Maybe remove FC ability on Fletcher death?

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts:

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: https://github.com/McTsts/Werewolves-Roles/issues/1117

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: https://discord.com/channels/584765921332297775/1026637459875967046/1026637459875967046

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: <@&1045732542399131769>

intro As a continuation of https://discord.com/channels/584765921332297775/1026637459875967046/1026637459875967046 this suggestion proposes to make it so that when the Fletcher dies, the Fletcher's Customer loses their power.

why change The key reason for changing Fletcher (and other roles from roles that make it too easy) is to avoid them being used for trivial claim collecting. Roles that can confirm themselves easily, without this leading to a disadvantage for the team are thus problematic, as they allow for fast and risk free claim collecting, which generally makes the game much less fun.

for change Fletcher has a mechanic to make the fletcher (the ability to revoke the FC ability) not want to reveal, but I don't think it works. A wolf gaining the Huntress ability isn't all that bad, as you're more likely to lynch wolves anyway, especially if you know they're FC (which you would if the Fletcher public claims to claim collect), so the Fletcher dying honestly isn't a big deal.

against change A public claiming Fletcher can be counter claimed by a wolf, who claims the Fletcher's FC as their own, which is actually really easy to do if the FC is also a wolf, and depending how it plays out, this wouldn't necessarily link the fake-Fletcher and FC together, though this relies on the Fletcher hitting a ~25% chance of selecting a pack wolf, when they have a just below 50% chance of selecting a townie in which case it becomes significantly harder to counter FC (it basically becomes as hard to counter a TC/Townie duo, except the chance of the second player being confirmable in some way rises significantly. The fake-Fletcher could still claim the actual FC as their FC, but there's ways of dealing with that (e.g. confirming knowledge of who FC is pre revealing FC))

the suggestion The suggestion is to make it so the Fletcher's Customer ability is lost if the Fletcher dies. This doesn't really cause a significant difference for a scum FC(*), but it would be problematic for town, as they'd be losing out on a kill. So Fletcher would be less likely to want to public claim. * Actually, I think it would in fact also make it more interesting for a scum FC - they now have some incentive to keep the Fletcher around.

pros/cons for this specific suggestion • The change makes Fletcher more usable in lists. • The change may potentially fail to achieve its goal as its still only one kill you'd lose • However the extra kill would also basically promote one player into a defensive role which with elected roles can be a huge advantage • This may lead to making strats such as claiming FC without a Fletcher viable (the Fletcher would have to reveal to deny it) • May also make scum FC scenarios more interesting, as scum may want to keep Fletcher alive now

✅ Approve ⛔ Deny 🤷 Abstain

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: <@242983689921888256> This passes

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: nice

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: I keep thinking fc is flute charmer

[CrowdfordBot]

jeand.arch: Same

[CrowdfordBot]

jeand.arch: Hm

[CrowdfordBot]

jeand.arch: Thats actually.... a pretty good suggestion but idk if it would incentivize FC for not coming out

[CrowdfordBot]

venomousbirds: this seems too make revoking a stupid ability

[CrowdfordBot]

venomousbirds: i think fletcher being able to revoke and fc keeping ability after fletcher death makes fletcher more exciting and strategic to play

[CrowdfordBot]

venomousbirds: should i revoke tonight in case i die? etc

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: It's more to stop Oh I have a town customer I can then claim and die without having to worry about revoking

Because now they think

If I claim and get mayor and die then I was basically useless and town lost a kill they had

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: in theory it makes it more exciting and strategic. in practice it makes it so the strategy is just "claim fletcher publicly"

[CrowdfordBot]

venomousbirds: fletcher is already quite fakeable imo

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: it's only fakeable if a wolf gets fc, and can also be scuppered fairly easily - outing both involved wolves - by TI checks

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: i suppose you could technically fake it by countering the real fletcher publicly, but that's still vulnerable to TI checks

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: (with a town FC)

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: and yes, obviously the vast majority of claims are vulnerable to TI checks, but it's especially a risk for roles that should always be claimed publicly and don't register as threats

[CrowdfordBot]

venomousbirds: ;fletcher customer

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts:

this seems too make revoking a stupid ability

it makes revoking much less useful yeah

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: it would only be useful if the Fletcher knows that TK wants to NK the scum FC

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: That power could maybe be removed then

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: I think we once said town just lynch a wolf FC instead

The only thing revoking is useful for is solo FC since pack might kill them but it would then be a bad kill

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: overall revoking just isnt that useful

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: yes

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: this passes

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: which i think was known but then there was further discussion

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: might take a look at this tomorrow

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts:

which i think was known but then there was further discussion

might be worth further discussing if revoking should be kept at all

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn:

might be worth further discussing if revoking should be kept at all

The only thing that would be bad is if a solo got it and wolves killed them and the solo screwed town over

Otherwise the Fletcher wouldn't revoke town

And town lynch a wolf FC

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange:

might be worth further discussing if revoking should be kept at all

I'd say remove it - otherwise fletcher can reveal (esp if fc is town), immediately revoke, and become confirmed cit basically

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: Do we do a vote on removing revoking then?

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: sure

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: <@&1045732542399131769> Remove Revoking as a fletcher action

Pros

• Action is unnecessary as it is never used
• Prevents this https://discord.com/channels/584765921332297775/1125459870792036362/1131388347378565183
• Won't cause any issues since we're adding FC ability loss on Fletcher death

Cons

• It may be useful is really specific circumstances

• Removes the ability for fletcher to decide who dies

• Yes

• No

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: by the second con I mean if someone dies*

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: Idk why I put who

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: I feel like it should be an option but not expressed explicitly in the rulebook

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: as in they should still be able to revoke, if that makes any sense?

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: ?

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: what?

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: If it has an ability it needs to be explicitly stated

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: I feel like you should still be able to target nobody if you want to

[CrowdfordBot]

captain_luffy: I don't think it's useless to revoke, but not being able to revoke could make it more interesting

[CrowdfordBot]

captain_luffy: If the fc is mayor and a wolf and u wanna kill it, you'd normally revoke

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn:

I feel like you should still be able to target nobody if you want to

revoke is fletcher's ability to stop FC killing someone

[CrowdfordBot]

captain_luffy: If customer is fc, then what's the abbreviation for flute charmer

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: fpc

[CrowdfordBot]

captain_luffy: Where's the p come from

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: all flute team are called fp