Board Thread:Role Ideas (Neutral)/@comment-36558623-20181109144823/@comment-36539941-20181111000546

Faraday242 wrote: BobJeff647 wrote: So, when you're dead, you'll see that you can attack people, provided they are infected, right? If so, what's the point of Chomping, if when you die, as long as you've infected all the neccessary people, you can kill them all anyways?

For how many nights would you be able to do so? The night you die? The 3 nights after you die? Forever? If it is Forever, then it's a bit like an Arsonist that has douses that act like PB's plague, and has a nerfed Ignite (just kill off your infected after you die)

Also, what if it's a town with only town in it, but Zombie has infected everyone, and is now dead? Does the game result in a Town win, or a Zombie win (Zombie would eventually kill everyone)?

Example : Jester can only choose who to kill the night they are lynched.

I'd like a few answers to these questions, but it's an interesting concept! Forever, but I could nerf this.

Yes the Zombie would win in that example.

Keep in mind, the Zombie chomping is an immediate way to kill, while infections are long term, meaning if you want to infect, you're playing the long game.

Also, Infected people could die and you might gain nothing. While I do agree that infecting is long term, as long as you manage to get all the people that you need to kill infected, they are gauranteed to die (unless they're Pestilence, but that's a whole other story), as you'd kill them after your death, with your powerful attack. Since infecting works like Plaguebearer's plague, you'd get quite a lot more people infected, and thus a lot more people will die to you in the end.​​​​​ Chomping kills 1 person a night, but infecting can 'kill' at least one person a night, and will increase the more infected you have. Now, if you don't recieve messages on who gets infected, I can see it being balanced, as you may try to infect someone who was already infected by another infected, but in general, infecting will award more kills to you in the end.

Although, I have thought over it, and Chomping does have it's pros. The fact that it is an immediate kill was the main reason behind it's pros (It has weaker attack and can't get multiple people in the same night, like an infect can). The main usage I see for Chomp is taking out people who are good at the game and would eventually catch you before you've gotten all your infecting done. Otherwise, it is generally better to infect people due to the fact that any infected people will die, either to you or to someone else.

The main meta for this role would be very similar to plaguebearer's : Infect roles that visit on a regular basis, and only Chomp when clever players are hot on your trail, or would soon be, and you haven't gotten all your infecting done.

In a way, it is similar to Plaguebearer in the sense that if you infect everyone, you've essentially won. The difference is that Pestilence can actually be stopped through lynching, but a Zombie can't, as it is already dead when it starts killing everyone with it's powerful attack.