Talk:Destruction in Dvorak deck

New Group Project

What are all of your opinions on this? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 02:08, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Given that Town of Salem, Throne of Lies, etc. exist already, I'm interested to see what uncharted design space yet exists.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 03:04, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Have you heard of the Fourm of Lies? More specifically, Grand Idea. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 06:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Jack Of All Trades

Can you use his copy ability repeatedly to store up multiple copied abilities? Also, this should probably only be able to copy Uninformed Majority abilities since otherwise you can not only identify Mafia you target (This is a powerful investigative tool by itself!), but kill them if you copy a Mafia Killer. I like this card though. Your own idea?--ChippyYYZ (talk) 05:19, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Usually referred to as a JOAT. Maybe it should get a 1 shot of Invest, Protect, Kill, And Distract (Or Occupy). Thoughts on this? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:32, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

A slew of single-use abilities sounds good. And I defer to your judgement if you want to change Distract to Occupy across the board.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 05:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

What about this current JOAT? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:42, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Still a fairly capable investigator, and Social should say "target player cannot be lynched tomorrow", and I would also add Visits where appropriate (if you think Visit is a term worth having, which I think it is), but the rework is good.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 07:06, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Role Types

These could use a line of description each. Mostly I'm wanting to know what is meant by "Offensive". Should Escort and Consort be Offensive?--ChippyYYZ (talk) 07:06, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Alignments

The rules seem to use the undefined term "Team" when "Alignment" is meant. And the rules seem to describe Uninformed Majority as an alignment, when it seems to be a type of Alignment. I propose the following clean-up:

Alignments

There can be any number of alignments present in a game. Instead of a card type, Each role has a single alignment and a role type.

There are four categories of alignments: Uninformed Majority, Informed Minority, Neutral Evil, and Benign Neutrals. A non-neutral role's goal is to kill off all players of other alignments except for Benign Neutrals. Neutral roles each have their own unique goal.

All the same information in a fraction of the space. Since you're putting Neutral Killers' goals on their cards, the rules don't need to define their win condition. This wording gets rid of "Team", though your neutral killers both use the undefined term "major faction". Their goals could be shortened to "Kill all other players except Benign Neutrals."--ChippyYYZ (talk) 07:06, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I love this. Thank you. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Bodyguard

"...instead of their target." Ain't too good at his job otherwise.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 05:19, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Escort/Consort

Shouldn't they be Offensive? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 06:28, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

High Elves

"While you are alive, you and other Elfguards wake up together and share information gained from each other's Night abilities." This seems like a thing the Informed Minority does. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 23:32, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

That it does. The Captain is a pretty bad investigator since he outs himself to any mafia he meets, but in exchange he and a friend or two know each other's names.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 01:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Design Questions

Is the distinction between morning and afternoon necessary? It's weird to call out Morning specifically as being a time that players can say things. If the rules explicitly state that talking is allowed at this time, then talking is implicitly disallowed at other times. Far easier to say "no talking during trials or while asleep" and leave it at that.--ChippyYYZ (talk)

Should the morning be defined as a time where players aren't allowed to vote for a trial yet? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't know that you need to mandate a "no trials yet, you still need to discuss the results of last night" period. The players will either do that anyway, or they already know who they're putting on trial. Morning and Afternoon can just be Day.--ChippyYYZ

"Whoever has half or more of the other players voting them becomes the accused" - If half of players vote for one person and half vote for another, each of them would qualify as accused. And if there's an odd number of players, you can have a trial without even a majority (If I'm one of seven remaining players, half of the other six players means three votes). If either of these scenarios is not intended, would recommend this line become "Anyone voted for by more than half of living players becomes accused, beginning a trial."--ChippyYYZ (talk)

"If there are an odd number of players, then someone must obtain that number of votes divided by two rounded up, to become the accused. Alternatively, if there are an even number of players, they must obtain that many votes divided by 2 plus 1." Or, "If a player receives more votes than half of the nu,ber of players alive, they become accused" --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

How about "Anyone voted for by more than half of living players becomes accused, beginning a trial."--ChippyYYZ

Sure. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

"The Moderator tells roles to wake up" Does that mean that the presence of each role is known to everyone? Does the moderator announce "Wake up, Arsonist", thus alerting everyone?--ChippyYYZ (talk)

This wasn't made clear, which is my bad. I meant to say "The Moderator tells role alignments to wake up" however, this can lead to much conflict, so I would implement some type of card-numbering, so the actual message that should be written is: "The Moderator tells role types and alignments to wake up, starting at the lowest number to wake up, if it's a possibility. Then they go to the 2nd lowest, if it's a possibility. Then the 3rd, etc. All roles will work like this" --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

There needs to be some sort of priority list, with Offensive roles probably first and Investigative roles last so that a Police Person doesn't need to wake up once, choose a target, then sleep while everyone who could distract/redirect them or frame/tailor their target gets a turn, then wake up again to see what information they get. I'll work on this.--ChippyYYZ

Ok.

What is made known? If a player is killed at night, is their role revealed? Do players learn what role(s) killed that person, or maybe something more vague, like the killer's alignment or the cause(s) of death (bullet, sword, magic, fire, suicide, etc.)? If a player is Distracted, do they learn that they were distracted and failed to use their ability (for the sake of abilities with limited uses, I'm deciding this answer is yes)? If a player is attacked and healed, are they told so? If a player attacks someone death immune, do they learn that their target was immune?--ChippyYYZ (talk)

If a player is killed, their role is revealed to everyone, assuming no abilities prevent it from being revealed. Players do not know what killed that person in any way. They will only be told if they were distracted if they were an investigative. However, they will not be told of being healed or of being immune, by any party. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

No, they need to know if they failed to use an ability due to distraction. If the Doctor uses their single-use Self Heal, but gets Distracted, they need to know that they didn't actually spend that use. The Surgeon should probably know when they've healed someone too. I think "You were attacked, but survived", "You were distracted", and "You healed someone" are things players have a right to know.--ChippyYYZ

If the Dictator attempted to kill but failed, they wouldn't regain a use of it. Distraction fails the attempt. If the Mafia attacked the NE, and they knew there was a doctor around, they probably would push on the NE for being scum, as they were notified of them being Death Immune, for example. It essentially would lower the winrate of the NE, and that's something I want to avoid, as I've seem in many Mafia like games.

"Distraction fails the attempt" is news to me! So Distraction does not prevent the use of Night abilities, as I had thought, but causes them to have no effect, which means that a Distracted player still visits their target for the purposes of being tracked by Surveiler? Assuming I have that right, do we also want some form of Night Ability Prevention in the game, which would work the way Distract is currently worded?--ChippyYYZ

So for notifications, just "You were attacked, but survived" and "You healed someone" (at least for the surgeon)

Well, the occupy in ToL prevents both the action and the visit, as if the ability did nothing.--JakeTheWolfie (talk) 01:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

So what do we want Distract to do? Prevent the use of an ability, or cause it to fail and waste a use?--ChippyYYZ

Cause it to fail, waste the use, and prevent the ability.--JakeTheWolfie (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

"Revived players will only be revealed if they were revealed before death." (I'm assuming that players killed at night have their roles revealed) So a player killed by the mafia and revived flips their role face-down again because they weren't revealed until after they died? Even though everyone knows who they are now?--ChippyYYZ (talk)

I meant to say "Revived players will only be revealed if their role was revealed because of death, or was revealed before death." --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)--JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

I think "If a dead player is revived, their role stays revealed if it was revealed." puts it concisely.--ChippyYYZ

Sure --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

"If there is only one remaining alignment (and no Neutrals prevent the game from ending), the game will end with the last alignment as the winner, along with any Neutrals that achieved their goal." You don't need to define who wins here, since that's described two lines down the page. How about "The game ends when only one alignment has any living players, not counting any Benign Neutrals."?--ChippyYYZ (talk)

Well, you also have to take into account Benign Neuts that can keep the game from ending. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I'll revisit this once there's an example or two of that.--ChippyYYZ

In ToL, if the inquisitor has at least 1 kill left and is alive with at least 1 heathen/heretic, the game will not end.--JakeTheWolfie (talk) 01:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Role Types - I feel like 6 categories is too many. Offensive in particular seems way too narrow. I prefer Town Of Salem's Investigative, Protective, Killing, and Support for Town, plus Killing, Support, and Deception for Mafia.--ChippyYYZ (talk)

Offensive is Preventing things from a target, Support is preventing things to a target. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

After checking Throne of Lies, I see Redirect is another form of offense. Now that I know there's more to it than just Distract, I'm okay with it.--ChippyYYZ

"Kill - Kill target player." - oh is that what that means--ChippyYYZ (talk)

No, it actually means Kill a player in Target. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 01:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

"Strongman - This ability cannot be stopped unless another strongman ability stops it." - Stop is not a defined term, so it's hard to interpret this. Can a Strongmanned ability be used when you're Distracted? Can a Strongmanned Doctor Of Philosophy Distract an Escort? I assume a Strongmanned kill ignores both Death Immunity and Healing?--ChippyYYZ (talk)

"This ability bypasses anything that would usually stop it, unless a thing it's bypassing is strongmanned as well." --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Stop is still not a defined term. I would spell out specifically what strongman applies to. I would also divide it into two separate systems as follows:

"Attack and Defense - Attacking a player kills them if the attack's strength exceeds their defense. A Basic attack will kill a player with no Defense, a Powerful attack will kill a player with Basic Defense, and an Unstoppable attack will kill a player with Powerful Defense. No attack can kill a player with Invincible Defense; they must be lynched.

Empowered - An Empowered ability ignores non-Empowered effects that would negatively affect its outcome (Distract roles that normally can't be distracted, investigate a player as though they were not Framed or Tailored, target the intended player even if you are redirected or they are untargetable (I assume strongman beats redirect?)). An Empowered ability can be used even if you are Distracted. An Empowered attack increases from Basic to Powerful or from Powerful to Unstoppable. An Empowered Heal grants its target Invincible Defense for a night. Multiple effects Empowering an ability are treated as a single Empowerment."

From there, Kill becomes Attack, Death Immune becomes Basic Defense, Heal becomes "grant Powerful Defense for a night", Bodyguard's attack becomes Powerful and grants his target Powerful defense. Now everything is clearly defined.--ChippyYYZ

Well, there's a small issue I have with this. A bodyguard shouldn't necessarily have to kill an NE. In ToL, there's many ways for an NK to avoid death from a Knight. Reaper has souls (Invincibility), Possessor uses others to attack, And Sorcerer doesn't atatck if they're Death Immune / Defended. But that might be because of the words on the roles. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Words on the roles indeed. The BG kills the Reaper, who self-revives. BG would kill the Possessor, but the Possessor isn't the one attacking. BG would kill a visiting Sorcerer but the Sorcerer auto-cancels their visit. In fact, because of the "Ignore Everything" implied by Strongman, it's actually easier for an NE to survive a Bodyguard if the Bodyguard just deals a Powerful Attack.

"Unique - There can only be one of this role at a time." - in a game, or among living players? If the Godfather dies and the Mafioso promotes to Godfather, but the Godfather is revived somehow, there would be double Uniques. Such cases are probably rare enough that Unique only has to mean "There can only be one of this role assigned at the beginning of the game."--ChippyYYZ (talk)

"There can only be one of this role among living players. If a role becomes a unique role after it's death, and said unique role is revived, the newest one becomes their old role." --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

"Up to one of this role can be assigned at the beginning of the game. If multiple living players have the same unique role, the one who most recently became that role (except via this rule) becomes their previous role." handles all possible cases.--ChippyYYZ

Sure. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

"Frame - Usually on Uninformed Majorities, Any investigative checks on target player will return evil." and
"Tailor - Usually on Informed Minorities, Any investigative checks on target player will return good." - Good and Evil are not terms. Also, not all investigative checks are created equal. Some of them (Police Person, Captain of the Elfguard) return only either "Informed Minority" or "Not Informed Minority" while others (JoaT and Corrupt Cop) return the target's exact alignment. "Good" and "Evil" don't work there.--ChippyYYZ (talk)

"Usually on Uninformed Majorities, Any investigative checks on target player will return as if they were an Informed Minority Killer (Or Special, if they are a Killer already.)"

"Usually on Informed Minorities, Any investigative checks on target player will return as if they were an Uninformed Majority." --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

JoaT and Corrupt Cop still beat this because they ask for a more specific answer than just Minority/Majority. I think it would be easier to standardize the meaning of Investigate to "Determine whether a player is Suspicious" where Uninformed Majority and Benign Neutral roles are Unsuspicious. This would allow Police Person et al. to recognize non-tailored Neutral Killers as suspicious, which they currently can't do (unless they're JoaT). Corrupt Cop can still augment his investigation with "Learn their role type if they're Unsuspicious."

"Frame - Investigative checks on a Framed player return Suspicious."

"Tailor - Investigative checks on a Tailored player return Unsuspicious."--ChippyYYZ

Sure. This makes sense. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

A player with multiple Night abilities can only use one per night, correct?--ChippyYYZ

Unless otherwise stated, yes. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Uninformed Majority and Informed Minority each have an awful lot of letters in them and they look similar at a glance. Could we shorten those terms to "Town" and maybe "Gang" or "Clique" or "Mob" or something?--ChippyYYZ

The Unifs and the Infs? I don't want to presume their evilness. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I like Town and Clique as appropriately descriptive morally neutral words, but I'll take anything shorter than 16 letters.--ChippyYYZ

The Unif, The Inf, The Neuts, and the Psychos. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 01:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Are we making the distinction between Visiting and targeting without Visiting? Your Mage implies such, but it's your only card that mentions visiting. The impression I'm getting is that any ability that targets a player is a Visit unless it specifically mentions not being a Visit (Archer) which honestly makes sense since most abilities will be Visits. So forget I asked.
"Visit - A player using a Night ability Visits that ability's target, unless specified otherwise. Some abilities can detect Visits or affect players who Visit certain players." and then I'll just scrub Visit from all my cards and add "not a vist" to the surveiler.--ChippyYYZ

This makes sense. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Given that there's nothing benign about the Mage, I think Neutrals need to be split into Neutral Benign (Fool, Surgeon), Neutral Evil (Mage, Scorned), and Neutral Psycho (Jake, JoMT, Arsonist). That way you can have non-Kill-Em-All neutrals like the Mage whom the town still has to eliminate as part of their victory, and who still read as Suspicious when investigated (if they're not auto-Tailored).--ChippyYYZ

Well, Neutral Evils as you seem to be defining them mainly hurt the Unifs. And the Town doesn't need the Mage dead to win, nor the Scorned. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

On reevaluation, forget the split. Benign is still not an accurate word for some of them, so how about just Neutral (not suspicious) and Neutral Evil/Neutral Psycho (suspicious)?

Neutral Psycho works well. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 01:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

To preserve "Neutral" as a category referring to both kinds of Neutrals, how about True Neutral and Neutral Psycho as the subtypes?--ChippyYYZ

Sure.

"If more than half of the votes are Lynch, the accused flips their card over and the day ends." should become "If more than half of the votes are Lynch, the accused is killed and the day ends." that's the important part. Players already know dead people reveal their roles (at least once we put that in the rules).--ChippyYYZ

This makes sense --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't mean to overwhelm you with questions and suggestions, but you seem to care about this game, so I want to make sure it works perfectly. And that means poking the rules until there's no weaknesses left.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 02:23, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm fine with it.

And lastly, why is it called "Destruction in Dvorak"?--ChippyYYZ

Dvorak is the Place, and the players are destroying it trying to achieve their goal. You really think the Mafia are gonna clean all of that blood up? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 14:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Minority Conversion

I think by default Minorities should be Unconvertable. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 01:26, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Along with anyone Death Immune? And to give factions who use conversion as their primary weapon a way to fight other Minorities, how about "Informed Minorities are attacked instead of converted"?--ChippyYYZ

Well Death Immunity shouldn't be a factor. I might give the Mithrite Leader a secondary attack apart from their conversion ability. Also, If it's the Primary weapon against them, then it should specify what happens. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 14:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

By "anyone Death Immune" I mostly just meant Neutral Psychos, but each converter can probably just specify who they can affect. So good design guidelines for converter factions would be (1) can't convert Informed Minorities or Neutral Psychos, (2) needs a way to fight other Informed Minorities, and (3) needs a restriction on rate of conversion (1 per days e.g.) and/or max size of faction.--ChippyYYZ

I don't think Neutrals should be convertable anyway. Neither should Informed Minorites, as they would know who their old teammates are and would reveal them. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 15:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Unspecified Factions

You know the King in ToL? How it can be a part of any faction? What about an entire category for role like that one? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 15:06, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

category: Variable Alignment. "The King - Variable/Social - Unique --- Reveal this role. The Moderator secretly selects a random (non-neutral?) player and gives you a second face-down King role with their alignment. Can't be Investigated, Distracted, or Redirected. (Day) - Royal Finger/Decide Fate. When you die, players elect a new king, which might be better to put in a special rule in this section instead of on the King card."

"Uninformed Majority King - Any Uninformed Majority/Social - Unique --- The Moderator assigns your exact Alignment. (Night) - Guards/Safeguard"

"Informed Minority King - Any Informed Minority/Social - Unique --- The Moderator assigns your exact Alignment. You don't wake up with them. (Night) - Safeguard/Close Allies"

"Mithrite King - Mithrite/Social - Unique --- You don't wake up with the Children of Mithrite. (Night) - something specific to the Mithrites"--ChippyYYZ

Something like that, but what about the more general Application of "This role can be in any Faction"? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 17:22, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

You could do that too, just put in some way to determine which Faction (like "secretly selects a random (non-neutral?) player" above). Also it sounds like you want Faction to mean what Alignment currently means (Moderners, Mafia, Mithrites etc.), which works if Alignment is moved up a level to "Categories of Factions" (Unif, Inf, Neutral).--ChippyYYZ

I think that Faction is a shorter way to say Alignment. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Factional Rules

Chippy suggested that the Mithrites should only have a limited amount of Members. What better way to set this rule up than in the Factional Rules, which are special Rules applying to a Faction, but before the actual cards are displayed. --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 23:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Card Clarifications

Doctor - Heal is already defined in the rules, don't need to define it again here
Jack of All Trades - his investigate beats Frame/Tailor (intended?). His Social should say "can't be lynched", or "can't be accused" or at least "can't be voted for".
Lawyer - Only useful on people the lawyer knows are Town, who probably aren't going to be lynched by the town anyway.
Bodyguard - protects from conversion? also needs "the attacker will kill you instead".
Dictator - What is meant by "you will not die from this?" Is BodyGuard supposed to beat this with his strongman kill? how about "You are (strongman?) Death Immune to effects that result from visiting or attacking your target."
Unjust Mayor - triple vote only during trials, and not while accusing?
Regenerator - If a member of the Mithrites dies, it's too late to heal them. Try "Heal all Mithrites without visiting them" or Heal all Mithrites. You visit any Mithrites whose deaths you prevent tonight."
Divined Leader - seems super weak. You can't surprise reveal during a trial like the Unjust Mayor to force a lynch, and your whole faction has to out themselves by voting alongside you just to make any use of your single extra vote (psychos probably won't vote with you because most of them fear being lynched more than being attacked). And since you have to choose to reveal before the night's kills are confirmed, you can't be sure you'll have the majority you're expecting. Also, needs something like the mayor's tie breaker clause in case two people receive enough votes to be accused.
Combatant - If there's two Combatants, who kills? And does Combatant do The Guard's kills? Can the Combatant use his own ability on the same night that he's performing Mithrite Leader's kill ability? Should be specified that it's an exception to One Night Ability Per Night if so.
Fool - executed->lynched. Kills anybody at night, not just someone who voted against him? And it's just a regular kill that can be survived/healed?
Mage - "Whenever a player would visit you, kill them." This implies that the visit ends up not happening, which makes his goal pretty hard.
Surgeon - "This ability is Strongmanned until you prevent a player's death." is the wording you want. Currently, it only strongmans an already successful use, which doesn't have much point.
Scorned - "Live to see 2 marked targets lynched".
Crusader - "Heal target player and kill any players visiting them." Not clear whose visitors he kills. Also ", or prevent 2 people from dying."
Yin and Yang - I feel like neither of them have much control over whether or not they win, since either could just get killed at any time. one-use Death Immune?
Jack of More Trades - Can he hold multiple stolen abilities? I would assume not, since that's how Jack of All Trades works, but you didn't change this one when you changed that one.
Reaper - Dies to Strongman kills as written. How about "In the morning when your death would be announced, you spend 1 soul to revive yourself instead."? Also should specify "killing all visitors to that player"
Possessor- "Target a player and choose another player. Your target visits and kills the chosen player." and "Target a player. If they aren't Death Immune, you trade roles with that player and unavoidably die. You win if the Possessor wins (2 uses).
Sorcerer - "If you would be killed as a result of visiting or attacking your target, or if your target is Death Immune, you will learn that something feels off and not use this ability."
Wraith - That's a weirdly specific message. Does the moderator say that out loud, or hand them a notification card saying that? How about "When you would be killed, instead the attacker learns they attacked the Wraith." Also, kill anyone visiting them, or kill everyone visiting them?
Ventriloquist - second ability isn't worded like a non-visiting ability, which it seems like it should be. Does it Redirected your puppet's night ability to that player, and also kill them? If so: "Your puppet is Redirected to a player of your choice. They kill that player if they are Redirected this way."

Notification Cards

Wraith gave me the idea for a way for the Moderator to silently communicate complex ideas to players: handing them face-down Notification cards, saying such things as "You healed someone" or "You felt something off about your target and did not attack them" or "You were attacked, but survived" or "You were Distracted"--ChippyYYZ (talk) 00:53, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Recruit

How does this role work? --JakeTheWolfie (talk) 05:58, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

As a Recruit, your goal is to find the Mafia (or mithrites or whoever). When a Mafia member you've identified dies, you use the opportunity to join their group. If you are a Promising Recruit, you work with your new buddies to kill the town. If you're a Subversive Recruit, you sabotage your new buddies as best you can to rid the streets of the Mafia. You aren't able to do so directly, and would probably get killed anyway if you did. You can't call for protection from Healers or Distracters, and identifying the mafia to the town doesn't help you personally win (and might not even convince them, since your sub-role is not revealed on death).

The Promising Recruit and Subversive Recruit both have the same restrictions on targeting allies, but for different reasons. The Subversive Recruit can't directly hinder the Mafia or their job would be too easy, while the Promising Recruit has the same set of restrictions so the Mafia can't test them (like "Distract the Corrupt Cop tonight to prove you're not Subversive"). This is also why neither can become a Killer while they have any allies left. The penalty for killing a Promising Recruit exists so that the Mafia can't play it safe by just killing recruits on sight, while the boon for killing a Subversive Recruit exists to refund the night spent killing them. Since a Recruit existing in a game means the Mafia has an advantage/disadvantage, the on-death effects offset that advantage or disadvantage a bit.--ChippyYYZ (talk) 23:47, 3 November 2019 (UTC)