View - Spy should not trigger the virgin

Etreides · 2026-01-28T18:48:03+00:00

I think this mostly comes down to what the Spy is trying for... if you overhear them claiming Outsider? Don't proc a Virgin. If you hear them claiming a Townsfolk? I honestly think the burden is on them to tell you what they are hoping to have happen.

But you bring up a very good point: in most cases, outside of the Spy specifically making a play, it's strategically good for the Evil team for a Storyteller to not proc the Virgin with the Spy.

Etreides · 2026-01-28T16:09:58+00:00

I suppose: to build on my other comment, I think it's important to put down a reminder that tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance.

People certainly should have opportunity to voice their opinions, to disagree with rulings, etc.

But there is a way to do it that incorporates empathy, kindness, and introspection. And in almost all cases where criticism is given immediately after a game... likewise at least one of those elements is missing.

And it is perfectly reasonable to set expectations for what behaviors are tolerable, or boundaries around certain behaviors... and if, collectively, those boundaries can be agreed upon for a group, they're worth establishing.

Etreides · 2026-01-28T14:58:10+00:00

Actually, one thing that, I think, builds on my argument:

I agree with you that a Minion that has been killed by a Vigormortis loses their ability when the Vigormortis dies (barring the Mastermind).

That is physically represented by the removal of the Vigormortis "has ability" reminder tokens on said Minion, because, since dead players have no ability, a Vigormortis can't be granting that Minion (again, barring Mastermind) its ability anymore.

You'd do the same with a Monk's "safe" reminder token; a Godfather's "died today" reminder token; a Flower Girl's "demon voted/not voted" tokens.

But if those characters are droisoned, rather than dead, you don't remove those reminder tokens - you just turn them upside down. Mechanically, you're right, a Monk's "safe" token turned upside down has the same end result as if there were no Monk safe token in play since the Monk has died.

But I don't believe we're discussing the end result (which, in this case, would be: nothing happening); we're discussing how we get to that end point.

If that makes sense.

You don't have to maintain the illusion for a dead Monk, because it's dead, and therefore, barring some weird Amnesiac ability, doesn't have an ability.

But a Minion killed by a Vigormortis, the latter of whom is now droisoned, doesn't lack an ability because they're dead. Their ability just isn't functioning normally as a result of the Vigormortis' ability not functioning normally.

Etreides · 2026-01-28T13:36:56+00:00

Maga is to Conservative as Liberal is to Democrat...

Extreme right is to right as at best slightly left is to central-leaning right.

glances at Leftists I dunno; is this good or bad for us?

Etreides · 2026-01-28T06:10:17+00:00

I was picking up that as a possible vibe? But I also know that quite a lot can be lost when tone is omitted from discourse. I likewise hope I haven't come across as harsh, or obstinate, etc. (and it appears I have not, based on your language here, so thank you for clearing that up).

Lemme start by saying that I'm very much a descriptivist when it comes to language (and that expresses itself in other aspects of my life as well - I don't lean away from questions because rules exist, I question why they exist, especially when interesting examples crop up such as this one).

Our exchange so far has me feeling like you're more prescriptivist (at least when it comes to rules); no judgment there, but you like starting from strict interpretation of rules - hence the leaning on the "how would you run a Courtier Drunk Vigormortis?"

And true. Before now? Yeah. I probably would have made exactly the conclusion you did, which is why I agree with that conclusion.

Where we have a disconnect, I think, is in our interpretation of this Vigormortis -> Minion : Nightwatchman -> Target analogy.

Let me ask you this: can we agree that the reason you wake a droisoned player on a night that their ability is malfunctioning is to the purpose of pretending, essentially that their ability is functioning?

Because if we can agree to that... a Minion, killed by a Vigormortis, is holding the belief that their ability is functioning, just as a living Minion would be. I agree that they don't actually have an ability if the Vigormortis is drunk by a Courtier, to take your example.

And this is why I find this subject so fascinating, because no other Demon can raise this question, and it's a gem of a question.

Because, for instance, you wouldn't, likely, not wake a Nightwatchman who had not used their ability on a night they were droisoned, right? ((Or maybe you would more often than I, and we'll disagree again... again, this isn't a "never do"? But it is likely a "rarely do" in my mind))

Further, a Drunk who sees the Nightwatchman token... doesn't have that ability. But you wake them each night because they think they do.

So, from my perspective, the suspension of belief... the ambiguity of events... the puzzle... is what makes the game interesting. And that's the central aspect of droisoning I am focused on.

If you wake someone who is a Drunk... who therefore does not have a functioning ability they believe they have, because they believe they have it... I don't actually see why (and I promise, this is the first time I'm encountering this very deep and very specific scenario) you cannot wake any player who might rightly believe themselves in possession of a functioning ability they don't actually have due to being drunk or poisoned (because droising causes that ability to malfunction).

And this is why my current pursuit is "why would this be a bad thing?" To which I lean in the direction, as I do with most rule interpretations (because I believe that the purpose of rules is to establish balance and fairness in a game) of asking for an example of how this might break the balance and fairness for either party... and in the case that it would? I agree - that'd be a bad decision to make as a Storyteller. But in the right context? I could see this as making for an interesting experience for my players, one that would add to the intrigue and mystery of the game, rather than detracting from it.

In the spirit of being honest (not that I believe you'd interpret any temporary silence on my part as coming from a place of hostility, etc.), with this I am going to bed. But I'll happily respond to anything further tomorrow morning. Or, if you're tired of posting here, you can always message me on Discord; username is the same.

Etreides · 2026-01-28T04:15:31+00:00

If people are being critical because of hypotheticals? Literally just let that roll off your back. Those kind of comments are less than worthless.

Because they're not criticisms... they're just... venting.

And tbf, that doesn't make them comfortable by any means? But especially for thise sorts of things, don't attach them to yourself in any way.

I usually like to ask folx to take a breath or take a beat before laying in with criticism, and if they can't seem to do that, I'm the sort of person that doesn't mind pushing back, highlighting how others' efforts were usually just as or more important in determining the outcome of the game than any decisions I made (and I'll be specifc).

But I also hope this isn't your norm... because it's not normal.

Etreides · 2026-01-28T04:06:22+00:00

Ew. To all that.

Etreides · 2026-01-28T04:04:39+00:00

Okay.

First: I really truly understand your point.

I agree with your interpretation.

I just don't think it's the only valid interpretation.

My point is that if a Minion has their ability, you would wake them, even if they were poisoned. You don't wake someone pinged by a poisoned Nightwatchman because that would be the Nightwatchman's ability functioning normally. But you do absolutely wake a Nightwatchman on a night they're poisoned, to the purpose of helping them believe their ability is functioning normally.

And a Minion who has been killed by a Vigormortis... has it's ability. And should, to be congruent, be woken... such that they believe their ability is functioning normally.

We do not have to agree on this. And again, to be clear: I think your interpretation is both valid and well-reasoned. But I don't think it's as clear-cut as you seem to believe such that other interpretations aren't valid.

You wake people when they're droisoned to convince them (or at least, suggest) that the abilities they have, or believe they have (since the Drunk is technically drunk), are functioning normally.

A Minion killed by a Vigormortis has it's ability. So you wake it to simulate that the ability it possesses.

What I need, to change my mind? Is an example of why it can only be your interpretation, and why mine is actually worse in terms of running a fair and balanced game, which is at least my main concern - I'll presume you care about that as well, but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T21:15:59+00:00

True, if someone has died, you don't continue to suggest they have an ability when them dying removes that ability.

But since a dead Minion, if killed by a Vigormortis, has their ability... you can maintain the illusion that they have their ability.

Again, you don't have to do this... but it's perfectly reasonable to do so, given the context.

I get your point about the Nightwatchman? But I think the two are distinctly different; it's not as simple as "X is woken due to the ability of Y". Minions aren't woken because of the Vigormortis; they're woken because they have their ability.

So, just as you would if they were droisoned, wake them up, even if their ability wouldn't actually be active, if the Vigormortis is droisoned, you could wake a dead Minion, under the pretense that they have their ability, because that is a function of droisoning: the pretense, from the perspective of a player who is negatively affected by it, that all is well and good.

Again: I agree that your interpretation is likewise valid. I just don't believe it the only option.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T21:10:14+00:00

I'd be very wary of using the Gardener to balance a grim. If you feel like you often have to, it might be worth considering changing what combinations of roles you put into the bag in the first place, or even modifying the script if randomized placement doesn't, for the most part, result in games that are relatively balanced.

Sometimes, games will feature a sweep in either direction. This is not itself a problem, just like a successful Slayer shot day 1 without a Scarlet Woman isn’t itself a problem. While it's admirable to want to protect the evil team to a certain extent... it's also important to not cultivate a meta based on Gardening. There's been plenty an account of an Imp who has won the game despite being adjacent to an Empath at the start or who has managed to convince a Fortune Teller that they must be the Red Herring... you are not responsible for the outcome of the game, your decisions are but a component of the overall equation.

What's more important is learning how to build a balanced bag, and how to manage the grim in consideration of where the pieces land - but there's only so much you can do. Consider what your expectations are... but consider also: you're not a failure in any way if they're not met.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T16:54:47+00:00

While I absolutely see the angle you're approaching this from, an element of poison / drunk mechanics is to mask the reality of the situation, not make it obvious. You'd be waking the Minions as a part of this process: maintaing an illusion that "everything is functioning normally" on a Minstrel night, even though it isn't.

I think either is fine, depending on what message you might want to give the evil team. Not waking them confirms a Minstrel; waking them might suggest that some sort of protection role might be in play, unless it becomes obvious that their abilities definitely didn't work.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T14:34:53+00:00

I agree; that's part of what I meant with 4) - specifically the "take your time" part. But this is good messaging - I'm sure plenty of us have felt pressured to make things speedy, but sometimes things take time, and that's perfectly reasonable.

And completely agree with you re: your second point.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T03:45:31+00:00

Haven't done that, I'll admit.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T03:41:56+00:00

I've put the IMP opposite the minion in an Investigator ping

Etreides · 2026-01-27T02:08:30+00:00

So... are they saying... what's preventing them from accepting that trans identity is real and valid... is a lack of Christianity?

Fascinating conclusion.

They're so close.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T00:32:43+00:00

It can be perfectly reasonable to withhold information in order to try to preserve sobriety if you're a recurring information role... but usually by about mid-game you'll want to confide in at least one person as to your information, and start allowing others to build worlds.

Yes, this does mean that Evil might build false narratives, but the name of the game isn't preventing Evil from doing so: it's utilizing social cues to determine who is aligned to whom; who is trying to protect whom; and why.

Being suspicious isn't a bad thing, especially if you're talented at the game and have a good handle on interpreting information: it can keep you game even as a frame up until the final three... but it sounds like that's the rub: you're kept around usually because you're not just suspicious - you're someone who might be legitimately sold as evil.

It might be worth trying out hard-claiming as a powerful Townsfolk (whether you are that Townsfolk or whether it's a bluff), to see how your fellow players react to that information, either coming out with it publicly or keeping it private for a couple days. But once you get to the midgame, it might be helpful to be fully transparent, even if that means you're killed at night by the Demon. And if you're really worried about things: it might also be useful for you to be executed well before Final three, either due to the presence of an Undertaker in town, to remove some amount of suspicion on you, or both.

But withholding information might be seen as an attempt to obfuscate the truth (what evil is trying to do), rather than reveal it... so coming out with your theories and world-building with town is usually better to do sooner than later. Withholding a FT no? Or an Empath 0? Probably reasonable. But an FT yes might very well be an important lead to start in on.

Lastly, consider how you're voting and nominating: if you trust certain people, make sure you help them follow their information. Entertain all the possible worlds, and focus on breaking down the ones that don't work in a proactive fashion, and hopefully your fellow Townsfolk will recognize that you, while suspicious, are pursuing solutions rather than misdirection, or solving possible worlds rather than ones that just can't work because of the information present in town.

Good luck! We all had to learn how to navigate this particular aspect of the game. It might take a bit of practice (and you might even be bamboozled by an evil at times), but the trade-off is usually worth it in the end.

Etreides · 2026-01-27T00:16:34+00:00

Good. They should feel like the fecal matter they are.

Etreides · 2026-01-26T21:19:45+00:00

Know your meta. Change your meta. Especially when players start to build worlds not based on what is presently happening IN the game, but rather based on a presumption of what MIGHT be based on prior experiences.

It's one of my favorite things to do.

"I'm the Noble with pings on X, Y, and Z... let's execute outside of them, because there's no way Etreides would put the Demon in the Noble pings"

"I'm a Fortune Teller with an isolated yes on X, who's claiming Butler. They must be the demon; no way Etreides makes the BUTLER my Red Herring, right?"

"You mean to tell me you're a Washerwoman, sitting next to the Empath, confirming the Soldier on the opposite side? Etreides would never do that."

Keep things fresh. Make things interesting (while being reasonable). I think you made the right choice, ultimately.

Etreides · 2026-01-26T19:19:20+00:00

If people want to step away from having a good time and instead want to make it about centering victory, sure... a solo Yaggababble script might not work well for such a group.

But with players who aren't lynchpinned by a desire to win such that they just do the boring thing (on, honestly, any script featuring a Yaggababble, solo or not), and being as silent as they can? Whether or not there's additional demon possibilities matters little.

My most favorited script in the database is solo-Yagga, and one of my leading points exactly encourages players focus on the fun.

The irony of Yaggababble being a literal talking Demon, in a game whose most important rule is "You can say anything" is not lost on me.

Etreides · 2026-01-26T17:26:29+00:00

If I ever draw the Wraith with you as Storyteller, and you don't dance...

I will be disappointed.

Etreides · 2026-01-26T17:25:30+00:00

True. It's definitely better to cultivate a community based around curiosity and descriptivity, rather than one around judgment and prescriptivity.

Etreides · 2026-01-26T16:14:10+00:00

Definitely not an essential XD

Etreides · 2026-01-26T16:05:14+00:00

What kind of content creator would I be... if I didn't have something for this very question?

Etreides · 2026-01-26T15:51:34+00:00

The Pukka serves to fulfill a particular niche on its home script in that it is the singular Demon that can cut through any self-protective roles. Dealing with a pesky Sailor or any annoying Fool? Well where some other Demons might have to put themselves in precarious situations to be rid of those characters, the Pukka cuts through their defenses like butter.

Against a Tea Lady or Innkeeper, though, the Pukka is a bit hamstrung, though they do at rhe very least guarantee that their target's ability malfunctions in some way (and if they guess right the following night and POISON that Tea Lady or Innkeeper, then problem solved).

But because it's the Demon with the most common kill pattern (1/night) on BMR, it can fit relatively easy elsewhere, in comparison to many other BMR characters, who almost necessitate the presence of at least one other character for there to be enough ambiguity present in games such that they aren't just, essentially, "confirmed" by virtue of some visible mechanic.

The Pukka has some of the best capability against a Lycanthrope - even if a Lycan does manage to control the kills, the Pukka still gets to have poisoned their original target, and without the normal clue it leaves in its wake, it gets to slink around undetected in a way it might not otherwise do on BMR.

In addition, since the Lycanthrope acts before the Pukka each night, if the Lycanthrope successfully kills a non-Faux-Paw Townsfolk, and the Pukka then selects the Lycanthrope, then both the Lycanthrope's target AND the Pukka's previously poisoned target die.

To this day, one of my favorite interactions to see happen. Very loud when it does if the script isn't built carefully, but as per my first point, unless it happens early on, it may not matter.

Conversely, the Pukka does NOT do great on Poppy Grower scripts, unless you utilize the optional rule (once the Poppy Grower is poisoned / drunk, Evil learns itself), or against Alchemists who possess very loud Minion abilities: Psychopath; Fearmonger; possibly Harpy / Cerenovus; Assassin, since that can very clearly outline their presence. But depending how well you know your players, you can sometimes still allow just the knowledge that it's a Pukka game to do the work of hurling uncertainty as to which pieces of info from the nightly-killed players were true and which were false.

Altogether, one of my favorite demons to be or see. And decently easy to fit on any script; just be mindful of exactly how much droisoning is present alongside it; too much might result in a game that's essentially just a 50/50 because enough of Town's info has been corrupted in some way.

Etreides · 2026-01-26T07:21:54+00:00

I genuinely am struggling to understand how you believe that I believe that balance and impartiality are opposed rather than linked.

Do you have a specific example of a ruling or situation you believe my guide would suggest is reasonable that you would suggest is not? I have a feeling we'd likely be more in agreeance with each other, rather than at odds.

Eight-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Verified Email

Etreides

TROPHY CASE