Town of Salem Game Forums

Rolecard:

Spoiler:
Name: Extortionist
Alignment: Neutral Evil
Summary:

Abilities:
- Each day lock 2 players' votes. (See information)
- Or you can select yourself for a double vote that day. You can use this only once.
- You have a vest that will save you from the first basic scum attack.

Attributes:
- Your ability doesn't affect scum. Additionally, if you target any scum members, they'll get the message "someone tried to lock your vote!", but you won't get a message.
- If you target a revealed mayor, they'll have 2 votes instead of 3. Their vote won't be locked and they can guilty/inno

Sheriff result: Your target is not suspicious!
Invest result: Spy, Blackmailer, Extortionist, Jailor, or Guardian Angel. (MAY CHANGE)
Consig/Witch result: Your target locks peoples' votes. They must be an Extortionist!

Wins with: Mafia, NKs and Extortionists
Goal: Witch goal

Info:
Spoiler: To lock someone's vote - they won't be able to vote guilty or innocent (aka they will abstain) and they won't be able to vote after their first vote, that means cannot switch votes after and before a lynch or unvote. BUT THE VOTE STAYS ON THE LOCKED PLAYER'S TARGET. This effect only lasts the same day.
Each day lock 2 players' votes - This can be done:
- even if the 2 players you chose have already voted once, but the vote gets locked when they vote again.
- at any time of the day, even during the discussion phase.
- if all the 2 players' votes are already on someone. They'll get locked and won't be able to vote for anyone else.
The locked players will get the message "Your vote is locked!" when they try to vote for someone else / unvote or guity / inno someone.

Example:
Spoiler: Mary - Town | John - Town | Noob - Town | Google - Extortionist
Day 2:
Noob and John vote for Mary
Google locks Noob and John's votes.
Now they can't unvote or switch votes.
Mary gets on the stand.
Noob and john both abstain because their votes are locked.
Mary gets innoed.
Noob and John still can't unvote or vote for someone else, their vote stays on Mary.
Day 3:
Noob and John can now vote for whoever they want, unless Google locks their votes again.

What do you guys think about this concept? (also pls suggest a new name)

Interesting concept, although needs some changes.
- Make it so if your target naturally abstained, they won't get a message.

I can't really say much more, this is a concept which would need further testing.

BasicFourLife wrote:Interesting concept, although needs some changes.
- Make it so if your target naturally abstained, they won't get a message.

I can't really say much more, this is a concept which would need further testing.

That's pointless because if the player tries to unvote or switch votes they would know before that. Also added an example for those who are confused with the info section.

Players will know this role exists early on, which sounds like a good thing for scum because this actually softcounters the faction of Town itself

/nosupport

fwogcarf wrote:Players will know this role exists early on, which sounds like a good thing for scum because this actually softcounters the faction of Town itself

/nosupport

The player decides if they want to double vote, And if they do it early game, that's completely on them. Yes, just like witch, players will know it exists, but that's not bad. It doesn't really counter town. They can still lynch.

I actually like the name and the idea. My only question would be how would it work when it comes up against a revealed mayor?

TheLeaper wrote:I actually like the name and the idea. My only question would be how would it work when it comes up against a revealed mayor?

Same thing as any other role really. The mayor's vote would be locked.

So instead of blocking 2 votes that day the extortionist gets to block 4? So this would be a complete nerf to the mayor, why would extortionist ever not lock the mayor's votes? This seems like it would be a huge problem.

TheLeaper wrote:So instead of blocking 2 votes that day the extortionist gets to block 4? So this would be a complete nerf to the mayor, why would extortionist ever not lock the mayor's votes? This seems like it would be a huge problem.

Town most likely would know that there's an Exto in the game so the mayor must be careful with who he votes, but yes it is a huge nerf to the mayor anyways and I may change it so it doesn't affect mayor.

GoogleFeud wrote:

TheLeaper wrote:So instead of blocking 2 votes that day the extortionist gets to block 4? So this would be a complete nerf to the mayor, why would extortionist ever not lock the mayor's votes? This seems like it would be a huge problem.

Town most likely would know that there's an Exto in the game so the mayor must be careful with who he votes, but yes it is a huge nerf to the mayor anyways and I may change it so it doesn't affect mayor.

Make it so it takes 1 vote away from Mayor.

BasicFourLife wrote:

GoogleFeud wrote:

TheLeaper wrote:So instead of blocking 2 votes that day the extortionist gets to block 4? So this would be a complete nerf to the mayor, why would extortionist ever not lock the mayor's votes? This seems like it would be a huge problem.

Town most likely would know that there's an Exto in the game so the mayor must be careful with who he votes, but yes it is a huge nerf to the mayor anyways and I may change it so it doesn't affect mayor.

Make it so it takes 1 vote away from Mayor.

The biggest problem is that the mayor must abstain which is a huge disadvantage

GoogleFeud wrote:

BasicFourLife wrote:

GoogleFeud wrote:

TheLeaper wrote:So instead of blocking 2 votes that day the extortionist gets to block 4? So this would be a complete nerf to the mayor, why would extortionist ever not lock the mayor's votes? This seems like it would be a huge problem.

Town most likely would know that there's an Exto in the game so the mayor must be careful with who he votes, but yes it is a huge nerf to the mayor anyways and I may change it so it doesn't affect mayor.

Make it so it takes 1 vote away from Mayor.

The biggest problem is that the mayor must abstain which is a huge disadvantage

abstain on one vote, he still has 2 others

GoogleFeud wrote:

fwogcarf wrote:Players will know this role exists early on, which sounds like a good thing for scum because this actually softcounters the faction of Town itself

/nosupport

The player decides if they want to double vote, And if they do it early game, that's completely on them. Yes, just like witch, players will know it exists, but that's not bad. It doesn't really counter town. They can still lynch.

It said this ability doesn't affect scum. :/

fwogcarf wrote:

GoogleFeud wrote:

fwogcarf wrote:Players will know this role exists early on, which sounds like a good thing for scum because this actually softcounters the faction of Town itself

/nosupport

The player decides if they want to double vote, And if they do it early game, that's completely on them. Yes, just like witch, players will know it exists, but that's not bad. It doesn't really counter town. They can still lynch.

It said this ability doesn't affect scum. :/

Because it's Neutral Evil, and NEs are not supposed to harm scum.

---


What do you think about this: - If you lock mayor's vote he'll have 2 votes insted of 3, and he can still Guilty / Inno.

IMO this role is not strong enough, maybe you should be able to give anyone the doublevote instead of just you?
I like it though

This is, as you would expect, a vote-blocking role. What this means is that this role is taking away core mechanics that should be kept for all living players. I understand that this only applies to guilty/innocent votes, but this does not change the fact that it is taking away a core mechanic of the game. When you take away this mechanic, you will deprive somebody of their ability to play the game, ruining the point of the player going out of their way to play the game. While speaking in terms of balance, this mechanic may work effectively, this mechanic will never work ethically in the environment of Town of Salem. For this reason, I cannot support the role at its current state.

What do you guys think about removing the unable to guilty / inno part?