If you aren’t voting for yourself you scummy. Giving hun to someone else means you are either trying to look favorable to not be shot or more keen to get the gun later since cooperative
Not true. If he is town he shoot’s whoever we all pick most likely. If he is scum he will still do the same. Unless unjester. It doesn’t even make sense to pick a player and think they wouldn’t listen early
Then doesn‘t that make it even more valuable if they happen to not listen and we get 2 scum in one go?
Like, I can get your reasoning, but it‘s also flawed.
They can wait it out but they can somewhat control the shot if they play nice. Give influence and such and less likely to be shot because they don’t want hun. Then later they get hun for that reasoning.
Then doesn‘t that make it even more valuable if they happen to not listen and we get 2 scum in one go?
Like, I can get your reasoning, but it‘s also flawed.
It’s not flawed. It’s logic. People can do other actions, but logically it wouldn’t make sense. Regardless you’d be top of my list to shoot or one of the others who threw the vote easily
Then doesn‘t that make it even more valuable if they happen to not listen and we get 2 scum in one go?
Like, I can get your reasoning, but it‘s also flawed.
I mean, if we tell Player X to shoot Player Y and Player X doesn‘t shoot them, then Player X might just be scum and Player Y has a higher chance of being scum, too.
but yeah you look word appart from that first one, think your scum self wouldn't worry about voting for someone else to give the gun and as unjester you wouldn't really campain and expect to win D1
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.