fixes for bakers

[CrowdfordBot]

shapechange: 🥖🥖🥖

[CrowdfordBot]

e_thsn: they give bread to people if the bakers (one per baker) die everyone without bread dies cause they starved

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: <@&1045732542399131769>

intro As a continuation of https://discord.com/channels/584765921332297775/1026637459875967046/1026637459875967046 this suggestion proposes to make it so that when one Baker dies, all Bakers die.

why change Back in the earlier seasons when people played less optimally, the Bakers usually didn't claim, instead they stayed in the background and just used their trust in each other to vote together / potentially elect one another(*). Bakers would generally not public claim or claim collect. The intend behaivor of Bakers has long be lost. * In fact this is closer to how the Baker equivalent (Sisters/Brothers) works in WWoMH - They know to trust each other but lack the means to communicate privately or collect claims privately, so they cannot do any of the common WWR strats.

for change In the current meta, the pretty much only thing Bakers do is to immediately claim and collect claims. With 2p Baker groups it's reasonable for Wolves to counter, but we've seen that usually this doesn't happen much. 3p Baker groups are pretty much impossible to counter. The only thing stopping Bakers from claiming is the existence of an Infecting Wolf, which only is a threat in Night 1, so they can always public claim Day 1 and collect claims then. With 24 games since the last usage, Baker have now become the least recentl‭y ​ս​‌​ꜱ‭е tо‌wn ‭ꭇо​l‭е, so clearly there's a problem.

against change Not sure if there's any reason not to change Baker, other than "its a classic role and should not be changed". It is a classic rule, but it has in fact been changed without getting changed - as the meta changed it has long ago lost the way it originally worked and started working in an unintended way. A change to Baker would be intended to restore the "classic" behaivor

the suggestion The suggestion is to add a cupid-like mechanic, making it so that if one Baker is attacked, the others are attacked too. This will pretty much force the Bakers to remain hidden, as they're otherwise very likely to die quickly.

for suggestion It makes Bakers usable

against suggestion It's not very thematically fitting. It's a bit of a copy from another role (Cupid). I imagine it could get annoying to die because your partner(s) died. It makes bigger baker groups much worse (a 3p death in one night is very swingy).

alternatives I don't think this suggestion is optimal, but I imagine it's much better than the status quo. An alternative could be to think of something more thematically fitting (for example, in some variants the Bakers dying causes town to starve making the lose / be role blocked - but this is not a mechanic we want, so we can't use that), but we haven't found anything else. I think the weakest point of the suggestion is the fact that it doesn't work well with bigger Baker groups, maybe we can think of a fix for that? (Making it so that a Baker dying results in the death of 2p, but not more than that)

✅ Approve 2️⃣ Option 2 - Instead of the above suggested fix, all of town should be role blocked the day/night following a Bakers death ⛔ Deny 🤷 Abstain

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: I think the role will kinda just suck now

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: In my opinion

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: well yea

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: after the change it kinda sucks

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: right now it absolutely fucking sucks

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: Preferably there's some alternative change

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: But this is probably better than current

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: yea, I would prefer another change too

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: but I can't think of anything

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: I liked the town roleblock one

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: How exactly would it work?

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: When a baker dies all town roles can't use their powers next day/night

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: hm

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: Thematically "if the last baker dies ..." makes more sense

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: though in that case a 3p baker group could public claim with 2 bakers, and as stated above 2p groups rarely get ctced

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: Buf it its on every Baker I'm not sure it really helps resolve some of the issues

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: I added 2️⃣ as an option for it

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: I think it's better imo

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: I think for me its around the same as the other one

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: Neither feels particularly fitting, but they both achieve the goal at least

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: More different than the cupid ability at least

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: And less swingy

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: I disagree on that

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: I think it can be more swingy actually

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: in a 2p Baker scenario, worst case 2p die

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: in a 2p Baker scenario with the RB variant worst case you skip 2 Assassin kills and 2 Fortune Teller checks

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: Which equals 2 lost kills, and potentially 2 lost good lynches

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: a scum death is more significant than a town death, so even losing 1 scum death and 1 town death (if you compare Option 1 with Option 2, Option 2 removes a town death, but will RB the TK losing a scum death) is actually worse

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: Think I just convinced myself that Option 1 is better than Option 2

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: The sheer amount of things just 2 Bakers could role block is pretty crazy

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: And with 3p Bakers both options become really bad

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: Maybe if the second one dies only

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: I think that could work, but also only for 2p

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: though thats the same case for Option 1

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: Should I update Option 2 to that then?

[CrowdfordBot]

captainluffy: Yeah

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: Im voting 2

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: More bakers means its more likely they are randomly killed

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: And that screws over however many bakers there are

[CrowdfordBot]

phantomtomic: If bakers are kept a secret couldn’t this basically mass confirm town as well?

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: What

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts:

If bakers are kept a secret couldn’t this basically mass confirm town as well?

What do you mean?

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: Oh

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: I see what he means

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts:

Im voting 2

option 2 has been changed

[CrowdfordBot]

federick: If you are town you get told you are roleblocked

[CrowdfordBot]

mctsts: ah