Is this assuming there were no defenses?
Why isn't it a fact?
And the paladin also has a double attack, so even defense won't save you in this case.
New here? I'm Roha — want a quick tour?
Is this assuming there were no defenses?
Well, just say it then. He said this and that, so it's unlikely he's that and that.
A, that is, cries like "I only have one role left in psychology, let's execute!" don't count as leaking information. Okay, I'll remember that for you, the Table is a sacred artifact, and mentioning it a priori confirms any nonsense said.
And what if I don't want to reveal this "someone" to the Mafia?
And if in that case, a peaceful player is revealed, then maybe look for other ways. For example, link evidence to the suspected negative player.
first option.
"He said this and that, only a Mafia member could say/know that. Let's execute him!"
Isn't that a valid option in this case? From a psychological perspective.
In short, the Heroes player chose the very best option, after considering it many times, so don't argue.
Well, otherwise the city would have lost due to the percentages not working out.
Their absence wouldn't have changed anything.
And yes, Kosh, I keep forgetting to respond to you about the spreadsheets. My position is this: if someone uses spreadsheets and says something like, "According to the spreadsheet, I only have one role left, so let's execute him!", then they should post the spreadsheet for everyone to see and explain why the other roles were ruled out. Otherwise, it should be considered leaking information obtained through their role and punished with a modkill.