What does a Watcher see?

[Seol]

I just re-wrote the wiki definition of Watcher and thought I'd make this poll to ensure that my view is the generally accepted one.

My view is (1) - previously the wiki said (2).

Agree. 2 is a tracker variant (normally, the tracker also learns who the chosen character targetted).

[Seol]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"](1), with or without knowing who targetted him[/quote]"Standard" watcher learns who targetted him - just knowing he was targetted is much less useful than the analog tracker variant knowing a player targetted someone but not who.

[Seol]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"][quote="Seol"][quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"](1), with or without knowing who targetted him[/quote]"Standard" watcher learns who targetted him - just knowing he was targetted is much less useful than the analog tracker variant knowing a player targetted someone but not who.[/quote]The "Standard" Watcher is used as both knowing and not knowing who targetted him. It's just what the mod preffered to pick. They're both perfectly fine roles.[/quote]They're both fine, but I hardly ever see the latter version. It isn't used nearly as regularly - "Watcher" virtually

always

means they know who targetted their target. That's why I said that's the "standard" version, it's not a value judgment on either role.

[Seol]

I voted 2, but I meant 1. I'm surprised that article has been incorrect for so long.

What the wiki said was what watcher had been considered to be, as far as i can make out, since the founding of the site (i actually read old games to confirm this). That a bunch of people came along and tried to redefine the role does not render the wiki 'wrong.'

And yes, I know i'm in a minority of one here.

It renders the wiki 'wrong' if they were successful. I'm not saying that's the way it

should

be, but in this respect the Wiki is analagous to a dictionary. Dictionaries don't define language, they document it - similarly, the Wiki should use the definitions for roles as they are commonly understood.

That's why this thread was necessary - to ensure that the Wiki represented the Watcher as understood by the community, not just by Stoof. If you're in a minority of one, that doesn't make you wrong about what a Watcher should be - as long as you accept that you're 'wrong' about what a Watcher

currently

is (wrong in inverted commas because a) you are under no illusions that your opinion and that of others differs and b) what is 'wrong' and 'right' here is not a matter of merit but consensus).

edit: My point here, clumsily made, is that 'wrong' isn't really the appropriate word here. More accurate to say that because a number of people redefined the Watcher to a role that makes more intuitive sense - one who watches their target, with the previous role already accounted for under the umbrella of Tracker - the Wiki was rendered not wrong, but out of date.