Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Proposal: Abuse the Force

Failed 13-7. Quorum against.—alethiophile

Adminned at 16 Dec 2009 18:32:26 UTC

Add a dynastic rule “Self Flagellation” with the following text:

If any adventurer takes a game action, that requires or uses power and does not already include a penalty, that adventurer shall increase their corruption by the amount of power required or used, whichever is greater.

My understanding is that power does not corrupt unless it is used, and/or insufficiently punished when abused.

Comments

Ienpw III:

12-15-2009 02:59:04 UTC

for

Klisz:

12-15-2009 03:36:46 UTC

You don’t need to add the “Flavor text” formatting. Just put it in the box.  for

Scaramouche:

12-15-2009 04:29:04 UTC

for  The “requires or uses power” bit seems a bit vague (understandable in that nobody knows how it’s going to work yet), but not enough to sink the proposal.

alethiophile:

12-15-2009 05:26:44 UTC

AFAICT, “requires or uses power” means that the action either subtracts a certain number from your Power (“uses”), or simply requires a certain minimum Power value to carry out (“requires”). It seems unambiguous enough to me, if a bit unclear superficially.
for

Bucky:

12-15-2009 07:09:06 UTC

imperial

Josh:

12-15-2009 07:25:00 UTC

imperial

Kevan:

12-15-2009 09:10:59 UTC

for

Ornithopter:

12-15-2009 09:45:32 UTC

imperial
“Penalty” seems much vaguer to me than “requires or uses power”.

SingularByte:

12-15-2009 10:59:35 UTC

for

Darknight:

12-15-2009 12:59:59 UTC

for Though the rule’s name made me cring lol.

Oze:

12-15-2009 15:52:16 UTC

for

NoOneImportant:

12-15-2009 17:13:29 UTC

against

I agree with Orn, “penalty” is too vague for this rule to be functional.

TrumanCapote:

12-15-2009 17:55:07 UTC

imperial

Ornithopter:

12-15-2009 20:36:37 UTC

against CoV

Ienpw III:

12-15-2009 20:40:37 UTC

against

Wakukee:

12-15-2009 21:27:40 UTC

against

tecslicer:

12-15-2009 23:55:39 UTC

Yeah, I don’t like the word penalty, being so undefined, but I figure that since there are no power based actions right now, I will have enough time to propose a definition to add to the rule. I tried to phrase it vaguely enough to be usable. Too much I guess.

tecslicer:

12-16-2009 02:51:39 UTC

Something like “For the purposes of this rule a game action is not considered to have a penalty unless the rule that enacted the aforementioned game action, specifically states that it does have a penalty.”

digibomber:

12-16-2009 05:50:19 UTC

against Remove the penalty clause. Else it is good.

spikebrennan:

12-16-2009 15:56:57 UTC

imperial

ais523:

12-16-2009 16:15:02 UTC

against because it isn’t obvious what it does.

Hix:

12-16-2009 17:49:09 UTC

against

alethiophile:

12-17-2009 01:03:53 UTC

Stands 12-8 against. CoV.  against
Now stands 13-7 against.