Question: Can A Neutral Benign/Evil 'gamethrow'?

[wafflesenpai]

For example, if I was a witch and I wanted SK to win. However, I knew who the dragon head was. Before I die, I leave in my lw who the DH is so that town can lynch DH and let the SK kill next night. Is that considered 'gamethrowing'?

My thinking is that the neutral roles can side with anyone and make town lynch anyone they want. I've done this plenty of times when I sided with SK/Arson instead of triad, yet most triads said they'd report me for choosing to let the SK win.

As a 'Neutral', can't I side with/betray anyone I want? Even if it means I will be lynched and my lw still reveals, if I feel like SK or Arson or Mafia/Triad deserves the win.

[Auckmid]

Unless the the rules for gamethrowing have changed, playing against ones win conditions as a neutral = gamethrowing. However, favoring a side while still playing to win is always legal. Since the Witch must survive to win the game, she will have lost regardless if her last will is read. As such, nothing she puts in her last will shall be considered a gamethrow, making the above situation legal.

Edit: To clarify though. Intentionally getting lynched as an evil neutral is playing against your win condition and could very likely be considered a gamthrow. Need a current keeper to confirm this is still the case.

[EagleMan]

Even then, generally no one cares as the neutral losing does not affect anyone else - they are not throwing the game for anyone but themselves. Short of suicide, almost any tactic a neutral does can be construed as a possible attempt by the player to win, even if it's a stupid attempt.

At any rate, the situation you described is definitely okay. The Witch is free to favor any side they want, even in death.

[Reemus]

Neutral-loners can't "gamethrow". They're either benign who win or lose or evils who side with themselves only. Another question if two neutral evils who win together are present with town. If any of them favours town, that means going against his objective.
Also this "Waffle" is an indecent.

[wafflesenpai]

Alright thanks. I just needed this to be cleared up. This was the situation:

I was witch and was put up for trial. The triad regardless of what I said guiltied me. So I put in my lw who the DH was, since I have been controlling him. They knew I was witch and yet still guiltied me when the evils had majority. I lost regardless, but the triad also lost as a result. I already lost my condition so I decided town should win since triad lynched me on purpose. I was playing within my condition, trying to protect myself with doctors and also making triad kill important town roles.

Waffles are not indecent! They are delicious.

[louiswill]

They can gamethrow. It is already part of the law half a year ago.

Working against your win condition is gamethrowing.

It doesn't necessarily mean you will be iron fisted.

[Gyver]

Unless the the rules for gamethrowing have changed, playing against ones win conditions as a neutral = gamethrowing. However, favoring a side while still playing to win is always legal. Since the Witch must survive to win the game, she will have lost regardless if her last will is read. As such, nothing she puts in her last will shall be considered a gamethrow, making the above situation legal.

Edit: To clarify though. Intentionally getting lynched as an evil neutral is playing against your win condition and could very likely be considered a gamthrow. Need a current keeper to confirm this is still the case.

As a keeper I will acknowledge this as the most accurate answer to the original question. You did not game throw. I could see an argument put forward that the Triad did gamethrow if they knew you were the witch and they knew you knew who the Dragonhead was.

[EagleMan]

They can gamethrow. It is already part of the law half a year ago.

Working against your win condition is gamethrowing.

It doesn't necessarily mean you will be iron fisted.

Yeah but how many people actually get punished? As I said, almost anything a neutral does can be construed as an attempt to win, unless we begin equating bad plays or stupidity with gamethrowing. Short of -suicide it's very difficult to make it clear you're gamethrowing - even trying to get yourself lynched can be construed as an attempt at playing Jester or a bluff.

[Arrow]

I saw a witch a few months ago who claimed their role, said they wanted to help town, and then every day, told the town who they had controlled and who they'd made them target, essentially becoming a Detective and helping the town root out one of the Triad killers, before the town lynched the witch themselves in disgust.

So yes, a neutral can gamethrow.

[Cryptonic]

I saw a witch a few months ago who claimed their role, said they wanted to help town, and then every day, told the town who they had controlled and who they'd made them target, essentially becoming a Detective and helping the town root out one of the Triad killers, before the town lynched the witch themselves in disgust.

So yes, a neutral can gamethrow.

I've done this exactly same thing, but I won the game by having the Survivor side w/ me at the end.

I first tried this gambit to get myself lynched as Jester by claiming Witch and saying I'll side with the town. Town kept me alive and Mafia killed me. >_>;

[AppleyNO]

As a keeper I will acknowledge this as the most accurate answer to the original question. You did not game throw. I could see an argument put forward that the Triad did gamethrow if they knew you were the witch and they knew you knew who the Dragonhead was.

That argument would be false. No one gamethrew in this situation.

As for the larger picture of neutrals gamethrowing, anyone who is actively playing against their win condition is considered to be gamethrowing. Its harder to decide if a neutral is gamethrowing or gambitting(Is that a word?), so we usually reserve the calls for neutrals who -suicide or who ask to be lynched with no jester possible.

Every situation is different. :P

[ika]

That argument would be false. No one gamethrew in this situation.

Well arguble its true that triad did gamethrow

triad wincon: eliminate towns and all who oppose you

so argubly how gibver phrased it

I could see an argument put forward that the Triad did gamethrow if they knew you were the witch and they knew you knew who the Dragonhead was.

so in that case triad is gamethrowing (unless if you consider it strategics bussing). but it does come down to the basic premise of this as you said

Every situation is different. :P

i would argue the situation giver pointed out is a gamethrow but agree that this one is not. It also falls to keeper judgements like you said

[AppleyNO]

The Triads do not need nor are they on a team with the witch ;P

If they think the witch is a liability, they can shoot.

[ika]

The Triads do not need nor are they on a team with the witch ;P

If they think the witch is a liability, they can shoot.

What happens when the DH(GF) needs to fake venting to stop witch manipulation only to be "herp-a-derp" ;P

but in seriousness, fair enough

[louiswill]

Yeah but how many people actually get punished? As I said, almost anything a neutral does can be construed as an attempt to win, unless we begin equating bad plays or stupidity with gamethrowing. Short of -suicide it's very difficult to make it clear you're gamethrowing - even trying to get yourself lynched can be construed as an attempt at playing Jester or a bluff.

Our opinion is to punish them as little as possible.

Don't cared, usually.

I'm not going to support punishing them in any normal setup, where neutrals are such a small faction of trouble. And besides, neutrals are harder to win.

So this is a intended loophole for neutral players' advantage to enjoy the game.

Plus it efficiently eliminated the reality complexity of detecting neutral game throwing.

What do you think?

[AppleyNO]

What happens when the DH(GF) needs to fake venting to stop witch manipulation only to be "herp-a-derp" ;P

but in seriousness, fair enough

</3 I will always hold that to be CP9's fault.