We had a big argument over this.

[Kaznaka]

I think this is the key difference then. Gotta ask yourself one more question: can it be g3 if g3 is possibly layered already?

if the g3 was already in line to be played from some earlier clues then it would make no sense no. but i don't see how that might be relevant as then it would be a bad clue either way. it's not a card that can be played and also promps no other cards to be played. worst case is it might disrupt the layers, best case is it does nothing apart from being confusing.

i can imagine the possibility of it to be a trash card, layering the g3, but definitely not in the given game situation because g1g2 were still to be played (and what green trash could it be then?). also g4g5 should probably be known/tagged for that to work.

According to you, was the g3 in Capy's hand playable at the time the clue was given? If the answer is yes, then you gotta consider the possibility that it was layered.

A simple example with similar logic, player 3 has r1, b1, w1, g1 in hand, and player 4 is given a 2 clue. Player 4 has to consider that their 2 is possibly a g2 and wait.

[Silene]

According to you, was the g3 in Capy's hand playable at the time the clue was given? If the answer is yes, then you gotta consider the possibility that it was layered.

Yes, it was in a playable position when the clue was given. So yes, i would consider the possibility that it is layered. After careful consideration I realize that there is no option for the card that I hold to connect to the layered g3 because I cannot have g4 and there is no g4 in play position. So after having considered it I will dismiss that thought.

A simple example with similar logic, player 3 has r1, b1, w1, g1 in hand, and player 4 is given a 2 clue. Player 4 has to consider that their 2 is possibly a g2 and wait.

In this situation I would also consider layered (or I think this is usually named clandestine finesse) and realize that my 2 might actually connect to the g1 so here it works and I will wait for g1. Here it works out. This situation is different.
However if I saw both g2 in another player's hand or we had already lost both of them or I had negative green on my 2, then I would not wait for g1 but play after w1.

[springiest]

* g1 and g2 plays, so it has to be g3, g4, g5
* it can't be g4 because both of those are somewhere else
* it can't be g5 because g4 is not in finesse position, so g4 can't be part of finesse.
> therefore has to be g3.

this is the clearest explanation so far of why BTTF should (by default) assume they have g3 and not g5. sure, g3 is layered in capy's hand, but that only allows BTTF to have g4! having g5 would require BOTH g3 & g4 being on finesse (layered or otherwise), which is not the case here.

if u were trying to avoid clueing the g4's directly (which is reasonable, but tbh not necessary), the best clue imo would be "5" to BTTF. after capy responds with g2 it cannot be k5, and negative color prevents it from being m5 (which would otherwise be possible if BTTF's hand was m3 [b1] m[5] m4). therefore BTTF would immediately know it must be g5, and that g4 in diart's hand needs to be fixed! this is very strong because now TWO players can do the fix instead of just u.

[Michael417]

clue the number

[shccer]

is'nt the clued 3m a problem for this clue? from the player holding 3m's pov he could very likel have 3g so i get why the person holding g5 would think it makes more sense for you to clue him 3g tthen to cause a bomb.