Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
However, there's a very subtle point here. For example, will I get an answer to the question: "Are you going to kill someone tonight?"
In my opinion, you will. After all, this doesn't reveal the role. Heroist
In this case, we get a town member with a clue, which means there should be a reason to find and kill him. Therefore, the journalist needs to be strengthened.
I don't understand the logical connection. What does the town member, who needs to be killed based on the clue (and why, by the way?), have to do with strengthening the journalist? Heroist
because we won't even know who he visited in the end.
Why make things so complicated? If the GM wanted everyone to know who the journalist visited, he wouldn't bother with pseudonyms and would use the real nicknames of the people being questioned. Heroist
I think it would be worth increasing the range of possible questions so that he can expose the Mafia, even with just one false answer, forcing them to reveal themselves.
Have you read Rimp's questions? There, the negative role is 100% exposed; how can you increase the range even further?
..разым двазым трызым рызым пята лата сигерь мата локом боком крюк за крюк из бульмы бульма урюк.. Знание некоторых закономерностей освобождает от изучения многих фактов. Мечты сбываются рано или поздно, так или иначе.