Board Thread:Role Ideas (Neutral)/@comment-30255850-20171015211902/@comment-26234016-20171019221921

HereThereEverywhere wrote: The problem with a final verdict is that it should be just that, final. Absolute. No discussion afterwards. However, this should be an open discussion. Stating your opinion is fine, but the creator should be given the chance to refute your points. As you've shown, the Hobo idea doesn't work because it's practically a Survivor. What if the creator believes it would make for a good Survivor rework? What are they supposed to do? You've already given your final verdict, which makes it seem like you're done. There's no more, it's canned. It's not a good tone to have. Maybe you and everyone else know why the role is bad, but the creator doesn't. So they should have the opportunity to defend their role - and then if it is a bad role, they'll get told why. They can learn not to make the same mistakes. The finality of everyone's posts makes it seem like that's the wrong thing to do.

This role specifically is a bad example, because I do think that you can't really defend this role. Hobo roles aren't allowed, and Survivor is a good role that doesn't need to be changed. Of course the creator can refute points - if I'm wrong about a role, I'd love to know! I think i originally rejected the Spud, for example, until it was re-balanced in a way I didn't expect.

My 'final verdict' is only a final verdict for that role. If they thought it would make a survivor rework (which we don't know for sure, in fact it's unlikely), well, I rejected this role, not the rework.

However, bad roles should be put down. Say I see a Firefighter - should I engage the creator? No. That role can't be fixed, it's simply a bad role. You need to give a verdict.