. Scum should not be rewarded for being obvious. If town finds someone who is obviously scum, they should have all the right to lynch him.
And secondly, we already have executioners for scaring town from lynching. In fact, changing jesters to NB would increase the odds of executioners spawning, so town would be really scared of lynching, especially in games where no one claims witched.

I disagree.
Town is way too lynch-happy.

It's very hard not to make a mistake every few games because there are a lot of things that can go wrong as you lie your way out of the ropes. Especially when it's something completely out of your control as an evil role.
Jester's kind of serve as a way to help cover that up. If we were in a setting where there were never any naturally-spawning jesters, then the town would be way too confident in who they lynch since they know for a fact that a jester is way too unlikely.
Sure, there's Executioners, but those do not function the same a jester from the start.

You guys are making it sound like people who take on the role of jesters are people who say really obvious, dumb and meaningless crap in the chat to get themselves lynched. And that's not the case at all.
Jester's can play cleverly, and that's the town's fault for not realizing who they end up lynching.

Jesters should remain in ranked for the sake of not making the town so confident. Townies already have overpowered, unclaimable and unbalanced roles. So why would anyone want them to gain even more confidence in who they decide to lynch?