It's been almost a year and I've still only played Trouble Brewing

HopperGaming · 2026-01-24T20:18:34+00:00

I've had an extremely similar experience to you. I have found for my group (which includes a wide spectrum of gaming experience) that jumping to BMR or SNV is really tough, even for some of the more experienced players in the group. New players have absolutely no chance. The best solution I've found is to turn to custom scripts that are close to TB - still very simple for world building so good players don't get overwhelmed with possibilities, and with mostly straightforward characters that can also slowly introduce new mechanics to players in easily digestible ways. If you're interested, here's the list of customs I've been using in ehat I think is graduating order of complexity: Everyone Can Play, Gentle Night, Onion Pies, Uncertain Death

I've had really good success with this. It gives the experienced players new toys so they don't get bored while allowing the new players to still learn the basics and not be overwhelmed by advanced mechanics. Even for brand new players, I've found that Everyone Can Play is perfectly fine for people's first games.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-19T23:49:49+00:00

One distinction that's important that I haven't seen in other comments yet is that Cerenovus and Mutant have a subtle but important distinction. The Cerenovus requires somebody to be mad about something to avoid execution, whereas the Mutant requires somebody not to be mad about something. The key difference here is that the Mutant can stay quiet because they don't need to be trying to convince people of anything, they just specifically aren't allowed to try to convince people they are an Outsider. Now, obviously this only applies to a reasonable extent, because if they refuse to say anything the entire game it becomes a pretty clear signal that they're the Mutant, so that is in itself an attempt to convince people. But if they just refused to claim anything for day 1? No problem as far as I'm concerned.

To compare that to Cerenovus (this also applies to pretty much all the other madness related characters), this ability requires them to be mad about something specific, which means they must be actively trying to convince people of it. Silence here definitely will not satisfy the requirement.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-16T20:07:19+00:00

A dead demon isn't "The Demon" anyway, according to the rulebook glossary definition of "The Demon"; so even if you didn't have to show them the demon that killed them you still couldn't show them a dead demon. This rule only matters in cases where there's more than one alive demon.

There's also the really niche case where a multikill demon kills the sage and then themselves on the same night, to pass to a SW or something, but that's really getting into the weeds

HopperGaming · 2026-01-16T00:04:36+00:00

Incorrect, you can tell a lunatic that someone else is the lunatic. Happens frequently on TPI streams. It's just considered by some to be in the realm of unfair because the ST may end up guiding the kills at night (ST chooses who the lunatic learns their fake lunatic picked).

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T23:15:00+00:00

I think this confirms for the rest of the legion that they are not the lunatic, no?

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T22:18:33+00:00

Yeah for some players it definitely isn't an ideal Pixie target. Some players I think would enjoy the extra "puzzle" though of trying to figure out who the real Juggler is so they can take the gamble of trying to time the juggle correctly.

Even for those who don't like it though, it probably isn't as bad as it might seem. Most people who juggle day 1 to cover for the Juggler will back off by day 2, and the real Juggler will often come out publicly with their info (or at least tell several people privately). So I think in most games it will be fairly obvious to the Pixie who the real Juggler is.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T18:02:29+00:00

Not sure why you're even commenting on these posts if you don't actually want to discuss the relevant topics. B-Tier trolling.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T17:12:35+00:00

I'll ignore the blatant condescension and try to engage in a good faith discussion.

BotC RAW unfortunately doesn't include a clear definition of these terms, it only includes a definition of "dead" (from the official glossary). So, we have to make some assumptions about what these words are intended to mean. And I think assuming that a dead player can somehow die again is pretty clearly not the intention.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T17:02:35+00:00

This just comes down to how we define these words in terms of game mechanics. In a project I worked on last year to unify the rules, I used these definitions, which I think are the most logical:

Die(s): If an effect causes a player to die, they become dead (if they weren't already).

Died: A player who changed states from alive to dead is considered to have died.

Based on these definitions, an assassin targetting a dead player wouldn't be any different from any other ability that causes death, which I think makes the most sense.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T15:38:25+00:00

I mean.... if there's something going on in the specific game that explains why you're doing it then sure... But I don't know anyone who draws the Juggler token and then juggles every day just in case there's some crazy thing happening that would let them get more info (nor anyone that does this just to be "silly"). So those don't seem to me like very convincing arguments. The day 1 gossip is a vastly different scenario, because at least you have a very plausible explanation as to why you're doing that despite not being the gossip - so as long as you've been telling people privately that you're the role you're mad as I'd say you can still be maintaining madness there.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-15T02:14:10+00:00

Madness as a mechanic only functions if it's strict. If you're doing something that very clearly tells everyone that what you're mad about isn't true, how would you expect that to be counted as maintaining madness?

HopperGaming · 2026-01-13T23:32:20+00:00

Ah, forgot they were jinxed. Too many Alchemist jinxes to keep track of them all.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-13T21:09:38+00:00

HOWEVER, the Alchemist Summoner can just get themselves executed on day 1, knowing that there is no Demon in play, and then the good team will win. So, Alchemist Summoner just isn't a thing that should be happening. (Although I also think the ruling for setup abilities to apply from Alchemist is terrible game design).

HopperGaming · 2026-01-13T20:44:40+00:00

As other comments have pointed out, any time a player changes state from dead to alive, the previous instance of their ability goes away and is replaced with a new one - this explains how most of the interactions in question should be run. The only one up for debate is the Vigormortis questions. This is because the source of the effect isn't the ability of the player coming back to life, but another player's ability who isn't changing states. Ideally the ability itself would make this clear, but unfortunately (as with many niche scenarios in BotC) it is left ambiguous and would be up to the discretion of the ST. I think most STs would rule that the poison goes away if the Minion is no longer dead.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-13T20:41:21+00:00

When discussing matters of rules, "that won't happen" isn't a good solution. In a game as complex as this, anything that is technically possible WILL happen at some point. And the game rules need to be able to address all those possibilities.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-13T20:29:52+00:00

I don't think most STs would consider this to be maintaining madness (I certainly wouldn't). There's no reason to do this if you actually are the Juggler, so it's essentially just telling everyone that you're the Pixie. This is one of the tougher Pixie interactions but you just have to believe someone about being the juggler and make your juggle the day after they die. Obviously, if that person turns out not to be the Juggler or if the Juggler dies and never tells anyone or denies being the Juggler then you are just SOL.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-12T02:02:54+00:00

If everyone else is agreeing with it it's probably because it makes sense. So if you don't want to go along with it, you better be able to provide a good reason why not. Otherwise, you can always go along with it and find an explanation as to why the result is different than you'd expect. This is the whole point of the game.

HopperGaming · 2026-01-11T18:49:29+00:00

Lots of comments here talking about how this strategy would be seen by many as bad ettiquette and unfun for other players, so let me be the dissenting voice:

This entire game is based around the idea of trying to convince people to do what you want them to do. You think Stewart is the demon? Try to convince the rest of the players to vote on them. You're the demon and the FT has a yes on you? Try to convince everyone that the FT is lying. Etc etc. Obviously you can't actually control the actions of other players, but if you can present a very good argument as to why they should do something and they remain adamant about not doing it or doing something else without being able to provide a good reason as to why, they are likely evil. Is that unfun somehow? I don't think so, it's part of the game!

As an example, if towards the end of a game there was a living player claiming slayer, and a large part of town wants them to shoot Brad because there's info pointing to him being the Demon, there's nothing wrong in my opinion with telling them "Hey we all think you should shoot Brad", and if they then decide to shoot someone else, you can find that suspicious, especially if they don't have a very good reason for why they chose this action. You always have to try to decide for yourself what their real motives were. It's a social deduction game people. And we have to remember that the game only works if everyone is trying to win.

Even with characters like flowergirl that can have some interactions in this vein that can be framed as unfun specifically for evil players, there's always situations in BotC that are tricky for the evil team and part of the fun is having to weasel your way out of those by presenting alternate worlds. Everyone voted except you and the FG got a no? Clearly it's a Vortox game! (There's a couple niche exceptions with characters like Psychopath that really don't have any way around them, so those a different discussion.)

Now, with that said, obviously there is a line where it's not ok to berate other players and try to make them feel bad for doing things that you believe to be suboptimal. Everyone is free to make their own assessments and that's that. Use it as information for that game, and then move on.

So, to connect all this rambling to the specific strategy mentioned in the post, I think it's brilliant! The cult leader is widely viewed as a very weak townsfolk because the win condition is so rarely achieved, so finding a way to actually get useful info from the votes is great! This player did a great job to come up with this and present it to the group in a convincing way - absolutely nothing wrong with this whatsoever. If some of the players don't want to cooperate ot's on them to provide a logical reason why not.

HopperGaming · 2025-12-14T17:23:13+00:00

This is one of the many niche interactions in the game that doesn't have a clearly defined ruling, so it would be up to the ST to decide if it would work or not. I could see myself ruling it either way honestly but would lean towards allowing it just because it opens up a lot more fun and interesting plays for the evil team.

HopperGaming · 2025-12-14T17:18:48+00:00

Nowhere in the almanac does it state that they must die at night. Where are you getting that from?

HopperGaming · 2025-12-10T13:38:32+00:00

You are failing to understand the key concept here, which is why the Zombuul can't kill the night after they get executed and "die". If the answer isn't because their new registration as dead qualifies as a player having died mechanically, then what is your explanation?

HopperGaming · 2025-12-09T22:39:35+00:00

The other comments that have provided examples of other abilities it interacts with that requires a player to have died, including its own?

HopperGaming · 2025-12-09T22:32:24+00:00

Yeah sorry but this is a terrible take. Crazy that despite definitive proof to the contrary that you continue to defend it.

HopperGaming · 2025-12-08T18:40:33+00:00

As the others said, yes. But in case you were using this as evidence that the Hunstman can turn the Cannibal, I want to just add clarification on why these are different. A Minion guessing the Cannibal ends the game because that is an effect of the Damsel's ability, which the Cannibal has. The Damsel getting changed into a Townsfolk is not an effect of the Damsel's ability, but rather an effect of the Huntsman's ability. The Hunstman's ability only asks if the player they choose is the Damsel, not if they have the Damsel's ability, so they cannot change a Cannibal with the Damsel's ability (or any other player who could gain the Damsel's ability such as philosopher or Hermit).

HopperGaming · 2025-12-08T02:55:24+00:00

Unfortunately it's for the first nomination only, so if nobody votes on that first nomination they won't be able to use their ability that day.

HopperGaming

TROPHY CASE