I actually have a different concern, and it once again dips into conspiracies. Eevee, now confirmed town, had reason to believe there was a cult in the town (caveat: I think Eevee only said he knew of a recruiting faction -- it might not be a cult at all). Drinking from a glass of wine certainly seems like something that would be done as initiation into some secret order. That Galz started with it could be a reference to RMMI, where Galz was a cult leader. Then again, that would be a rather overt reference, not as subtle as ehunt's drunkenness. Well, maybe subtle isn't the right word -- "unexpected" or "meta" might be a better description. Anyway, keep in mind that a "drink our wine" initiation would work just as well for Masonry or even a Neighborhood as it would for a Cult. And again, this is conspiracy theory stuff.
Anyway, the possible danger there is the main reason I'd be interested in letting ehunt drink ALL the wine. I have a huge town read on ehunt (caveat: might be because he defended me on day 1, which is not the best way to get reads) so I will sheep him on this particular matter. Since ehunt seems to believe the wine is a force for good, then I will consider it as such until I have reason to believe otherwise.
I think if the wine were initiation into a cult, it would be borderline bastard mod. The description I received of what the wine does (initiates a subgame where possibly the descriptions of the two players are revealed to each other) matched Galz's more or less on the nose (I say more or less because my description of the subgame was vaguer). I guess Robz didn't say "this is an exhaustive list of what the wine does," but still...
Nonetheless, out of heightened paranoia - let's change the default town response to an offer to be
don't drink. There's one other thing the wine does if it's given to me: if a town-aligned power role gives me the wine, I involuntarily "blab" the power role to everyone. If a VT or scum gives me the wine, this doesn't happen. I do not understand the flavor that differentiates between VT/scum and power-role-town, but the rule is what it is: it's basically strictly anti-town, since it doesn't serve to differentiate scum from town, it only exposes town PRs.
Yesterday I didn't want to disclose this because I thought it was possible that scum would give me the wine in spite of my "don't give me the wine" post and argue that they gave me the wine because they didn't believe me. I wanted to be able, if this happened, to catch them in a lie by making them false-claim a power role. But this is no longer necessary, since it seems everyone agrees that whoever gives me the wine is just definitely scum. So it means we can just make an exception to that rule: if you are a town power role, and you are about to be lynched, and you happen to have the wine, you can give it to me to get your townitude mod-confirmed. It seems unlikely that all three of those things are going to happen simultaneously, but just so people know. Does this make sense to people? I feel inarticulate as I type this.
I don't think the wine is
that pro-town, since it only has a 50% chance of working and descriptions are not giveaways to alignment. So losing it won't be the end of the world. We can agree that VTs should give it to me under no circumstances and town PRs should only give it to me if they're about to be lynched.
By the way, I'm nearly certain that Robz designed my role before he chose my alignment.
What follows is a long "proof" of that fact, the tl;dr is bolded below. I think I may have said this yesterday, but let me explain in detail.
Yesterday I had debated starting a case on eevee on the following grounds: eevee got special role info indicating the existence of a cult. Now, why would Robz give that to a townie? A townie will just rat out the cult (as eevee did). The only way it's interesting is if eevee is scum and has to debate whether to let the town in on the extra knowledge or not.
The reason I didn't start the case is that I realized my own role had a similar weird catch: why not just tell the wine-owner not to give me the wine (as I - thought - I did!)? Yeh, if the wine-owner is scum, he'll just give me the wine, but then everyone will know he's scum because I just announced to the whole topic not to give me the wine. After I posted I then wondered if there was maybe a timing issue - the point being that scum could give me the wine and NK me before I could say who gave me the wine. I worried that I had screwed up, but at the time I was certain that Glooble had the bottle and relatively certain that we had communicated this fact between the two of us successfully (now I feel a little like one of those schizophrenic music fans who thinks the band is encoding personal messages...).
Anyway, I think my sort of "personality-related extra" (and presumably also eevee's) is designed to have interesting strategic value both for scum and for town, and that's why there's some "wait, why can't I break this by just doing x?" aspects of both these roles. Samesies for Axxle's double-vote. In other words, I think that
Robz developed personality-related extras, then randomized alignment. This also seems like the fairest way to both "incorporate people's personalities" and still have a game that's not broken (nobody wants to have a "so-and-so's a jerk, so he's probably mafia" argument).