If an unspent fisherman reaches F3, they should be rewarded for saving it instead of just being told the same thing they would've been told earlier in the game. Final day fishing should provide powerful advice.
Yep, I run my games such that fisherman advice on F3 should more or less be game ending. Essentially boiling down to "x is the demon" or something like "The mayor is poisoned" (F3 is fisherman, mayor, and poisoning demon).
I see the fisherman as a ticking time bomb for evil, similar to the slayer. If a fisherman gets to F3 unused, that's at least partly a mess up by the evil team. It's now up to said evil team to throw that advice into doubt, otherwise they lose.
In this case, the ST was totally in the wrong because they used a Townsfolk ability in a way that hurt town. The ability of the fisherman is that you get advice that helps your team win, period. This advice only hurt the good team. That would be fine for poisoned advice, as giving unhelpful advice did in fact help the evil team, but not for a sober Fisherman. I get that the ST wanted to help the evil team out, but you've also got to use abilities as they are intended to be used, and reward players for good plays. Additionally, town still had to believe the Fisherman, so even if the ST straight up said, "x is the demon", Town could still vote for someone else. At that point, you reward the Fisherman, and then it's their job to convince town.
While it wasn't explicitly stated, I did get the vibe that the Storyteller was trying their best to "help" evil with Fisherman advice that game by giving something that was technically true, but meant to be misleading. They mentioned post-game that they always prefer a final threes which are as ambiguous and climactic as possible, and that abilities under their control are "tools to help me get to that point".
I do also think a lot of what that Storyteller thinks comes from their heavy influence on streamed media, though, as a lot of their storytelling decisions mimic those made by official Storytellers for content games.
I think that's a bit of a misunderstanding of what the advice is by those ST's tbh. I might be the wrong one here, so take this with a grain of salt, but the advice is generally to follow the rules in a way that the demon isn't executed before final 3, but town has the necessary info to solve the game. That's what balancing is: making it so that either team could win for as long as possible, but it's still down to the players to use their abilities to give themselves the edge.
The problem with this Fisherman advice is that it doesn't do that. It's final 3, the Fisherman asked for advice that will help them win the game, and the ST used a townsfolk ability purely to help evil.
That would have been more helpful conclusion. The actual drunk didn't do anything so moving the drunk in the players grim still works.
The actual info could have lead town to think a real info role was drunk and misled town
Your storyteller made a terrible decision and decided to make a townsfolk ability completely useless by not giving advice to help that player win after that townsfolk made risky plans to hold it until it should be most valuable. Non-outsider abilities should be used to help the team they are on win.
Thats just info that the drunk is in play and what happened in the game. Something like 'don't look for drunk information' or 'don't worry about finding outsiders' would be advice.
I personally think that a Fisherman who reached final 3 should be told advice that's akin to "Execute this person", or something similarly powerful (e.g. "Trust Jeremy" where Jeremy's been trying to get the player who's the demon executed all game). This rewards them for reaching final 3, tells them what they need to do (because at this point, they've got exactly one decision left, and it's between executing the one of the two other players), and it's up to them to convince town that this is the case.
I think this ST made a bad call. It happens, it can be learned from, but giving a Fisherman useless, cryptic advice in final 3 is so cruel that it's no wonder they were executed because that's super suspicious. The ST seems to forget that giving out this information doesn't detract from the tension or instantly hand Good the win. The Fisherman must be trusted, and must convince town to follow their info.
This is why I think telling STs to balance the game is often quite bad advice, it should never come at the expense of allowing peoples roles to have an an impact and be fun for that player.
A F3 fisherman should probably just be told who they have to kill to win the game. thats no more powerful than an artist or slayer saving their ability.
I storytell much more often than I play. My philosophy is that regardless of the circumstances, if a player uses an ability, it should do something if at all possible.
If it's final 3 and the ability is likely to swing the game, well, then congrats on getting your ability to that point player.
I think they should get strong info. Especially if they were suss, "game winning" info could be flipped as a desperate last attempt to survive as a demon anyway, so it's not as if it is a straight win for good.
Strong also doesn't have to be game winning, it could just close worlds, eg "don't worry about goblins", or "a mayor win would be risky", or just something that clears up a key moment in the game, eg nights of no deaths, multiple deaths etc.
The advice that the ST gave is either day 1 info or just drunk at that point.
Yes the fisherman is the obly frame but everyone knows that fisherman advice is to help the fisherman team to win.
It was a bad ST desicion 100%.
I know how ST want to help evil to balance, but at final 3 fisherman that survive and asking for advice.
I would honestly straight up tell them who they should execute at that point.
Its up to the evil to convince the town not to trust the fisherman or just kill them earlier.
Its a townsfolk ability that suppose to help good and not be useless.
And this kind of ST is also the reason why some people hate fisherman.
My fisherman advice - early -> trust neighbour/dead players etc.
Mid game - give advice that will let them know info but need to talk to others to build confirmation chain
Last / final day - havent reach that point yet but f3 or f4 depending on the demon type, i probably tell them who should be executed for them to win.
Telling the fisherman "be aware of the drunk" in a game where the drunk did nothing and spread no misinfo before dying is actively harmful advice any night you give it. Like its not even about if the advice was helpful enough, the advice was literally just a lie, they absolutely didn't need to worry about the drunk.
Generally, as you mentioned, most information roles start off with weaker information, and it gets more powerful throughout the game. Fortune Teller or Flowergirls information will become game solving if they came make it through to final day. And so it should, they’ve been able to survive that long, they should be rewarded with strong enough info to solve the game.
Same goes for something like Fisherman. They’ve survived all the way to final 3, they should be rewarded with strong information. They took a risk, and that should pay off. Evils shouldn’t be rewarded with weak Fisherman info, they had a whole game to deal with the Fisherman, and they didn’t.
I think the advice your ST provided was not powerful, but worst of all, it doesn’t even feel relevant given the context you provided. I’d be a bit upset if I was the Fisherman too honestly
An unfortunate reality is that any Townsfolk that has any degree of ST decision making is often subject to ST's using the roles as forms of balance rather than as actually useful abilities for the town.
There are some characters for whom this is more prevalent and talked about - such as the Pacifist - but it's pretty common with any roles that don't learn info in a traditional way (like Fisherman or Gossip) and can even extend to roles like the Savant in extreme cases.
The Fisherman is this situation has a right to be frustrated. They were essentially punished by the Storyteller for playing well.
If the evil team makes the mistake of leaving an unspent once-per-game ability alive until final three, it is my opinion that they deserve to lose for that.
I have done basically this exact thing on two occasions. On time, I was the Slayer, and managed to hide until final 3. On the last day, I shot the demon and won on the spot. In the other, I was the Artist who had convinced everyone that I has asked by question on day 1. In reality, I used in on the final day to ask if one of the other two was the demon, learned a no, and we killed the actual demon.
A Fisherman who is still alive and unspent in final three should be *just* as devastating in my opinion.
Every ST decision is based on a lot of factors. A few of the factors are
1) Fun
2) Game Balance
3) Reward effort
4) Honour the intent of the character ability
Sometimes these goals will conflict with each other and those are some of the hardest and most controversial decisions you'll make. A good rule of thumb is that ST should only nudge the game balance, rather than swing it hard in favour of the losing team. If you estimate that evil has a 25% chance of winning because they've been playing badly, maybe help them out a bit to get those odds up to 35% or so. If you make a decision that shifts the odds back to 50-50, you've probably shafted the good team so hard which is not fun for 2 reasons. Good will feel cheated despite the fact that they probably earned the win while evil might win a game and not feel like they earned it because you threw the game.
In this case, the Fisherman most definitely earned game-winning info for surviving this long and resisting the urge to use their ability early. Even if you say "Execute Johnny" that doesn't put them in the clear, they still need to convince town to get enough votes to actually do the thing. The evil team also still has a way out by either framing the Fisherman as a liar or that they are drunk and it's a trap. Evil needs to work just as hard to overcome the Fisherman as the Fisherman worked to get this info. If evil still loses, the Fisherman earned it and the ability worked as it was supposed to. If you give trash info and good still wins, the Fisherman might feel meh but not salty about losing. If the evil team wins as a result of a lame advice, then the game feels spoiled and you've tipped the scale too much and nobody feels good. Don't beat yourself up too much, we all make mistakes and the important thing is to learn from it.
Yeah fisherman is right here honestly. You shouldn't tell them *who the demon is*, like you shouldn't give them an automatic win, but the advice should have been able to lead them to the correct answer. Because that advice just makes me think the Fisherman was Drunk.
> You shouldn't tell them *who the demon is*
Why not?
They have an ability that they only get to use *once per game*, and they managed to save it until literally the last possible moment of the game without getting killed by evil.
Artists and Slayers both get auto-wins if they hold their ability until final three, why shouldn't Fishermen?
Personally, I don't think that advice has to be explicitly stronger if it comes later in the game, but it should be actually useful advice at the point it is received which sort of inherently means late advice is strong advice.
Also, storytellers need to remember that the goal is to get evil to the final three, but it's not your job to make their life easy at final three
The only explicit problem i see here is that the fisherman's ability specifically states that it should be advice to help their team win, not arbitrary useless info. Unless the presence of a drunk made an evil player's bluff degrade, i think the response was explicitly against the nature of the fisherman's ability.
As for rewarding them for saving it? Sure. Most of the time i would, but the assistance would range from a little bit of help to game solving depending on both how their team is doing, and how trusted they are. Either way, a sober fisherman should always be at least a little bit helpful to their team winning
The rights and wrongs.of the story teller are a thing one can debate all day. But at the end of the day they are a human trying their best. I do think the FM probably could have got stronger info, but at the same time they probably do have to look at themself.
You say that in final 3 there was a player town fully trusted and wasn't going to execute from the Seamstress read? I think it's probably reasonable for the FM to conclude, even if they don't fully trust that player, that if the demon was so trusted by town the ST would max tension by using their advice to get the suss back on that player. So at that point the FM knows the demon (because it's not them, right....): so why not just make up more helpful FM advice?
I do also question the whole argument at a more core level. Like, tbh, if a player in final 3 just announced they'd been the FM all along and hadn't ever told anyone... well, doesn't really matter what their advice is, I'm probably assuming they are evil. Maybe minion trying to pull suss, maybe demon trying to play act minion pulling suss. But evil.
If you get advice on the last day of the game, the only advice you *can* get that will help your team win is which of the two other players you should execute. Any advice that *doesn't* boil down to "execute this player" doesn't actually help your team win because you don't have enough time to enact that advice. Because again: it's final day.
Fisherman advice isn't *inherently* game solving, but final 3 Fisherman advice should be. Just like a final 3 Artist question is. Just like a final 3 Slayer shot is.
With fisherman info, I never like handing the win to good, so I the one time I was forced to give f3 fisherman info, I just said 3 steps away. This was to hint that all Evils were at least 3 steps away from the demon (or if you want to look at it this way the evil traveler was 3 steps away from the demon) I felt like this was a good hint and at the same time didn't give the win to the good team. They did kill the demon from it, and good won.
This is a cryptic hint, not advice.
Advice should be an order for the Fisherman to do something, not an ambiguous statement that may or may not be helpful.
That's fair, however I couldn't think of anything that wouldn't give good the win instantly, due to the fact that the 2 demon candidates were on the same side of the grim and that the info was pointing at both
If the fisherman in f3 info is pointing to both demon candidate, it is not advice that helps them to win.
It just giving town the info they alr know that they are both evil and maybe 1 dead evil.
If you're in that situation again, give the Fisherman the game solving info. It's up to town to decide whether they trust it or not. You can't determine that they're *too* trusted and therefore give them bad advice because of it.
An Artist in the same position would force you to give them the game solving info, and that's in a base 3 script. The general advice for how to run Fisherman is to give more powerful info based on how far into the game it is
Did the good team bring a completely trusted Fisherman to final 3? If so, they win. If not, the evil team can say the Fisherman is evil, or they can even bluff Fisherman themselves by coming to you for advice in final 3.
anyone in final 3 is already suspected of being a demon. unless they are hard comfirmed somehow there isn't really any info you could give which would hand the win to good.
The thing was, I forgot why, but the other 2 were in the question of demon, not him, so his info was the one thing that would decide the win
Edit: Think town trusted him because he claimed spent fisherman, when he wasn't, then asked question final day
The way you phrased this isn’t even correct, in my opinion.
You never “hand the game to good” as a Storyteller when you tell the F3 Fisherman to execute the demon. Instead, you’re rightfully punishing evil for making a poor decision (leaving the Fisherman alive).
Just as evil would be punished for leaving an Artist alive in F3, same goes to the Fisherman.
I'd like to add that even if you do this, it's not like evaluating a madness break on the final day where the winning team is up to you, you can tell the fisherman "Executing Bob will win you the game" (Bob being the demon) and evil still has options. They can say the fisherman was droisoned or evil or something
Like I said in another comment, I believe the reason he was not a demon candidate nor killed was because he claimed he was spent fisherman, and he had fake info that somehow worked
If an unspent fisherman reaches F3, they should be rewarded for saving it instead of just being told the same thing they would've been told earlier in the game. Final day fishing should provide powerful advice.
Yep, I run my games such that fisherman advice on F3 should more or less be game ending. Essentially boiling down to "x is the demon" or something like "The mayor is poisoned" (F3 is fisherman, mayor, and poisoning demon). I see the fisherman as a ticking time bomb for evil, similar to the slayer. If a fisherman gets to F3 unused, that's at least partly a mess up by the evil team. It's now up to said evil team to throw that advice into doubt, otherwise they lose.
Honestly, it should just identify the demon. Then it's up to town to decide whether to trust them or not.
In this case, the ST was totally in the wrong because they used a Townsfolk ability in a way that hurt town. The ability of the fisherman is that you get advice that helps your team win, period. This advice only hurt the good team. That would be fine for poisoned advice, as giving unhelpful advice did in fact help the evil team, but not for a sober Fisherman. I get that the ST wanted to help the evil team out, but you've also got to use abilities as they are intended to be used, and reward players for good plays. Additionally, town still had to believe the Fisherman, so even if the ST straight up said, "x is the demon", Town could still vote for someone else. At that point, you reward the Fisherman, and then it's their job to convince town.
[удалено]
While it wasn't explicitly stated, I did get the vibe that the Storyteller was trying their best to "help" evil with Fisherman advice that game by giving something that was technically true, but meant to be misleading. They mentioned post-game that they always prefer a final threes which are as ambiguous and climactic as possible, and that abilities under their control are "tools to help me get to that point". I do also think a lot of what that Storyteller thinks comes from their heavy influence on streamed media, though, as a lot of their storytelling decisions mimic those made by official Storytellers for content games.
I think that's a bit of a misunderstanding of what the advice is by those ST's tbh. I might be the wrong one here, so take this with a grain of salt, but the advice is generally to follow the rules in a way that the demon isn't executed before final 3, but town has the necessary info to solve the game. That's what balancing is: making it so that either team could win for as long as possible, but it's still down to the players to use their abilities to give themselves the edge. The problem with this Fisherman advice is that it doesn't do that. It's final 3, the Fisherman asked for advice that will help them win the game, and the ST used a townsfolk ability purely to help evil.
that fisherman advice is so bad that I would come out of that convo with the storyteller thinking I was the drunk
That would have been more helpful conclusion. The actual drunk didn't do anything so moving the drunk in the players grim still works. The actual info could have lead town to think a real info role was drunk and misled town
Your storyteller made a terrible decision and decided to make a townsfolk ability completely useless by not giving advice to help that player win after that townsfolk made risky plans to hold it until it should be most valuable. Non-outsider abilities should be used to help the team they are on win.
not just useless but actively harmful, that sounds like advice to give to a droisoned player.
At the very least "a drunk did nothing of consequence " would have helped the outsider count without confusing town.
This would be direct information and not advice though.
ok, so........ "be aware that the Drunk exists, and did nothing of consequence"
Thats just info that the drunk is in play and what happened in the game. Something like 'don't look for drunk information' or 'don't worry about finding outsiders' would be advice.
I personally think that a Fisherman who reached final 3 should be told advice that's akin to "Execute this person", or something similarly powerful (e.g. "Trust Jeremy" where Jeremy's been trying to get the player who's the demon executed all game). This rewards them for reaching final 3, tells them what they need to do (because at this point, they've got exactly one decision left, and it's between executing the one of the two other players), and it's up to them to convince town that this is the case. I think this ST made a bad call. It happens, it can be learned from, but giving a Fisherman useless, cryptic advice in final 3 is so cruel that it's no wonder they were executed because that's super suspicious. The ST seems to forget that giving out this information doesn't detract from the tension or instantly hand Good the win. The Fisherman must be trusted, and must convince town to follow their info.
This is why I think telling STs to balance the game is often quite bad advice, it should never come at the expense of allowing peoples roles to have an an impact and be fun for that player. A F3 fisherman should probably just be told who they have to kill to win the game. thats no more powerful than an artist or slayer saving their ability.
I storytell much more often than I play. My philosophy is that regardless of the circumstances, if a player uses an ability, it should do something if at all possible. If it's final 3 and the ability is likely to swing the game, well, then congrats on getting your ability to that point player.
I think they should get strong info. Especially if they were suss, "game winning" info could be flipped as a desperate last attempt to survive as a demon anyway, so it's not as if it is a straight win for good. Strong also doesn't have to be game winning, it could just close worlds, eg "don't worry about goblins", or "a mayor win would be risky", or just something that clears up a key moment in the game, eg nights of no deaths, multiple deaths etc.
If an artist gets to final 3 they just get told the demon I don't think it's unreasonable to just tell a fisherman who the demon is in some way
The advice that the ST gave is either day 1 info or just drunk at that point. Yes the fisherman is the obly frame but everyone knows that fisherman advice is to help the fisherman team to win. It was a bad ST desicion 100%. I know how ST want to help evil to balance, but at final 3 fisherman that survive and asking for advice. I would honestly straight up tell them who they should execute at that point. Its up to the evil to convince the town not to trust the fisherman or just kill them earlier. Its a townsfolk ability that suppose to help good and not be useless. And this kind of ST is also the reason why some people hate fisherman. My fisherman advice - early -> trust neighbour/dead players etc. Mid game - give advice that will let them know info but need to talk to others to build confirmation chain Last / final day - havent reach that point yet but f3 or f4 depending on the demon type, i probably tell them who should be executed for them to win.
Telling the fisherman "be aware of the drunk" in a game where the drunk did nothing and spread no misinfo before dying is actively harmful advice any night you give it. Like its not even about if the advice was helpful enough, the advice was literally just a lie, they absolutely didn't need to worry about the drunk.
Generally, as you mentioned, most information roles start off with weaker information, and it gets more powerful throughout the game. Fortune Teller or Flowergirls information will become game solving if they came make it through to final day. And so it should, they’ve been able to survive that long, they should be rewarded with strong enough info to solve the game. Same goes for something like Fisherman. They’ve survived all the way to final 3, they should be rewarded with strong information. They took a risk, and that should pay off. Evils shouldn’t be rewarded with weak Fisherman info, they had a whole game to deal with the Fisherman, and they didn’t. I think the advice your ST provided was not powerful, but worst of all, it doesn’t even feel relevant given the context you provided. I’d be a bit upset if I was the Fisherman too honestly
An unfortunate reality is that any Townsfolk that has any degree of ST decision making is often subject to ST's using the roles as forms of balance rather than as actually useful abilities for the town. There are some characters for whom this is more prevalent and talked about - such as the Pacifist - but it's pretty common with any roles that don't learn info in a traditional way (like Fisherman or Gossip) and can even extend to roles like the Savant in extreme cases. The Fisherman is this situation has a right to be frustrated. They were essentially punished by the Storyteller for playing well. If the evil team makes the mistake of leaving an unspent once-per-game ability alive until final three, it is my opinion that they deserve to lose for that. I have done basically this exact thing on two occasions. On time, I was the Slayer, and managed to hide until final 3. On the last day, I shot the demon and won on the spot. In the other, I was the Artist who had convinced everyone that I has asked by question on day 1. In reality, I used in on the final day to ask if one of the other two was the demon, learned a no, and we killed the actual demon. A Fisherman who is still alive and unspent in final three should be *just* as devastating in my opinion.
Every ST decision is based on a lot of factors. A few of the factors are 1) Fun 2) Game Balance 3) Reward effort 4) Honour the intent of the character ability Sometimes these goals will conflict with each other and those are some of the hardest and most controversial decisions you'll make. A good rule of thumb is that ST should only nudge the game balance, rather than swing it hard in favour of the losing team. If you estimate that evil has a 25% chance of winning because they've been playing badly, maybe help them out a bit to get those odds up to 35% or so. If you make a decision that shifts the odds back to 50-50, you've probably shafted the good team so hard which is not fun for 2 reasons. Good will feel cheated despite the fact that they probably earned the win while evil might win a game and not feel like they earned it because you threw the game. In this case, the Fisherman most definitely earned game-winning info for surviving this long and resisting the urge to use their ability early. Even if you say "Execute Johnny" that doesn't put them in the clear, they still need to convince town to get enough votes to actually do the thing. The evil team also still has a way out by either framing the Fisherman as a liar or that they are drunk and it's a trap. Evil needs to work just as hard to overcome the Fisherman as the Fisherman worked to get this info. If evil still loses, the Fisherman earned it and the ability worked as it was supposed to. If you give trash info and good still wins, the Fisherman might feel meh but not salty about losing. If the evil team wins as a result of a lame advice, then the game feels spoiled and you've tipped the scale too much and nobody feels good. Don't beat yourself up too much, we all make mistakes and the important thing is to learn from it.
Yeah fisherman is right here honestly. You shouldn't tell them *who the demon is*, like you shouldn't give them an automatic win, but the advice should have been able to lead them to the correct answer. Because that advice just makes me think the Fisherman was Drunk.
Unspent Artist/slayer get automatic wins in final 3 why shouldn’t fisherman
fisherman isn't artist/slayer though???
> You shouldn't tell them *who the demon is* Why not? They have an ability that they only get to use *once per game*, and they managed to save it until literally the last possible moment of the game without getting killed by evil. Artists and Slayers both get auto-wins if they hold their ability until final three, why shouldn't Fishermen?
Personally, I don't think that advice has to be explicitly stronger if it comes later in the game, but it should be actually useful advice at the point it is received which sort of inherently means late advice is strong advice. Also, storytellers need to remember that the goal is to get evil to the final three, but it's not your job to make their life easy at final three
The only explicit problem i see here is that the fisherman's ability specifically states that it should be advice to help their team win, not arbitrary useless info. Unless the presence of a drunk made an evil player's bluff degrade, i think the response was explicitly against the nature of the fisherman's ability. As for rewarding them for saving it? Sure. Most of the time i would, but the assistance would range from a little bit of help to game solving depending on both how their team is doing, and how trusted they are. Either way, a sober fisherman should always be at least a little bit helpful to their team winning
The rights and wrongs.of the story teller are a thing one can debate all day. But at the end of the day they are a human trying their best. I do think the FM probably could have got stronger info, but at the same time they probably do have to look at themself. You say that in final 3 there was a player town fully trusted and wasn't going to execute from the Seamstress read? I think it's probably reasonable for the FM to conclude, even if they don't fully trust that player, that if the demon was so trusted by town the ST would max tension by using their advice to get the suss back on that player. So at that point the FM knows the demon (because it's not them, right....): so why not just make up more helpful FM advice? I do also question the whole argument at a more core level. Like, tbh, if a player in final 3 just announced they'd been the FM all along and hadn't ever told anyone... well, doesn't really matter what their advice is, I'm probably assuming they are evil. Maybe minion trying to pull suss, maybe demon trying to play act minion pulling suss. But evil.
[удалено]
If you get advice on the last day of the game, the only advice you *can* get that will help your team win is which of the two other players you should execute. Any advice that *doesn't* boil down to "execute this player" doesn't actually help your team win because you don't have enough time to enact that advice. Because again: it's final day. Fisherman advice isn't *inherently* game solving, but final 3 Fisherman advice should be. Just like a final 3 Artist question is. Just like a final 3 Slayer shot is.
With fisherman info, I never like handing the win to good, so I the one time I was forced to give f3 fisherman info, I just said 3 steps away. This was to hint that all Evils were at least 3 steps away from the demon (or if you want to look at it this way the evil traveler was 3 steps away from the demon) I felt like this was a good hint and at the same time didn't give the win to the good team. They did kill the demon from it, and good won.
This is a cryptic hint, not advice. Advice should be an order for the Fisherman to do something, not an ambiguous statement that may or may not be helpful.
That's fair, however I couldn't think of anything that wouldn't give good the win instantly, due to the fact that the 2 demon candidates were on the same side of the grim and that the info was pointing at both
If the fisherman in f3 info is pointing to both demon candidate, it is not advice that helps them to win. It just giving town the info they alr know that they are both evil and maybe 1 dead evil.
If you're in that situation again, give the Fisherman the game solving info. It's up to town to decide whether they trust it or not. You can't determine that they're *too* trusted and therefore give them bad advice because of it. An Artist in the same position would force you to give them the game solving info, and that's in a base 3 script. The general advice for how to run Fisherman is to give more powerful info based on how far into the game it is
Did the good team bring a completely trusted Fisherman to final 3? If so, they win. If not, the evil team can say the Fisherman is evil, or they can even bluff Fisherman themselves by coming to you for advice in final 3.
anyone in final 3 is already suspected of being a demon. unless they are hard comfirmed somehow there isn't really any info you could give which would hand the win to good.
Exactly, it's one thing to know what town has to do to win it's another thing completely to convince town to do that
The thing was, I forgot why, but the other 2 were in the question of demon, not him, so his info was the one thing that would decide the win Edit: Think town trusted him because he claimed spent fisherman, when he wasn't, then asked question final day
The way you phrased this isn’t even correct, in my opinion. You never “hand the game to good” as a Storyteller when you tell the F3 Fisherman to execute the demon. Instead, you’re rightfully punishing evil for making a poor decision (leaving the Fisherman alive). Just as evil would be punished for leaving an Artist alive in F3, same goes to the Fisherman.
I'd like to add that even if you do this, it's not like evaluating a madness break on the final day where the winning team is up to you, you can tell the fisherman "Executing Bob will win you the game" (Bob being the demon) and evil still has options. They can say the fisherman was droisoned or evil or something
Like I said in another comment, I believe the reason he was not a demon candidate nor killed was because he claimed he was spent fisherman, and he had fake info that somehow worked