Changes to Normal Games (update September 2022)

[Alisae]

I would like to put forth the role modifier if Fragile - dies if targeted by an ability or if it uses an ability.

That sounds so unfun to play...

Coming from the man that doesn’t vote.

your modifier is unfun to play

[RadiantCowbells]

your MOTHER is unfun to play

[RadiantCowbells]

bitch

[popsofctown]

Whitelisted personal seems good.

There was a bizarre frustrating conversation in the open forums about whether "backup" is a modifier or a role itself the verdict being that universal backup is a role but backup applied to a specific role is a modifier (?).
Standardization on what backup means would be great. It's like so unclear conceptually whether backup is supposed to be like the Russian Army in World War 1 where if the guy you're partnered with is the one with a gun because the army is too poor, you pick up his gun if he dies, or if it's supposed to be like, you're a 68 year old detective in a small town and it's ok for you to take some naps but if something happens to the spry new 33 year old detective you are not too infirm to go deliver some justice.

[Oversoul]

That's closer, but I think it would encourage mods to put in roles like Suicide Doctor.

Admittedly, giving it an ability and the Fragile modifier has very niche uses (doctor, blocker, inventor). However, it’s just food for thought.

Oh also vigilante I guess.

[popsofctown]

I think the criticism in 373 is so unrelated to the topic of the thread that it is offcolor. I think it should be chided for being inappropriate rather than layered under a stack of memes.

[Oversoul]

It was clearly a tongue in cheek remark, but uh ok

[Plum]

There was a bizarre frustrating conversation in the open forums about whether "backup" is a modifier or a role itself the verdict being that universal backup is a role but backup applied to a specific role is a modifier (?).

That's how I wrote the Backup Tracker Role PM in my recently completed Micro Normal game (of course, there was no actual Tracker in the game so etc.).

[RadiantCowbells]

That seems accurate

[Oversoul]

Does the distinction really matter? I can’t think of a situation in a normal where it does

[popsofctown]

If the distinction directly resolves the X-shot question and other modifiers, Russian rifle guy does not get extra bullets and old detective has no reason to be Indecisive like the young whippersnapper was.

[Dunnstral]

It depends on what the role pm says

If it says you get the other guys role, then yeah you're an indecisive whatever

If it says you become a cop if a cop dies, and an indecisive cop dies, then no you're not indecisive

[Amrun]

It depends on what the role pm says

If it says you get the other guys role, then yeah you're an indecisive whatever

If it says you become a cop if a cop dies, and an indecisive cop dies, then no you're not indecisive

It should be normalized for normals though.

[Dunnstral]

It is normalized, it uses my second example (so you wouldn't become indecisive)

Don't be fooled into thinking the sample roles are optional - pay special attention to the words "standardized Role PM"

[Amrun]

I know. I was just saying. I would have chosen the former.

[Dunnstral]

My understanding is that Modkills are "standardized" so that becoming a neutral survivor always happens posthumously, which would trigger the backup role (since the role they backed up

has

died, even though they were changed to a different role after death)

I assume most list mods would rule that way, as they need to oversee modkills now. I guess my only problem is that the wiki uses very imprecise wording that conveys a different meaning, and which isn't what happens in practice:

In addition, players who are modkilled as a punishment (i.e. for causing deliberate harm) should have their role

retconned

to Survivor

Actually, there's an argument to be made that with the current wording, if a doctor protected someone on night 2, and they are modkilled day 3, the person they protected now dies, since their being a doctor is now "retconned" and they couldn't have submitted a protective action. Yes, that is what that word means... no, that word shouldn't be there

[Wake1]

Could a Bodyguard that also kills the attacker (while still dying) be possible in Normal?

[Amrun]

Could a Bodyguard that also kills the attacker (while still dying) be possible in Normal?

No.

[Dunnstral]

It sounds like you want to play/run a mini theme game Wake

[Wake1]

It sounds like you want to play/run a mini theme game Wake

I actually do have some explosively creative and fun ideas for a theme game. Problem is it'd take a while to flesh it all out.

In terms of Normal games, I'd just like to see more small things added that won't break the game or how Normal games function, but still adds a little more subtlety to the game. For example the 'Loud' and 'Announcing' modifiers were brilliant. If more things like that were made it'd be pretty neat. Like having a 3rd player be informed that somewhere in the game Player 2 was tracked, etc.

[mastina]

I would like to put forth the role modifier if Fragile - dies if targeted by an ability or if it uses an ability.

That sounds so unfun to play...

That version sounds terrible, yes.
The version of Fragile which *I* am familiar with, where they die if targeted during the night (but not if they act) feels like it could maybe have room for existence tho. It would exist as a similar modifier to ascetic/macho in that the holder of the modifier as

I

am familiar with it, would want to avoid being targeted by actions.

For that matter, the inverse of "using this role will kill you" has existing precedence as well--not in Normals, mind you, but onsite in the form of roles like suicide bomber.

Basically, separating those two into two halves feels like it has design potential; together, not so much.

[callforjudgement]

Just a note that Fragile has some bizarre action resolution situations (e.g. a Fragile player being targeted by two unrelated rolestops). That said, I'm sure it would be possible to come up with some consistent ruling if the modifier were popular enough.

I prefer mastina's variant (and have seen it used before, an Activated Combined Fragile Bulletproof Townie under the name "Weremuffin"). Presumably Fragile Bulletproof protects you from direct kills but not being acted on by non-kills.

[TemporalLich]

I'm not sure whether it is more normal for a mutual rolestop to result in the target being rolestopped or not... If the former is true a mutual rolestop should kill a Fragile target.

Bulletproof Fragile would be immune to kill actions (except Strongman) but die from non-kill actions. Fragile should be an unavoidable death anyway since otherwise a Doctor would be able to safely target a Fragile role as an effective Visitor.

[Dunnstral]

Rolestopper visits the target so the Fragile player would die, only needs one rolestopper to do so

Edit: The two rolestopper thing doesn't have a "right" answer in itself, but if they both visit the fragile player at least one of them have to go into effect to stop the other, so all that matters is that the fragile player dies. I don't think this problem is specific to the fragile role though

Fragile should be an unavoidable death anyway since otherwise a Doctor would be able to safely target a Fragile role as an effective Visitor.

Doctor only stops one death, which would be the one they caused from visiting the fragile player

And it's fine to work like that, IMO

[callforjudgement]

IMO the most sensible resolution to the double rolestop is that the rolestoppers rolestop each other and other actions go through (RAR produces this result, it's a bit less clear under NAR). In that situation, it seems strange for the rolestopped action to trigger the Fragile (unless you think that roleblocked actions would).