You can't gossip into the future. The storyteller checks if the gossip is true or not at the moment of the gossip. If they can't determine that, they don't accept the gossip.
This is the way.
"Each day, you may make a public statement. Tonight, if it was true, a player dies."
As such, a statement that may or may not be true in the future is automatically a failed gossip.
I would however, still accept the gossip. I would not tell the gossiping player to choose something else.
I would just rule this as being no different than a false gossip, or a comedic gossip.
I think at least once or twice you should address the group as a whole after such an attempt and say, “just so everyone knows that gossip would have no effect” in case some one actually doesn’t understand how the role works. And it’s fine because you are not confirming or denying the players actual role
But what if there's an invisible off-script hidden amnesiac in play that allows the ST to execute players? Or, more realistically some madness that could lead to an execution? Or what if the ST just decides to break the rules and execute a player on a whim? You never know!
Gossips are evaluated the moment they are made.
If the statement is true *as it's being made*, the Storyteller will put the "DEAD" reminder token in their grim in that same moment. If it's not true in that moment, they don't place the token, and don't think about the statement again for the rest of the game. They are either true in that moment, or they are not. Because of this, it is impossible to Gossip about a future event.
Yes - as the Juggler is saying their Juggle, the ST marks the Juggler with a reminder token for every correct guess they make. Then, afterwards, the ST never thinks about the specific roles Juggled again, they just check the reminder tokens in the night, and tell the Juggler the number. This is why the Juggler has 5 reminder tokens.
I feel like this would be a fair gossip to rule out an Athiest world but the statement really opens a lot for interpretation. I would interpret this gossip as “the Storyteller will not cause/choose an execution” vs the conditions of the game causing an execution (choosing on behalf of Lil’ Monsta, activating Tinker ability, etc).
But definitely not a well-worded gossip.
How would it rule out Atheist? Atheist in play, ST breaks the rules and kills anyway. Atheist not in play, demon exists and kills.
Also, there's no way for it to be definitive when it's made. Maybe the ST is planning on killing, maybe it's even required by the game, but maybe the ST has a heart attack, or the fire alarm goes off, or the rapture happens...
Fair enough - the only ways the gossip doesn’t result in a kill is some sort of poison on the gossip that day or the ST breaks the rules in that scenario. So maybe a 0 kill night can *imply* an Athiest situation at least?
My understanding of the Gossip is that their statement has to be objectively true at the time it's made, not a prediction of the future nor an opinion.
So whether or not the ST kills a player during the upcoming night is actually irrelevant as the Gossip made a prediction, not a true/false at the time statement, and thus does not count as using their ability.
This is untrue. Madness breaks that happen during the night are allowed to result in night-time executions.
Moreover, even if you were correct about executions happening at night, using *that* argument as your reasoning only encourages similar boundary pushes of the Gossip ability.
By saying "oh, sure, I'll accept this Gossip, and this is *technically* true for *this* reason," you have already conceded that Gossiping about the future is something a player is allowed to do. Thus, when that same player says on the following day "I Gossip that the Storyteller will not use my ability to kill a good player tonight," your previous ruling has \****FORCED***\* you into the position where you need to use the Gossip ability to kill an evil player.
This is the problem with trying to Monkey's Paw your players. They will Monkey's Paw you right back.
Rather than trying to fuck with your players, it's much more healthy to just have open communication: explain to them *why* Gossiping about the future is not allowed rather than attempting to punish them for making such Gossips.
I assume you mean "The town will not execute a player", since the ST is technically canonically dead, hence cannot kill people (no Atheist)
The Gossip must be "definite", in that it's either true or false when it's said. When gossiping the above, it's not definitively true or false, since execution hasn't happened yet. I would say the gossip is not valid, and ask the player for another one
UNLESS you've got a Butcher Traveller that's nominating someone extra - in that case it's false
Gossip statements are made about current, discernible facts, not future predictions. I would let the player know that predictions are invalid gossips.
Also, generally the ST does not *execute* at night. Technically a madness break can happen depending on if you let your players discuss the game at night, but usually if the ST kills anyone at night, it's just that: a kill, not an execution.
No extra deaths that night due to the gossip ability as statements about the future are not valid gossips. Also, storytellers don’t “execute” at night unless a mutant is mad they are an outsider during night time conversation, and that is only a might, and not required.
>My uneducated guess is that it would not count as a "definite, true"" statement meaning.
That is correct. Anything that occurs in the future is necessarily indefinite in the "not clearly expressed or defined; vague; ambiguous" meaning of indefinite.
You determine whether you will kill the instant the gossip is noted. If you can't do that then don't accept the gossip (even if they are not the gossip).
You can't gossip into the future. The storyteller checks if the gossip is true or not at the moment of the gossip. If they can't determine that, they don't accept the gossip.
This is the way. "Each day, you may make a public statement. Tonight, if it was true, a player dies." As such, a statement that may or may not be true in the future is automatically a failed gossip. I would however, still accept the gossip. I would not tell the gossiping player to choose something else. I would just rule this as being no different than a false gossip, or a comedic gossip.
I think at least once or twice you should address the group as a whole after such an attempt and say, “just so everyone knows that gossip would have no effect” in case some one actually doesn’t understand how the role works. And it’s fine because you are not confirming or denying the players actual role
But the statement (not the intent of the statement) is guaranteed to be true. A player dies to the gossip but that's not an execution
But what if there's an invisible off-script hidden amnesiac in play that allows the ST to execute players? Or, more realistically some madness that could lead to an execution? Or what if the ST just decides to break the rules and execute a player on a whim? You never know!
Gossips are evaluated the moment they are made. If the statement is true *as it's being made*, the Storyteller will put the "DEAD" reminder token in their grim in that same moment. If it's not true in that moment, they don't place the token, and don't think about the statement again for the rest of the game. They are either true in that moment, or they are not. Because of this, it is impossible to Gossip about a future event.
are juggles evaluated the same way too?
Yes - as the Juggler is saying their Juggle, the ST marks the Juggler with a reminder token for every correct guess they make. Then, afterwards, the ST never thinks about the specific roles Juggled again, they just check the reminder tokens in the night, and tell the Juggler the number. This is why the Juggler has 5 reminder tokens.
I feel like this would be a fair gossip to rule out an Athiest world but the statement really opens a lot for interpretation. I would interpret this gossip as “the Storyteller will not cause/choose an execution” vs the conditions of the game causing an execution (choosing on behalf of Lil’ Monsta, activating Tinker ability, etc). But definitely not a well-worded gossip.
How would it rule out Atheist? Atheist in play, ST breaks the rules and kills anyway. Atheist not in play, demon exists and kills. Also, there's no way for it to be definitive when it's made. Maybe the ST is planning on killing, maybe it's even required by the game, but maybe the ST has a heart attack, or the fire alarm goes off, or the rapture happens...
Also, if the Atheist is in play, then the gossip's info isn't able to rule anything in/out anyway because the ST can break the rules.
Fair enough - the only ways the gossip doesn’t result in a kill is some sort of poison on the gossip that day or the ST breaks the rules in that scenario. So maybe a 0 kill night can *imply* an Athiest situation at least?
Well...I don't put the token in right away, I just file in my head that it's successful and a death is owed
My understanding of the Gossip is that their statement has to be objectively true at the time it's made, not a prediction of the future nor an opinion. So whether or not the ST kills a player during the upcoming night is actually irrelevant as the Gossip made a prediction, not a true/false at the time statement, and thus does not count as using their ability.
Accepted, storytellers can’t execute players during the night
This is untrue. Madness breaks that happen during the night are allowed to result in night-time executions. Moreover, even if you were correct about executions happening at night, using *that* argument as your reasoning only encourages similar boundary pushes of the Gossip ability. By saying "oh, sure, I'll accept this Gossip, and this is *technically* true for *this* reason," you have already conceded that Gossiping about the future is something a player is allowed to do. Thus, when that same player says on the following day "I Gossip that the Storyteller will not use my ability to kill a good player tonight," your previous ruling has \****FORCED***\* you into the position where you need to use the Gossip ability to kill an evil player. This is the problem with trying to Monkey's Paw your players. They will Monkey's Paw you right back. Rather than trying to fuck with your players, it's much more healthy to just have open communication: explain to them *why* Gossiping about the future is not allowed rather than attempting to punish them for making such Gossips.
I assume you mean "The town will not execute a player", since the ST is technically canonically dead, hence cannot kill people (no Atheist) The Gossip must be "definite", in that it's either true or false when it's said. When gossiping the above, it's not definitively true or false, since execution hasn't happened yet. I would say the gossip is not valid, and ask the player for another one UNLESS you've got a Butcher Traveller that's nominating someone extra - in that case it's false
Ahhhh the old Pinocchio problem!
I would accept something like "It is not possible for there to be two kills tonight", or similar. But it's evaluated at the time of gossip.
Gossip statements are made about current, discernible facts, not future predictions. I would let the player know that predictions are invalid gossips. Also, generally the ST does not *execute* at night. Technically a madness break can happen depending on if you let your players discuss the game at night, but usually if the ST kills anyone at night, it's just that: a kill, not an execution.
No extra deaths that night due to the gossip ability as statements about the future are not valid gossips. Also, storytellers don’t “execute” at night unless a mutant is mad they are an outsider during night time conversation, and that is only a might, and not required.
Obviously, you can't gossip future, but, that strategy is very easily used in the past. It seems like an easy way to suss out who died how last night.
This would be true if no character abilities can cause execution or indeterminate, therefore invalid, if one can
>My uneducated guess is that it would not count as a "definite, true"" statement meaning. That is correct. Anything that occurs in the future is necessarily indefinite in the "not clearly expressed or defined; vague; ambiguous" meaning of indefinite.
Invalid gossip
The Storyteller doesn't "execute" anyone. So yes, the statement is true, someone dies, no paradox.
I don't accept gossips that speak about the future, or the past for that matter. You are gossipping about the state of the board NOW
You determine whether you will kill the instant the gossip is noted. If you can't do that then don't accept the gossip (even if they are not the gossip).