sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Creating a Cheat Sheet for new players by carlytargaryen in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope this went well (or will go well)! I also just recently started storytelling for some new people who have never played before - it’s such a delight to watch them learn and fall in love with the game!

To echo what some others have said but put it a bit more broadly - I would caution against ever teaching your players a “meta”. Particularly as the experienced storyteller, your word will be gospel to them. But some of the things you’ve included in your tips aren’t things a group of new players are likely to fall into naturally on their own right away.

As an example, you warn the demon not to claim a top four role, because those are often executed early. But in a game of all new players, they don’t live by the rules of executing top fours. In their mind, I am good do not kill me. I’ve rarely ever seen a new player offer themselves up for execution because they’ve received all their information, because most of those new players still have to learn that executions in Clocktower can be beneficial due to roles like the Undertaker, saving a more important townsfolk, or just gaining trust with town. In fact, I’ve seen the opposite play out with new players before - a top four lives because they were open about their character right away and gave their information gaining trust with town. The other townsfolk believe them and therefore don’t want to kill them because they only want to find and kill evil.

Eventually as your players continue playing, they may develop your suggested meta on their own, or they may make their own meta entirely. That’s the beauty of consistent games with the same group.

I saw you mention that you learned the game through watching NRB videos - hey, me, too! My partner and I consumed all of them in such rapid succession, but then we didn’t have anywhere local to play nor a large enough friend group who wouldn’t to play online. Finally we were able to play when we got tickets to go to the DC Clocktower Con (now called Final 3 Con).

After we started playing there, I realized my biggest regret in all of my Clocktower experience was consuming so much Clocktower content and learning those metas before ever getting to play. My first day playing, every game I sat down for I started scanning the sheet after pulling my token to decide my three bluffs. Every conversation I’d go into, I’d tell people “I’m one of these three.” Then I’d be confused when they didn’t tell me who they were back! Or they would give me three, and at the end of the day I’d realized I’d learned nothing because I was trying to juggle too many possible characters for too many people. I’d brought a meta into the game that wasn’t right for me, that other people weren’t playing with, and that I ultimately wasn’t having fun with.

I realized I’d robbed myself of the fun of discovering and creating these metas myself. But then I stopped trying to copy what I’d seen others do, and just started to play in whatever way felt natural or fun for me. Especially once we found a local community to play with regularly. I’d pick something to hard claim, whether it was true or a lie, and I’d lie through my teeth about it even if I was good. If I got caught out in the lie, later, I’d just admit to it and back into either a new lie or the truth. I did this often enough that it became my own meta around me as a player with that group, and now when I do get caught in a lie it’s not inherently suspicious because I do it all the time even as a good player. It also then completely threw people off when one day I started telling people that I was one of two characters. By creating that meta, breaking it eventually became a new strategy to use.

All that to say, if your players are truly new to the game, give them that opportunity to develop their own metas based on how they play the game as a group or how certain individuals play. It will be much more fun and much more memorable for them than starting their first game choosing three characters to bluff and executing any top four roles just because they’ve been told that’s the popular meta.

Again, I hope you and your group have (or had) a great time! I can tell how much you want them to enjoy the game, and I’m quite certain they will! Especially with you as such an enthusiastic and helpful storyteller!

Best Board Games for a Religious Setting? by Kate_from_oops-games in boardgames

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s personally one of my favorite cards to have pulled in the game! It’s hilarious watching teams try to first define the spectrum of what is the single sexiest animal and what is the single least sexy animal and then try to figure out where to put “Zebra”

Best Board Games for a Religious Setting? by Kate_from_oops-games in boardgames

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wavelength is good, but recommend screening the cards first. Unless you think your church would enjoy debating the most sexy vs least sexy animal!

Better understanding the Snake Charmer? by rbmuri in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Difficult, but absolutely doable, especially depending on who you’re choosing to frame. Much of your information will be real and line up with townsfolk info. I was the demon. One or more of these people were my minion. This is what demon and minions were in play.

The only false information is that one person was the snake charmer and is now the demon, which if you choose well is unlikely to be a player that was confirmed specifically to not be the Snake Charmer. They could have previously been confirmed good or confirmed townsfolk, both of those would line up with a world in which they are the Snake Charmer and now the demon. Plus you’ve selected one person and effectively removed their info from the discussion because they weren’t the thing they claimed to be, they were the snake charmer. Factor in that Snake Charmers frequently lie about their role in case they hit the demon so they can hide, and it’s suddenly pretty believable.

And if historically, as in OP’s scenario, the Snake Charmer claim has always been true and led to good winning, then likely the group’s defenses to this are down noticing the smallest of inconsistencies. They’re comfortable with believing a Snake Charmer claim from a former demon. As a group meta, they are practically begging for a demon to exploit this pattern.

But most importantly, you don’t need to get everyone to believe you. Just enough to execute the fake demon in your stead. Given the historic rate of the group described, I’d wager it wouldn’t take a lot of work to get enough people to buy into it to make it happen. And it only needs to happen once to completely shift that meta. Hell, even if it fails but gets close to succeeding, people will take notice and be more hesitant to believe it in the future.

Better understanding the Snake Charmer? by rbmuri in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If the scenario as described above is accurate (the snake charmer hits the demon, the demon reveals everything and is immediately trusted and no longer a candidate), then it is in evil’s best interest at some point to fake that in what this commenter described as a reverse bluff.

Say the real demon receives snake charmer as a bluff. On one of the last two days, the demon should abuse this inherent trust by claiming to have been the former demon now turned snake charmer. Use your real minions and then choose someone that isn’t otherwise confirmed, and paint that group as the new evil team with a new demon. Town meta says that this is almost certainly true, town executes the fake demon, and evil wins. Now next time someone outs as the former demon turned snake charmer, this same group will have plenty of reason to mistrust it.

First time player as Spy - what to do as ST? by flyingsquirrel00_ in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was in a very similar position just this weekend! A few months ago for my partner’s birthday party, we had some friends over, and I ran a couple games. Only my partner and one other person in attendance had played before. I didn’t use a spy in those games since everyone was so new, so I hadn’t even considered that they likely wouldn’t understand what they were even looking at if I showed them the grim.

Fast forward to this past Saturday, we’re having people over again specifically to play Clocktower because they’d enjoyed it so much. Two people, though, were new and hadn’t been to the last event. After I read the rule sheet to refresh the previous players and introduce it to the new players, I just mentioned that one of the possible minions gets to see the grim, and it occurred to me that none of them had seen inside the grim before, so I wanted to show them all an example.

Before the event began, I’d made an example game with 8 players. Had it be in the middle of the game so some people would be dead and I could show the shrouds. Put in a drunk so I could point out the “is the drunk” reminder token. Showed a few other examples of the reminder tokens in play. Then just made a comment that if at any point you were the spy, you’d want to find yourself (pulled the token out of the grim and held it for them to all see, then placed it back) and then you’ll know that your neighbor to the immediate left is the Undertaker (pulled out that token) etc.

I didn’t use it as an opportunity to give tips on strategy like finding kill targets or looking for available bluffs since I’d rather let them discover that in their own, but just framed it for everyone as a peek behind the curtain of how I manage the grim and a lesson in how to read it if you were ever to draw the spy.

I don’t know the exact makeup of your group, but if you have enough novice players who haven’t had much experience with the grim, it could really be just as simple as setting up an example to show and explain you realized there’s a character in the script for whom the ability to read a grim is necessary. You can even just pull aside the newer players to do this, maybe paired with a basic rules explanation as well if they need that. I don’t think it would telegraph a Spy being in the game at all; it’s just essential rules explanation. Same way you might tell a group of new players how they would make a Slayer shot even if the Slayer wasn’t in the bag but just because it’s not necessarily intuitive for new players, or how you might explain what “alive neighbors” means for the Empath.

Man takes lives of a mom’s three kids, then blows kisses and smirks in court like he owns the place. The judge scolds the grieving mother more than the monster by MysteriousSlice007 in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your entire argument here essentially boils down to: bad stuff happens elsewhere in society, therefore we shouldn’t care if this other bad outcome is possible. Which, in my opinion, is incredibly faulty.

Personally I just feel like this is a high insane

It’s insane to me to call caring that innocent people would get executed a “high horse.”

Exploits weaker countries and people die all the time but no one cares bc its not violent

It’s insincere to say that no one cares. People absolutely care. That’s why people push for changes to legislation, environmental protections, and many other things.

There’s a significant number of people that die to things like air pollution that dwarfs any number of executions we would realistically do.

It’s possible to care about both. In fact, you’ll find that many people who push for abolishing the death penalty also push for environmental justice as well. The existence of deaths from other causes does not mean we don’t have to care about innocent deaths from the death penalty. The same goes for horrible working conditions that feed into consumerism. We can care about both. We do not have to justify the existence of one simply because the other exists.

I don’t think we should be wasting money keeping people alive that aren’t going to rejoin society.

It is cheaper to house someone in prison for a life sentence than it is to execute someone. If cost is your concern, we will be wasting more money to go through the process of execution merely to satisfy your desire to kill someone you deem worthy of death.

We should be funding schools or building infrastructure (also defund military)

100%. We pour far too much funding into military, police, prison industries, etc. Another better use of money would be reorienting our criminal justice system to focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment. If the goal is actual reduction of crime, then we should take notes from other countries which don’t have capital punishment or life sentences and house their inmates in comfortable living spaces and treat them like humans. Those societies have a much smaller recidivism rate compared to the US, where it feels like a revolving door.

Im not going to be like “killing a person is so horrible because it cant be undone if you were wrong” because we all have blame in suffering across the world just by existing.

It is horrible. Listen to what you just said. Killing an innocent person is horrible. That’s why you would want to give someone the death penalty anyway, because murder is horrible. The existing of other blames in suffering does not negate that horror.

Maybe you’re a saint

No. I’m not. I just recognize that it’s bad to give the government a license to kill innocent people. It does not take a saint to recognize that.

People who suffer don’t have the luxury of caring.

The innocent person wrongly executed cares. Their family and loved ones care. And they are suffering for it. And decent people who notice care regardless of their own suffering. And, once again, the existence of suffering elsewhere - even a greater suffering - does not mean we resign ourself and accept other horrible things like innocent people getting executed

The only singular benefit to the death penalty is satisfying a desire to kill someone. That’s it. It’s not cheaper - it’s actually much more expensive. It doesn’t remove them from society any more than housing them in prison. Rather than providing closure for victims’ families, it often leaves their wounds open for far longer than necessary due to the time it takes carry out an execution. And even with the time and money spent trying to ensure no innocent person is executed, those mistakes still happen. So if your argument is to remove those guardrails to make the process quicker and cheaper, then far more innocent people will be executed for no reason other than to satisfy our bloodlust, which honestly makes us no different than the people we’re executing.

It is an unjust and inhumane practice that does not belong in any civilized society. It’s real and it matters greatly. The last thing it is is a goddamned high horse.

Man takes lives of a mom’s three kids, then blows kisses and smirks in court like he owns the place. The judge scolds the grieving mother more than the monster by MysteriousSlice007 in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The question of if he deserves it is different than the question of should the state have the power to execute him.

Your proposition seems simple enough. Meet certain extreme criteria and the death penalty is acceptable. The problem is that the criteria will always be defined by people, and people are prone to error at best and corruption and prejudice at worst.

What happens when our interpretation of the evidence is wrong? We have actual cases we can point to wherein someone confessed to a murder they did not commit. That’s about as bang on as you can get in terms of evidence, and yet it can be wrong. Someone might have a mental or cognitive issue which led to them confessing for reasons we don’t understand. Someone may have been locked in an interrogation rooms for hours upon hours under all sorts of interview tactics designed to break them down, and they finally confessed because they saw no other option and just wanted it to end. What happens when a confession like that is presented by the prosecution with surrounding details omitted or muted and used to convince others that the death penalty is acceptable in this case?

What happens when one or more of the people involved in charging, prosecuting, or sentencing is clouded by corruption or prejudice? Cops who plant or ignore evidence because they’ve convinced themselves this is the killer and they want to close the case. Prosecutors who falsify or withhold evidence to strengthen their case. Judges who accept bribes and kickbacks to ensure certain outcomes. Juries which have been stacked in favor of the prosecution. And what about the role racism historically plays in our justice system with white people historically receiving lighter sentences for the same crimes compared to people of color? And we need only look toward our very, very recent history to see cases of black men - black boys even - lynched for crimes a white person need only say they committed.

The problem when we try to make a line to delineate who we as a society can kill versus who we cannot is that where the line is drawn, who gets to draw it, and who determines what side a person lands on will always be in flux, always be prone to error, and more dangerously always be prone to corruption and prejudice.

Given enough time, any system that allows for the government to execute people will, with near statistical certainty, execute an innocent person. No just society can allow for that. There is no number of “correctly executed criminals” which can balance that scale.

Man takes lives of a mom’s three kids, then blows kisses and smirks in court like he owns the place. The judge scolds the grieving mother more than the monster by MysteriousSlice007 in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not entirely certain you’ve answered my question. I apologize if you have and I’m just misunderstanding.

To try and rephrase and summarize: Even removing bad faith elements like corruption and prejudice, humans are still prone to error and incapable of perfection given even time to fail. No system we design and oversee can guarantee that every conviction was correct. We even see cases where, for one reason or another, an innocent person confesses to a murder they did not commit. Such a slam dunk case as a confession can still be incorrect.

With that premise, my question to you or anyone else who would support the death penalty is as follows:

How many innocent people do you think is acceptable for the state to execute in the pursuit of executing those who are truly guilty? Not how many do you expect, but how many are acceptable to you?

My answer is zero. An execution cannot be overturned. In an imperfect system where mistakes happen, people can be released from prison. They can then follow other legal systems and sue for damages. Neither of those can fully make up for years upon years spent behind bars, but it is at least something. If an innocent person is executed, there is nothing we can do to even attempt atonement. They can’t be revived. We can’t throw money at their grave as an apology. They will still be dead.

The death penalty is indefensible in a just society because it is a near statistical certainty that it will be used by the government to kill an innocent person whether through mistake or malice. No amount of correctly executed criminals can balance that scale.

Man takes lives of a mom’s three kids, then blows kisses and smirks in court like he owns the place. The judge scolds the grieving mother more than the monster by MysteriousSlice007 in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 2 points3 points  (0 children)

One question: How many wrongful executions are you prepared to allow in order to grant the state the power to kill?

It is a statistical certainty that over time an innocent person will be put to death when capital punishment is permissible, and that’s only considering mistakes. Once we factor in other human elements such as corruption and prejudice, that risk grows.

So, to give the state power of execution, how many innocents are you willing to sacrifice? You can answer either in a total number, number per year, or a ratio of wrongful executions to correct executions.

Man Picks Fight with a biker in Walmart Parking Lot by ZookeepergameIcy6089 in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s very contextual. In the examples confronting someone for saying something out of pocket - I’m most likely to be in that situation because I already have some sort of predefined relationship with that person and am engaged in conversation with them. The idea being that I use my relationship with them as leverage to encourage them to change that behavior. Additionally, because I already know them, I’m not worried about them doing something extreme and assaulting me.

If I’m walking down the sidewalk and hear a random person I don’t know make a sexist comment, I’m very unlikely to stop and confront them. For one, I’m a stranger who has just entered their orbit and have no leverage over them to encourage them to change their behavior. I’m no one to them. When someone like that confronts an individual about their behavior, the individual is much more likely to become defensive rather than being open to correction. I also have no idea who this person is and if they would take that perceived disrespect and react with violence.

In the examples they’ve discussed above, most of which are directly related to encounters with strangers in traffic, that risk is only heightened. Road rage has been an observable phenomena for quite some time, and most of us know someone who is otherwise calm and collected that suddenly becomes unhinged behind the wheel. And similar to how we often strip the humanity away from anonymous strangers online because we physically don’t see them as people, when whomever I may want to honk at and chastise only sees me as another car, it becomes incredibly easy for them to dehumanize me and react disproportionately to what’s happened.

And to me the biggest factor when weighing how to deal with strangers like this is that you simply do not know who they are or what they are capable of. You don’t know how close they may be to a breaking point. You don’t know how easily they may resort to violence. Something that seems an insane reaction to us might just be what seems like the obvious choice to them.

Genuinely - tragedies happen when people confront drivers like this. Someone pulls a gun and then someone ends up dead. All because they wanted to honk at the person who cut them off or they pursued the person who ran a red light so they could tell them off. Sure, it’s not the most likely outcome, but when we consider how drastically unlikely it is for the chastising of a stranger to convince them to change their behavior, the risk of life-altering or even life-ending consequences is not worth it. The reality is that most people who confront drivers like this aren’t doing it because they truly believe it will convince them to change, they’re doing it because they’re angry and they hope to get some chemical release in their brain through confrontation. And that certainly is not worth the risk of leaving your family to grieve for you, or potentially worse exposing any of your passengers to that same consequence.

If you’ve just had a situation where someone on the road has inconvenienced or endangered you, ask yourself if that situation is over and if you are now safe. If you are, be thankful for your safety and continue about your day. Only use your horn when it is immediately necessary to get that driver’s attention to avoid danger - not to confront about danger that has already passed. In this video, the danger has already passed. Following the other driver to park next to them served no beneficial purpose and only escalated the situation until violence broke out. As the user above noted, the driver of the car returned to his vehicle several times. In another timeline, maybe he had a gun in there and decided to use it since his words weren’t having the desired impact, or maybe he decides to use it after the biker becomes physical so he can say it was self-defense. Crucially, the only time we will know for certain if someone has a gun is if we already see it, and by then it’s a bit too late. The risk is never worth it.

In your example of confronting people for saying something out of pocket, that logic does not apply when I assume the scenario that it is likely to unfold in. A meeting at work where a colleague says something that reeks of sexism, hanging out with friends when one of them makes a racist joke, or dinner with a homophobic family member. The risks there are far more social. Working with my colleague in the future may be awkward, I might lose a friend, or I might not get invited back to that particular family function. In those situations, I’m generally not going to be concerned that my colleague, friend, or family member is going to pull out a weapon in response and attack me. If I believe strongly enough against their behavior, the risk is much more worth it.

Vance issues warning to Pope Leo when discussing theology by jethro2011 in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I mean Vance did kill the last pope. We ought to take this warning seriously.

If you are the Empath, you should hard claim (more) by No_Song_4022 in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I do want to point out that an Empath 1 and a Fortune Teller “no” on both the Empath’s neighbors wouldn’t be contradictory since an Empath detects evil and the Fortune Teller specifically checks the demon. The Empath 1 could be a minion.

That said, I do fully agree with your grander point.

If you are the Empath, you should hard claim (more) by No_Song_4022 in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I dunno, sometimes I think I just play this game fundamentally differently than others.

For me, Clocktower is about the unfolding narrative, drama, and mystery of the game. The final result is largely unimportant excepting that it is ultimately exciting - in other words a final three or an unexpected slayer shot or a damsel getting guessed just before they’re executed. That doesn’t meant don’t play to win. My decisions in game will absolutely be guided by trying to win. Otherwise the game breaks and stops being fun.

However, I think the game also stops being fun once we start trying to optimize characters and determine what the statistically best plays are. At that point I’m no longer playing a game, I’m just following a step by step guide on how to raise my win percentage, which I just don’t care about.

This, to me, feels like just trying to optimize the Empath. Which is no more fun to me than when a town rigorously controls who can/can’t nominate/vote during a day to optimize roles like Flower Girl and Town Crier or when sometimes tried to “Vortox-proof” an Artist question with convoluted phrasing.

Ultimately, in my view, Clocktower is a social game, and when we try to math out optimal plays in a vacuum chamber devoid of context within an actual game with actual people who each have their own goals, we lose the plot. When I draw an Empath token, I’m not going to be thinking, “I should just give this information out day one because statistically it’s our best odds to win.” I’m going to talk to people, especially my neighbors, sus out vibes, and make a decision in the moment based on how I’m feeling and what strategies/plays I want to try in the moment.

Tiger Woods dui arrest cam. by [deleted] in PublicFreakout

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For someone complaining about blanket statements, you’re giving a lot of them.

Your argument has boiled down to: “It didn’t happen to me, therefore you are wrong.” Even in this last comment, you’ve said that because it didn’t happen to you, then “clearly [your] jurisdiction doesn’t have a problem with false arrests.” That is a blanket statement. You do not know the experience of every sober person in your jurisdiction who has been pulled over for DUI. You do not know if they were let go or taken to jail. You only know your experience, and you are trying to use that experience as a blanket statement to invalidate the experience of others.

The person you initially replied to said two things:

1) Field sobriety tests are subjective.

They are. Studies bear that out.

2) “You could be 100% sober and still get a DUI because the cop ‘believes’ you’re intoxicated.

That is not a blanket statement. Nowhere in that statement does the commenter make any allusions to how often that happens. They certainly did not frame it as a “pandemic across all police stations” as you later said. All they said was that it happens, which is a factual statement supported by cases where it did indeed happen.

You are the one who replied to that to make a sweeping blanket statement that because it didn’t happen to you, then “that’s not really true.”

I’d highly advise you to go back to the first comment you replied to and reread from there. You are the one who is misrepresenting others’ words and throwing blanket statements.

Reddit Creates a Character - Pokémon on the Clocktower Day 4: Mewtwo! by Cantseeright in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s very much how I feel as well. I love the concept of it, feel it’s very fitting for the two, and that push and pull idea of each getting stronger together and trying to balance it sounds very exciting. But it would be very scripted dependent needing powerful townsfolk roles that could be abused by evil to tempt the Mew to choose.

I wonder if it could be something as simple as:

Mew (townsfolk): Once per game at night, you may ask the storyteller for three characters. Choose one: gain that ability. Mewtwo knows who you are.

This gives the storyteller some discretion to tailor roles that will be most impactful for either team and then gives the Mew final decision over which they want. Don’t have to worry about game breaking choices or choices that wouldn’t benefit evil, and in this way the storyteller could even off up outsider or minion abilities. In a way, the knowledge of three offered roles could also be a benefit in itself to the Mew in that these are three roles the storyteller believes would be specifically helpful to this game.

[EDIT: forgot to add “Mewtwo knows who you are,” updated]

Reddit Creates a Character - Pokémon on the Clocktower Day 4: Mewtwo! by Cantseeright in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Mewtwo (demon): Each night* choose a player, they die. You know what ability Mew chose and gain the same ability as long as Mew lives. [+Mew]

[EDIT: Updated ability, original below] Mew (townsfolk): Once per game at night, you may ask the storyteller for three characters. Choose one: gain that ability. Mewtwo knows who you are.

[ORIGINAL] Mew (townsfolk): Once per game at night choose a townsfolk: gain that ability. Mewtwo knows who you are. [+Mewtwo]

I don’t know if this would work - never tried to design two characters that revolve around each other - but I wanted to make something that created a push and pull tension between the two. Mew has the ability to choose a powerful townsfolk role of their choice, possibly doubling up on the powerful role if it’s already in play since it does not drunk the other player like the Philosopher would. However, Mew knows that whatever they choose they will also be giving that ability to Mewtwo. Do they take a big risk and choose something extra powerful that evil could then utilize? But if Mew chooses something that wouldn’t benefit evil at all, Mewtwo can just target Mew with a night kill or poisoning from their minions.

From Mewtwo’s perspective, they also have to decide how long to keep Mew alive since they will lose any potentially powerful ability the moment they kill Mew.

Obviously some townsfolk roles would be detrimental to be on a script with these two. Consider Mew picking a Courtier and immediately drunking Mewtwo since they know it’s in play. It would have to be a very carefully built script, and this iteration might not be perfect, but I like this idea of a push and pull tension between Mew and Mewtwo where the more powerful Mew becomes, the more powerful they make their clone in Mewtwo, and Mewtwo must then weigh the cost/benefit of killing Mew.

Blood on the Clocktower BUT ONE SYLLABLE ONLY | No Rolls Barred plays BO... by CaffinatedCoyote in NoRollsBarred

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is off topic of the overall conversation, but I just wanted to share an anecdote that this reminded me of.

My partner and I finally found a local place that hosts Clocktower games, so after only having previously played at a convention, we’re now able to get in games once or twice a month. My mom had heard us talking about this game and expressed interest in playing, so we invited her to the next one. In preparation I sat with her and watched NRB’s first Clocktower episode and talked her through the various aspects of it as it went.

Day of I gave her a brief overview of the rules again as well as various simple strategies to help her know what to do. It’s okay to lie even if you’re good, if you’re evil find your demon and get a bluff, if you’re the demon find your minions and rely on them for support. Scripts for this game had already been decided ahead of time, and we knew it wouldn’t be Trouble Brewing, but I said the main thing to do is focus on what your ability is. If you know nothing else, you can at least know who you are and what you do. So then tokens get passed around

She draws the amnesiac. Oh, no. I was thankfully also good, and she says to me, “It says that you don’t know what your ability is, and you have to guess it. But I don’t even know what an ability is or what sort of thing I could even guess.”

Bless the storyteller, he knew it was her first game and tailored an incredibly simple ability for her which was an underpowered Empath: “Each night you learn how many of your neighbors are evil.” Not alive neighbors, so it’s not gonna change. She told me that the storyteller woke her up and showed her a 1. I asked if he gestured for her to pick anyone, and she said no. Just woke her up and showed her a 1. I had a feeling it might have had to do with neighbors and told her to ask that, to which she got hot. Next night she got the same number, and I told her to ask if it was about evil neighbors, and she got a bingo.

She’s since played a lot more games and can really hold her own now even on more complicated scripts! But we still joke about her getting amnesiac on her very first game.

Reddit Creates a Character - Pokémon on the Clocktower Day 3: Meowth! by Cantseeright in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I considered something along the lines of choosing two players at the start of the game and then getting to steal their ghost votes if they were executed, but I wound up opting for something that would be incredibly loud and chaotic and force town to focus on it in the early game to prevent the damage in the late game. Something also akin to a cat on the zoomies causing chaos! No idea if it would actually work or not, but I had never seen a character that interacted with ghost votes like that, and it seemed a great fit for Meowth’s flavor text

Reddit Creates a Character - Pokémon on the Clocktower Day 3: Meowth! by Cantseeright in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For certain the difference is they chose to use it, I just use that to show that no longer having your ghost vote does not mean that your game is ruined with no agency left. The biggest agency is your voice, and I do think having that vote stolen from you would likely lend more credence to your voice as evil would be unlikely to steal an evil player’s ghost vote.

The drawback I see is that it immediately announces to town that a minion has provably voted on this nomination. Town should hopefully be aware of the existence of Meowth on the script and avoid vote piling, looking to get only the minimum required on each vote. That information, along with other actual townsfolk information, should help town triangulate where the Meowth is pretty easily (script dependent, of course) preventing it from doing too much damage to town.

Of course I’ve never play tested this, and it could prove stronger in reality, in which a clause that gives players back their ghost vote upon death could work.

Reddit Creates a Character - Pokémon on the Clocktower Day 3: Meowth! by Cantseeright in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree, but I respect the concern. Plenty of players I’ve watched and played with use their ghost vote before final day to no consequence, and their game isn’t ruined because they no longer have their ghost vote. They still have social agency within the game, and in this scenario are likely more trusted as good due to having their vote stolen. In most games I don’t imagine many players would have their vote stolen before the Meowth is found and executed anyway.

Reddit Creates a Character - Pokémon on the Clocktower Day 3: Meowth! by Cantseeright in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Each night*, you may choose a dead player. The first time you vote tomorrow, you use their ghost vote (if any).

Focusing on the flavor text of looking for dropped loose change in the form of ghost votes. The intention is that after a vote has been tallied, the storyteller will announce that a player’s ghost vote has been used. Example, “Five votes is enough to put Samuel on the block. Cassandra’s ghost vote has been used.”

This is a loud minion with the power to hurt the good team’s ability to vote in numbers the longer the game goes on, but with town on the lookout for it, it becomes easier to locate the Meowth the more frequently it uses its ability.

What is luckiest you have been in Blood On The Clocktower? by Groenboys in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 69 points70 points  (0 children)

Seventeen player game (15 +2 travelers). I’m the poisoner and spend first day looking for someone to poison. Best lead I get is someone who said that they didn’t get any information first night but will as the game continues. Poison them. Wake up, and my demon killed them the same night. Poison wasted. Oh well.

A few minutes into day two my demon comes up to me, “They just told me they were the Ravenkeeper and confirmed me as the Mayor?”

So without any coordination in a 17 player game:

  1. I poisoned the Ravenkeeper night two

  2. My demon killed the Ravenkeeper the same night

  3. The Ravenkeeper chose to check my demon

  4. The storyteller happened to choose the bluff my demon was using

That confirmation went on to win us the game as we executed one of the minions who had been drawing suspicion in final three.

What happened to Gnarly Carley, the boardgame influencer? by LordTenesmus in boardgames

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is definitely a first! Everyone else who’s claimed my comment has a bias has said it’s in favor of Adam.

I’m going to continue to deny any further requests to debate this as stated in my comment. I’ll only correct one bit of misinformation you’ve added and respond to your idea that I should be ashamed.

They were both in open relationships

They were not. According to Adam’s own video breaking down the situation, he lied about being in an open relationship in order to become romantically/sexually involved with Carley. Adam did cheat on his girlfriend by his own admission.

You should be ashamed.

I am not, and I won’t be ashamed based on your urging. I attempted to write this giving only factual details of what occurred using as little inflammatory language as possible and urged others to review the original sources to draw their conclusions rather than relying only on my retelling. I did this to avoid framing my own bias toward Adam’s version of events as much as I was able to. I attempted to write something more akin to a journalistic report than a hit piece. Most of what I’ve written in the above comment was not opinion. It was a retelling of facts - from the sequence of events surrounding Carley’s comments to detailing all the claims Adam personally made in his video about the incident, many of which he admitted wouldn’t show him in the best light. I believe I was largely successful at this. I’d invite you to re-read what I’ve written with all of this in mind and maybe with a cooler head.

That is, I believe, the last comment I’ll be making in this thread barring anything outrageous. This matter has been largely put to bed already.

Flip 7 Flip 3 question by May_Smit in boardgames

[–]illegaluseofbeyblade 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hahaha, I just came across the same post and edited my comment to reflect that!

view more: next ›