One-Shot Roles and Blockers

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

My instinct is no, but I'm curious what other people think.

[gorckat]

Hmm. Not on the wiki, so this'll be a good thing to add...

Even though RBing is the first thing to "resolve" in most mod's ordering, I'd say one shot powers are used.

If a cop is RB'd, he gets no result.
If a townie is RB'd, it doesn't matter (except to trackers, etc)
If a one-shot is blocked...it matters if he did anything. If he didn't, it doens't matter. If he did, then he got blocked.

[somestrangeflea]

My standard Role PM set says yes.

[Guardian]

If a one shot vigilante's target is protected by a doctor, does it count as being used?

yes.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

That's a good point.

[Mr. Flay]

I agree with

Yos

Guardian.

The actual answer is something like "Usually yes on this site, though it depends somewhat on the blocker's flavor/specific methodology." A Jailer might preempt the usage, for example.

[Scigatt]

I'm gonna break with convention and say no.

[xyzzy]

I'm gonna break with convention and say no.

Why?

[Cyberbob]

The actual answer is something like "Usually yes on this site, though it depends somewhat on the blocker's flavor/specific methodology."

[Scigatt]

I'm gonna break with convention and say no.

Why?

Well, part of it comes from the idea that a roleblocker blocks the ability to do something, rather than making it fail. I also don't like what a 'yes' response will do to a sacrificial one-shot.

[Norinel]

Another practical consideration for "yes" is that a role that doesn't get a result back often won't know that it's been blocked. Saying "You get your shot back... for no reason" confirms the existence of a blocker, and puts a little more nightgame info in town's hands.

[Scigatt]

Another practical consideration for "yes" is that a role that doesn't get a result back often won't know that it's been blocked. Saying "You get your shot back... for no reason" confirms the existence of a blocker, and puts a little more nightgame info in town's hands.

Hmm...maybe I'll just make one-shots unblockable.

[Seol]

I also don't like what a 'yes' response will do to a sacrificial one-shot.

Well, that depends - is the sacrifice a cost or an effect? Are we talking Oblivion Stone or Nevinyrral's Disk?

[Dasquian]

Depends on what the game balance requires, with a nod to the theme.

If your game is built around blockers and one-shot roles, then yeah, maybe you want the blockers to completely negate and use up the powers of people they do manage to block.

If your game has one important one-shot role and a blocker, you might decide the blocker should only delay the use of that role, not counter it entirely (unless the blocker chooses to lock them down every night of the game).

[Yosarian2]

Usually, I'd say yes, if a one-shot gets blocked the ability is still used up. I would not say that a suicide vig dies anyway if he gets roleblocked, though.

[Megatron]

The way I've always seen it is that a doctor heals the wound from the bullet that was obviously fired.

However, a roleblocker is keeping you from aiming the gun in the first place. Therefore you haven't actually fired.

[Megatron]

EBWOP: That's in response to Guardian in post 3

[Mr. Flay]

Doctor is a crap role from a flavor standpoint, anyway. How do they NOT KNOW that the person they saved the life of was attacked last night? Balance.

Going back in time and editing the universe with :s/Doctor/Bodyguard would solve SO much...

[Battousai]

Yes in most circumstances. I think the only circumstance in which the answer is no, is if the one shot player is a KEY balancing point in the game.

[Twomz]

I also don't like what a 'yes' response will do to a sacrificial one-shot.

Well, that depends - is the sacrifice a cost or an effect? Are we talking Oblivion Stone or Nevinyrral's Disk?

Good example Seol.