So this just happened in a game I had and I'm curious as to what others reckon.
I was a necro whose fellow coven had already gone down. I was pushed to the stand and posted a decent ret will. No townies had died yet so it was a valid claim. As I came down from the stand, a survivor claim who'd been acting very townie noted that the will of a dead GA said their target was a ret. We went on to lynch an exe, and night came.
The rest of the town was fairly slow, with the surv the only one who was somewhat onto me. With this in mind, and knowing that I could get a mislynch or two off since the real ret didn't CC me while I was on the stand, I dispatched a ghoul to kill the surv, and he died.
I was eventually killed at night by the mafia, who went on to win the game, and upon arriving in the dead chat, I was blasted by the surv and a couple of others sympathising with him. They said that a surv is a neutral role, and just wants to survive, so not only is killing him a dick move, it's a waste of a kill. My line of thinking was that if a surv chooses to take a side, the make an enemy of the other sides in doing so. The survivor posed the biggest threat to me at that time, and in acting townie, killing him silenced someone who was sussing me out and took away a town vote.
The point was also raised that I could've whispered him and asked him to side with me, but I found that stupid since any surv would gladly screw over a solo coven to win town's favour.
It's all a bit moot since I lost anyway haha but I'm just curious as to what people think of this. Is killing a surv ever the most necessary/viable tactic as an evil?