ToL Neutral Suggestions


Alchemists’ heal is strange to me. It is a staple of her kit, but it doesn’t really make sense with her wincondition. Optimally, the Alchemist wants games to end faster - which would imply they aren’t healing too many people. I may be projecting my own playstyle here, as I typically get 1 heal max and then use both of my bombs over the course of the game and no-action every other night.

I also believe that 3 stoneskins is one too many, but evidently in the past 2 was too few. Since games usually end on Day 6 or Day 7, 3 nights of night immmunity would be 60% (3/5 nights) or 50% (3/6 nights) of the game. As opposed to 40% or 33.3%, which actually presents a dilemma on how to use them. However, in longer games, 2 nights of death immunity can equate a measly 25% or even less, and as a Survivor class that is pretty poor.

Finally, if Alchemist is going to keep her heal, I do not think it should be unlimited use. Limited use heals would encourage better decisionmaking with how to use those heals. It doesn’t entirely make sense for a neutral to have unlimited heals if their wincondition doesn’t involve healing (like old FoL Alch) and as a side effect of making heal a limited use ability, Alchemist shouldn’t count towards the “guaranteed healer” like it currently does. Although I believe that even if their heal remains as an infinite use ability, Alchemist should not be a “guaranteed” healer.


  • Remove Alchemist from the ‘Guaranteed Healer’ spawn pool (currently Alchemist/Chrono/Phys)
  • Make Heal a limited use ability (3 uses?)
  • Reduce Stoneskin from 3 to 2 uses

While I personally think Fool is too easy to win as, I think a lot of that has to do with the games meta and the players.

Trollbox is a genius ability and fits Fool perfectly. Frame is an ability that really can’t be changed and is very powerful for what it’s supposed to do - but it’s limited use and requires you to be targetted by an investigative ability, so that’s not too bad. However, I think Fool being always incompatible (without framing) is simply too easy for Fool. No other investigative class gets inaccurate results from a non-framing Fool. Although a change here could be an indirect Maid buff.


  • Make Fool not always incompatible when not Framed (I think always Compatible would be most balanced)

I think the biggest problem with Inquisitor is that heathens are aware that they are heathens. Pretty simple, really. There’s no need to have Inquisitors’ existence outted just by existing, and it can encourage “BD Inquisitors”

There’s also no reason this class should stay alive upon winning, as unlike Scorned and Mercenary there is no more “objective” they can do. Although this does weaken the possibility of fakeclaiming Inquisitor.


  • Heathens should not be aware that they are heathens
  • Suicide upon victory

Scorned is the only Neutral I actually think is on the weaker side, but it has a well designed kit for its wincondition. I’ve already suggested this in the #feedback-balance channel to fairly negative feedback, but the only buff I can really think of to Scorned that isn’t massively gamechanging would be the follows.

Change their wincondition from “See two marked targets executed.” to “Get two marked targets executed.”. The only difference this would make is that if you are killed the night you mark somebody who gets executed the next day (as your 2nd mark), or die to a Hunter you marked (as your 2nd mark), you’d still win. Not a gamebreaking buff, but a small one. Perhaps an exception to the Hunter arrow.

Additionally, after victory, currently Scorned is just there. They can’t use their abilities, so they just become a person with a vote. While I personally am not a fan of victorious neutrals surviving, the current solution of just making Scorned a vanillized class is awful. Taking a page from Mercenary, Scorned should be able to continue using their abilities and get bonus GP for successful frames. An exact number could be debated, but I think 20 or 25 is a good start.


  • Let a dead Scorned get credit for a marked targets execution
  • Either
    • Suicide upon victory
    • Give Scorned an incentive to go for additional frames upon victory

Mercenary simply has to occupy 4 people to win, which is very easy given the current meta of open claiming and is generally very easy in any meta. While I think the class is too easy I only think the the number of brilders to win should be increased by 1 (from 6 to 7)

Additionally, I do think there’s a problematic interaction with how Mercenaries interact with eachother.

I don’t actually know what the best solution is to “who gets what if multiple Mercenaries are on the same target”, but being the higher numbered Mercenary is extremely unsatisfying and quite frustrating at times. Making Merc unique is an option, and with how powerful Shield is, wouldn’t be completely unjustified. I do like this solution a lot more, as Shield is such a powerful protective ability and having so many occupies going around can be unfun for all occupiable classes.

The alternative options are to somehow give both Mercenaries brilders. I don’t believe giving both Mercs the full amount would be at all fair, as it’d be extremely easy. Giving both Mercs half brilders is an option, although then you have to deal with rounding up or down in the inevitable “.5” situations.


  • Make Mercenary need 7 brilders to win
  • Either:
    • Make Merc unique
    • Divide brilders to both Mercenaries if two are on the same target in half (rounding up or down)

I think Sellsword needs an entire rework. The class concept of being an “evil merc” isn’t exactly unique, and the wincondition is way too generous for how much mechanical power this class has.

I think one direction to consider (if the “evil neut” theme stays) is weakening the class, giving it one time death immunity from non-BD killers, and perhaps making the wincondition a tad harder. The goal I have in mind is making Sellsword a class that assists the evils socially more than mechanically.

While I understand the place a naturally evil-leaning neutral has in the game, I’d still personally like to see this class reworked to be more like old Contract Merc. But I’m totally a bit biased here ^^


  • Rework this class (preferably along the lines of old Contract Merc)

I don’t really want to talk about this class, because I don’t think I can give it a fair assessment. I’m very biased here. I think this iteration of Pretender is just fundamentally an awful class.

A neutral who has the wincon of getting kinged is certainly something that can work, but this ain’t it.


  • Rework/Remove

Thoughts? I think there’s some more specific class changes I’d like to look into in the future, but in my eyes a topic on every neutral was better to get some discussion started, and I think at face value every single neutral has room for improvement. Although “rework pret” “rework SS” isn’t exactly revolutionary feedback :sweat_smile:


It’s not any easier than there having just been 1 merc to begin with and it’s the natural result of resolving both abilities simultaneously.

If you really think it’s too easy afterwards then just make the requirement 8. It’s what it was originally and the requirement was perfectly achievable.



1 Like

but without tar

Fair point, but I still believe it’s the worst of my three proposed solutions.

If this post was on just alch it’d probably devolve to that, but I don’t want to suggest entire class reworks specifically at the moment

I also kind of have an idea with what to do with the JOAT Alch concept; I want to apply it to a NK. Soon™

What!? NO!

I mean you can do that too, but JOAT alch is an excellent Survivor class design.

Your other 2 solutions are

1 - Changing the spawn rules because one of the interactions is slightly annoying
2 - Having an arbitrary exception to how the ability works that completely goes against the abilities text and would require a complete rewording of the ability to specify just that one interaction and still doesn’t even fully resolve the problem due to fractions.

How is having the interaction be the same as if there was only 1 merc not better than a drastic change to spawning rules which also reduce fake claiming or an unintuitive convoluted mess to divide everything up.

I don’t entirely disagree and while I’d love to see a version of JOAT back I’ve kind of come to accept that it probably won’t happen. Perhaps I shouldn’t be so pessimistic, though.

I also think it could make for a very interesting NK, but that’s not an idea I’ve put too much development to.

This one interaction isn’t the only reason I believe Merc should be a unique class.

To further elaborate, I think a singular Mercenary can be gamechanging with 1 or 2 well placed SGs and the Shield is absolutely bonkers. I think if Merc stays as a non-unique class that Shield should get toned down, at the least.

I’ve seen 2 Merc games where the evil faction gets occupied more than 50% of the nights (until they’re occ immune) and it loses them the game. I wrote that under the impression that double Merc games were incredibly BD sided, but upon looking at my spreadsheet from when I used to track games, of the 17 double Merc games I tracked, BD won 8 of them and lost 9, so shrug.

I don’t really think someone is going to give two guards equal pay if the job would have been done identically with only one there, but in terms of balance I suppose you aren’t entirely wrong. Perhaps it could be experimented with. As long as the current system changes, I’m happy.

(We’ll get back to this)

Why not also make their killing ability Infinite use? As that would make the game much shorter. The reason we don’t do that is because when someone finds out the Alchemist, they would die anyway because they aren’t useful to the BD anyway

Why? This would not help their Wincon of surviving.

With the Proposed changes, yeah this works.

If we’re gonna keep this class, I’d want this as my top change. At the very least it would lower those winrates by like… 1%

Ehhh this is a hard one to really understand. Why, exactly, should heathens not know that there are other neutrals that seek to do them harm? It’s like if whenever an evil member member flipped, the class didn’t flip so you didn’t know whether it was a cult or Unseen game.

Yes. Just yes.

Well, yes only because you got them executed publicly and you had no way to influence it.

I think #2 is better, but that wouldn’t really mesh well with point 1.

This class is similar to an Evil King, in that it does not know it’s allies. Unlike Evil King, it does not have any mechanical way to “confirm” that someone is really evil. This is the only real “Social” class IMO.

100% agree. Just remove it until a rework occurs, or since I don’t believe that any good rework could happen, just keep it removed.

Because it means by not being a heathen you know you don’t need to worry about claiming, thus severely detracting the Inquis’s presence as an anti-claim incentive.

Also heathens knowing they are heathens is how inquis’s prove themselves when siding with the BD, something that defeats the point of a scum sided neut.

Stepping and becoming king as Sellsword to win with BD defeats the whole purpose of the class, yet it can still happen. Whether this is good or not is not relevant.

Cause that’d be silly. Alchemist isn’t a NK.

That’s the point. It’s a nerf.

It’s an “either A or B” proposal

But wouldn’t that make the game shorter?

And I’m saying

Doesn’t go well with

Establishing that this problem exists in more than one class does not make it no longer a problem.

It would, but while that is something the player playing as the alchemist wants, that doesn’t mean it’s healthy for the game for a Survivor neut to have such a massive impact every game due to how much infinite kills would speed up the game.

Conversion defeats the whole point of being Town.

Sure, but that’s not the point I’m trying to make. Alchemist is plenty powerful as is. Too powerful, even.

Most of my text on Alchemist is me stating the fact that an Alchemist has a higher chance of winning if the game is shorter, not that Alchemist should have the ability to speed up the game even more.

Why doesn’t it? The first is to give Scorned an extra chance of a frame the night they die, the second is to give Scorned incentive to keep framing after they win?

No. Conversion makes you STOP being town.

ATTEMPTING to be converted however DOES defeat the point of being town. Hence why one of the few non-gamethrowing gameplay related actions that is explicitly against the rules is to ask to be converted.

Well becoming Neutral King makes you stop being whatever neutral you were.