10:00 I think this is a far better interaction than "you can't put them together". The Damsel won't know they're poisoned, so they'll still be an outsider causing problems for town as usual. The only difference is good can't actually lose the game from a minion guessing them.
Spy damsel jinx idea: The Damsel knows their future role as a free bluff and a spy is in play. The spy sees the damsel as their bluff. Or the more chaotic idea: If the damsel is discovered the spy loses too. I really love this one cause it makes spies a bit more cagey and untrustworthy.
For Pukka/Summoner, I think a better jinx would be: - If the Summoner creates a Pukka, the Pukka gets to poison kill one player that night in addition to their normal ability.
It seems easier and maybe inevitable to let Spy/Widow exist with Damsel. Base 3 had no Damsel, and the only evil creator was Pit-Hag. Now, every third experimental character creates an evil team. Soon, we won't even start with tokens in a bag. My idea: One player starts the game on N1, and maybe says a few words before dusk on D1. Night 2, they choose two people to join the game, one of which is evil if player 1 is good. Those players get Night 1 info / ability. It's their first night. D2, all three talk, and go to sleep. N3, players 2 and 3 choose two more people each, and the ST can make only one evil. Day 3: Voting begins, with 5 players. N4: Either a demon exists, and they start tonight, or the ST starts killing at night, until they create a demon. And so on. Player 1 can be called "Captain", as in Captain Sonar Operation Dragon, where they recruit their crew over time.
Luckily as Storytellers you can control what jinxes apply to your games just as much as you control which characters are initially dealt, what info people learn during the night and various other things. So if you don’t like a jinx, don’t have it work that way in your game.
Just a thought on the summoner/pukka jinx: would it be better for the summoner to pick the first pukka poison on night two? The newly created pukka night 3 would be told what the first pick was and can go from there.
It's possible this may be better, but it was way more clunky and the idea behind this jinx is that its supposed to feel very intuitive and easy to understand.
I wondered if perhaps it would be fairer in that case to still end the game with a Good win if the Summoner were executed between summoning a Pukka on N2 and the usual 'safe point' of N3, but on reflection I think the Pukka either is, or is perceived as, and under-powered demon, so allowing a Summoner to summon a Pukka night two is an interesting trade-off if the Summoner is starting the feel the noose tighten.
Yea, my thought on it all was it eliminated the extra night of no deaths in original rules but also kept the original spirit of the summoner needing to get to night 3 and also prevents evil from getting an extra teammate early. Felt it was more balanced with the original concept of the summoner.
Waking the Summoner on night 2 to sing "Do you want to build a Pukk-man?" and if the answer is "no", then wake on night 3 for a different demon, can lead to two wakeups for the Chambermaid - that is new relative to the earlier wakeup pattern of just night 3... but not a problem as long as the players know of the change.
@@TorIverWilhelmsen Summoner also wakes N1 to learn bluffs. The previous waking pattern was N1 and N3, which is a very *weird* waking pattern. It made it so that Chambermaid could potentially know by N3 that a player must be either Summoner or Amnesiac -- but of course, the Summoner will have already acted by then, so it was never gamebreaking.
My proposal for an alternat Damsel + Peeker jinx is: just, give the Damsel a bluff. I've got an (untested) script in the unofficial discord that I'm lowkey tryin' to get testings for called the Widow and the Lady, and the premise of the script is it's built around an alternate jinx that I thought up while the two characters were still hate-jinxed, (that I only recently got around to drafting a script for). "The Damsel knows the Widow is in play, receives a not-in-play bluff which they misregister to the Widow as, and is safe from the Widow's poison." The Damsel's play pattern is hiding or lose the game. The Widow's play pattern is know everything and choose the misinfo that'll do the most damage, but someone knows theyr in play. I think the best resolution to the issue is to give the Damsel a bit of help in hiding from the Widow, and in exchange, the Widow ping is hidden until after the Damsel is dead or rescued, and that allows the widow to do its damage more quietly. This jinx, while significantly more complicated, protects both play patterns and preserves the intended game of 'cat and mouse'.
@@TheFinalChapters I hadn't thought to explicitly state how it works, but it does work. The damsel learns about the widow and gets the bluff as a part of the Widow's ability to see the Grimiore. When the newly created widow sees the grim, the damsel gets the bluff, presumably to align with what the damsel is already 'bluffing' as if possible. There is a pithag on my script because I wanted evil to have the option of a midgame widow or midgame damsel, and I did design my jinx with that in mind, though I could maybe reword it to clarify better.
@@TheFinalChapters In early mid-game, the damsel can easily pivot with, "everyone lies day 1," and in late mid-game, a damsel that's settled into a bluff which they know to be or suspect is and hasn't managed to get themselves dead yet made a series of calculated decisions but alas they are bad at math. I do understand that you see that as an issue, but the issue, if it even is one, and I'd need more than zero playtests to decide if it actually is or not, wouldn't be that the idea of giving the Damsel a bluff is inherently bad, but that my first crack at doing that had a flaw in its execution, and flaws can be fixed: We could scratch "not-in-play" with the additional ST guidence that while the bluff can be in-play, it should generally not be unless it's to back up whatever claim the damsel has landed themselves into. Sometimes the best the ST can do is a 50/50. (This is fine) Or we could have late widows get an additional misregistration (I don't like this one). Or we could modifying the condition for giving the damsel the bluff to be more liberal but less specific: "The damsel knows if a widow is in play or could be created this game." The damsel knows less about the state of the game initially (there are many ways to make a widow), but they gets to know that less clear info more often. This would eliminate the mid-game creation problem because the damsel always gets the bluff at the start of the game. I like that third one most of these immediate solutions.
10:00 I think this is a far better interaction than "you can't put them together". The Damsel won't know they're poisoned, so they'll still be an outsider causing problems for town as usual. The only difference is good can't actually lose the game from a minion guessing them.
Going from 0% chance to >0% chance is an improvement.
Spy damsel jinx idea: The Damsel knows their future role as a free bluff and a spy is in play. The spy sees the damsel as their bluff.
Or the more chaotic idea: If the damsel is discovered the spy loses too.
I really love this one cause it makes spies a bit more cagey and untrustworthy.
These are some wild ideas! I love it!
I'm sad that there still isn't a Kazali/Soldier jinx. I guess Kazali needs to be updated in general, not just how it interacts with Soldier.
Totally understandable, I made a case for that one.
For Pukka/Summoner, I think a better jinx would be:
- If the Summoner creates a Pukka, the Pukka gets to poison kill one player that night in addition to their normal ability.
That also could work, but I can see the argument that it'd be less intuitive for somewhat newer players.
It seems easier and maybe inevitable to let Spy/Widow exist with Damsel. Base 3 had no Damsel, and the only evil creator was Pit-Hag. Now, every third experimental character creates an evil team. Soon, we won't even start with tokens in a bag. My idea: One player starts the game on N1, and maybe says a few words before dusk on D1. Night 2, they choose two people to join the game, one of which is evil if player 1 is good. Those players get Night 1 info / ability. It's their first night. D2, all three talk, and go to sleep. N3, players 2 and 3 choose two more people each, and the ST can make only one evil.
Day 3: Voting begins, with 5 players. N4: Either a demon exists, and they start tonight, or the ST starts killing at night, until they create a demon.
And so on.
Player 1 can be called "Captain", as in Captain Sonar Operation Dragon, where they recruit their crew over time.
Yo Captain Sonar enthusiast???
Luckily as Storytellers you can control what jinxes apply to your games just as much as you control which characters are initially dealt, what info people learn during the night and various other things. So if you don’t like a jinx, don’t have it work that way in your game.
Storytellers do be empowered
Just a thought on the summoner/pukka jinx: would it be better for the summoner to pick the first pukka poison on night two? The newly created pukka night 3 would be told what the first pick was and can go from there.
It's possible this may be better, but it was way more clunky and the idea behind this jinx is that its supposed to feel very intuitive and easy to understand.
I wondered if perhaps it would be fairer in that case to still end the game with a Good win if the Summoner were executed between summoning a Pukka on N2 and the usual 'safe point' of N3, but on reflection I think the Pukka either is, or is perceived as, and under-powered demon, so allowing a Summoner to summon a Pukka night two is an interesting trade-off if the Summoner is starting the feel the noose tighten.
Yea, my thought on it all was it eliminated the extra night of no deaths in original rules but also kept the original spirit of the summoner needing to get to night 3 and also prevents evil from getting an extra teammate early. Felt it was more balanced with the original concept of the summoner.
Waking the Summoner on night 2 to sing "Do you want to build a Pukk-man?" and if the answer is "no", then wake on night 3 for a different demon, can lead to two wakeups for the Chambermaid - that is new relative to the earlier wakeup pattern of just night 3... but not a problem as long as the players know of the change.
@@TorIverWilhelmsen Summoner also wakes N1 to learn bluffs. The previous waking pattern was N1 and N3, which is a very *weird* waking pattern. It made it so that Chambermaid could potentially know by N3 that a player must be either Summoner or Amnesiac -- but of course, the Summoner will have already acted by then, so it was never gamebreaking.
So... for pukka/summoner... how does chambermaid react to that? does the summoner sometimes wake on n2?
Afaik the summoner now always wakes on night 2 and are asked if they want to create a pukka specifically
That's how I interpret it
Can't wait for BotC gacha skins
Lootgrimoires
My proposal for an alternat Damsel + Peeker jinx is: just, give the Damsel a bluff. I've got an (untested) script in the unofficial discord that I'm lowkey tryin' to get testings for called the Widow and the Lady, and the premise of the script is it's built around an alternate jinx that I thought up while the two characters were still hate-jinxed, (that I only recently got around to drafting a script for).
"The Damsel knows the Widow is in play, receives a not-in-play bluff which they misregister to the Widow as, and is safe from the Widow's poison."
The Damsel's play pattern is hiding or lose the game.
The Widow's play pattern is know everything and choose the misinfo that'll do the most damage, but someone knows theyr in play.
I think the best resolution to the issue is to give the Damsel a bit of help in hiding from the Widow, and in exchange, the Widow ping is hidden until after the Damsel is dead or rescued, and that allows the widow to do its damage more quietly.
This jinx, while significantly more complicated, protects both play patterns and preserves the intended game of 'cat and mouse'.
Doesn't work. A Widow can be created midgame, and this would *not* work at all in that scenario.
@@TheFinalChapters I hadn't thought to explicitly state how it works, but it does work. The damsel learns about the widow and gets the bluff as a part of the Widow's ability to see the Grimiore. When the newly created widow sees the grim, the damsel gets the bluff, presumably to align with what the damsel is already 'bluffing' as if possible.
There is a pithag on my script because I wanted evil to have the option of a midgame widow or midgame damsel, and I did design my jinx with that in mind, though I could maybe reword it to clarify better.
You can use the pithag to go damsel hunting if you want, but I don't imagine that's the most effiecent use of the evil team's time.
@@ookazi1000 "the bluff" doesn't work. By midgame, the damsel is *already* bluffing as something which may or may not already be in play.
@@TheFinalChapters In early mid-game, the damsel can easily pivot with, "everyone lies day 1," and in late mid-game, a damsel that's settled into a bluff which they know to be or suspect is and hasn't managed to get themselves dead yet made a series of calculated decisions but alas they are bad at math. I do understand that you see that as an issue, but the issue, if it even is one, and I'd need more than zero playtests to decide if it actually is or not, wouldn't be that the idea of giving the Damsel a bluff is inherently bad, but that my first crack at doing that had a flaw in its execution, and flaws can be fixed:
We could scratch "not-in-play" with the additional ST guidence that while the bluff can be in-play, it should generally not be unless it's to back up whatever claim the damsel has landed themselves into. Sometimes the best the ST can do is a 50/50. (This is fine)
Or we could have late widows get an additional misregistration (I don't like this one).
Or we could modifying the condition for giving the damsel the bluff to be more liberal but less specific: "The damsel knows if a widow is in play or could be created this game." The damsel knows less about the state of the game initially (there are many ways to make a widow), but they gets to know that less clear info more often. This would eliminate the mid-game creation problem because the damsel always gets the bluff at the start of the game.
I like that third one most of these immediate solutions.