I think that's a very good ability that meshes well mechanically, but it encroaches on the philosophy of giving the demon bluffs. Now giving three for threes, even when doing so to try and work out who the seer is, can make you inherently suspicious just for including the one role the seer knows.
Personally, if I wanted to give the Seer that classic werewolf vibe but to work in this game, I'd give them this ability:
On the third night, you know what Demon is in play.
I like that idea for a character. I'm not so worried about the concept of the game with this one, though, moreso the fun of the role. It doesn't feel like "vanilla" clocktower, I totally agree, but as a homebrew character it's pretty fun (in my opinion).
The thing is - you wouldn't be confirmed evil. This scenario might play out:
A good player states that they are the Monk.
The demon (who knows that a Seer is out of play because they didn't learn it) bluffs as Seer and says Monk is one of the three evil bluffs.
Of course, as a seer, if somebody uses the bluff, you wouldn't know for certain they're evil. They might be a pixie, cerenovus mad, the mutant, or just a powerful townsfolk trying to hide themselves. (And of course, you might be droisoned).
In teensyville games, evil gets no bluffs, which is a challenge that's possible to overcome. Same for minions in poppygrower games.
This is true for every role though, when talking about balance of roles you generally think of the scenario of the seer being trusted.
In the scenario you said though, both the seer and the monk would get executed most of the time. Seer should be happy to die and so town will probably do it if there's a shred of doubt on their claim or if there's no suspicion on anyone else. Happens all the time with roles like invest or clockmaker.
Good point. The edit I've made to the ability is this:
Seer (Townsfolk): You start knowing 2 characters - 1 in play and the other is a Demon bluff. The Demon knows you are in play.
The 1/3 chance you mentioned becomes a 1/6 chance, or evil can just choose to not bluff, or bluff arbitrarily (or do something weird like get a Pit Hag to make a Snitch)
>EDIT:
>Seer (Townsfolk): You start knowing 2 characters - 1 in play and the other is a Demon bluff. The Demon knows you are in play.
Why not make it more flexible for the storyteller? You start knowing 2 townsfolk characters - 1 is in play, the other is not. Its pretty powerful to know both an in play and out of play character, and the ST could choose whether to include an evil bluff or not.
The intended purpose of this role is to catch out evil players. I like the idea of giving the storyteller authority over whether or not a bluff is given, but
1) This makes a snitch bluff potentially known by the seer (which I don't want)
2) Storytellers might misunderstand the text and *always* give non-bluff characters
I have a fun idea; how about this variation.
**You learn one of the original demon bluffs, and it is replaced with the Seer. [Seer cannot naturally be given as a demon bluff.]**
So if the Demon gets one less bluff, and learns you are in play, you learn a role that is not in play.
The power is twofold, you deny the evil team a bluff (very strong) and you get one for yourself (you can help someone else hide).
I think making the 3 bluffs the demon receives unreliable is a lot less fun than taking one away, and giving them extra information about whether the Seer is in or out of play is interesting.
Too powerful, whoever takes that bluff is almost certainly evil, so this townsfolk either starts knowing an evil player, or does nothing if evil don't use this bluff.
there are similar homebrew abilities that have I've seen work before where they also learn one or more in-play characters, so that they don't know which is the bluff. This basically turns it into a noble type character that learns characters instead of players.
- If evil doesn't use the bluff, then the character HAS indeed done something. It has stopped them from using potentially all three of their bluffs.
- Likewise, if everybody seems to have a character, you can assume there might be a snitch.
- If they use that bluff, the town can infer that they *might* be evil. Remember a seer might not be in play at all, it might be an evil player bluffing.
I can see this working based on what you've said about other homebrew roles:
"You start knowing two characters, one in-play and one is a Demon bluff. The Demon knows you are in play."
But, as you said, this makes it too similar to the noble.
Maybe add a red herring? You learn two roles: one of which is in play and the other which is a bluff?
Ooh, I like that. Gives some more information as well - instead of learning a bluff which evil might never use.
I think that's a very good ability that meshes well mechanically, but it encroaches on the philosophy of giving the demon bluffs. Now giving three for threes, even when doing so to try and work out who the seer is, can make you inherently suspicious just for including the one role the seer knows. Personally, if I wanted to give the Seer that classic werewolf vibe but to work in this game, I'd give them this ability: On the third night, you know what Demon is in play.
Instead of 3rd night it could be if the are an equal number of dead and living players to balance for smaller games.
I like that idea for a character. I'm not so worried about the concept of the game with this one, though, moreso the fun of the role. It doesn't feel like "vanilla" clocktower, I totally agree, but as a homebrew character it's pretty fun (in my opinion).
It just wouldn't be fun playing as evil when you know a Seer is in play. 1/3 chance to be confirmed evil isn't fun
The thing is - you wouldn't be confirmed evil. This scenario might play out: A good player states that they are the Monk. The demon (who knows that a Seer is out of play because they didn't learn it) bluffs as Seer and says Monk is one of the three evil bluffs. Of course, as a seer, if somebody uses the bluff, you wouldn't know for certain they're evil. They might be a pixie, cerenovus mad, the mutant, or just a powerful townsfolk trying to hide themselves. (And of course, you might be droisoned). In teensyville games, evil gets no bluffs, which is a challenge that's possible to overcome. Same for minions in poppygrower games.
This is true for every role though, when talking about balance of roles you generally think of the scenario of the seer being trusted. In the scenario you said though, both the seer and the monk would get executed most of the time. Seer should be happy to die and so town will probably do it if there's a shred of doubt on their claim or if there's no suspicion on anyone else. Happens all the time with roles like invest or clockmaker.
Good point. The edit I've made to the ability is this: Seer (Townsfolk): You start knowing 2 characters - 1 in play and the other is a Demon bluff. The Demon knows you are in play. The 1/3 chance you mentioned becomes a 1/6 chance, or evil can just choose to not bluff, or bluff arbitrarily (or do something weird like get a Pit Hag to make a Snitch)
If you claim Seer you're asking to be killed, it's like coming out as an Athiest.
>EDIT: >Seer (Townsfolk): You start knowing 2 characters - 1 in play and the other is a Demon bluff. The Demon knows you are in play. Why not make it more flexible for the storyteller? You start knowing 2 townsfolk characters - 1 is in play, the other is not. Its pretty powerful to know both an in play and out of play character, and the ST could choose whether to include an evil bluff or not.
The intended purpose of this role is to catch out evil players. I like the idea of giving the storyteller authority over whether or not a bluff is given, but 1) This makes a snitch bluff potentially known by the seer (which I don't want) 2) Storytellers might misunderstand the text and *always* give non-bluff characters
I have a fun idea; how about this variation. **You learn one of the original demon bluffs, and it is replaced with the Seer. [Seer cannot naturally be given as a demon bluff.]** So if the Demon gets one less bluff, and learns you are in play, you learn a role that is not in play. The power is twofold, you deny the evil team a bluff (very strong) and you get one for yourself (you can help someone else hide). I think making the 3 bluffs the demon receives unreliable is a lot less fun than taking one away, and giving them extra information about whether the Seer is in or out of play is interesting.
Too powerful, whoever takes that bluff is almost certainly evil, so this townsfolk either starts knowing an evil player, or does nothing if evil don't use this bluff. there are similar homebrew abilities that have I've seen work before where they also learn one or more in-play characters, so that they don't know which is the bluff. This basically turns it into a noble type character that learns characters instead of players.
- If evil doesn't use the bluff, then the character HAS indeed done something. It has stopped them from using potentially all three of their bluffs. - Likewise, if everybody seems to have a character, you can assume there might be a snitch. - If they use that bluff, the town can infer that they *might* be evil. Remember a seer might not be in play at all, it might be an evil player bluffing. I can see this working based on what you've said about other homebrew roles: "You start knowing two characters, one in-play and one is a Demon bluff. The Demon knows you are in play." But, as you said, this makes it too similar to the noble.