Proposal: Aside from wishes, the Djinni does nothing, so…
Failed 7-7-6. Half or fewer votes for.—alethiophile
Adminned at 17 Dec 2009 02:31:10 UTC
Add a rule, “Possession”:
As a weekly action, provided their power is greater than one, the Djinni may take any action as defined by the dynastic rules for a player of their choice, with the sole exception of making a wish. Any effects on gamestate are applied as if that player had taken the action. The Djinni must then make a post to the blog stating the action taken, and by what player.
If at least half the EVCs on this proposal contain the phrase “More often, please” then replace “weekly” in the above rule with “daily”.
If at least half the EVCs on this proposal contain the phrase “Self-wishing” then remove the text “, with the sole exception of making a wish” from the above rule.
A traditional Djinn power.
Core rules are blocked to prevent potential abuse.
Comments
tecslicer:
Who is the “their power” the player or the Djinn?
Ienpw III:
That’s more ambiguous than I intended. If it’s unclear to others I’ll repropose.
tecslicer:
Just asking, because the Djinn can have no power.
Ienpw III:
It was intended to refer to the Djinni.
tecslicer:
Klisz:
Klisz:
CoV
because of the word “player”. You mean “adventurer”.
alethiophile:
I like the idea, but there would have to be a way to change the Djinni’s power to finite; currently, wishes can’t do that.
Klisz:
@alethiophile: If he’s in the Lamp, it’s 0.
Scaramouche:
alethiophile:
@Darth: Oh, that’s true. /me facepalms.
CoV:
Also, presumably you could wish for the Djinni to possess someone. Hmmm… Will this be allowed?
alethiophile:
@scaramouche: I think we can safely assume that infinity is greater than one. :P
Bucky:
Strong
Josh:
Kevan:
Ornithopter:
The use of “player” instead of “Adventurer” means the Djinni can possess himself and perform an extra weekly (or daily) action. Of course, the Djinni currently has no daily or weekly actions to take.
SingularByte:
Darknight:
Oze:
Klisz:
CoV
per Ornithopter.
Hix:
NoOneImportant:
I might vote For on a reworded version.
TrumanCapote:
Ienpw III:
There is now a reworded fix. Vote FOR both if you like the fix, as it does nothing if this fails.
Wakukee:
Ienpw III:
Failing 3-5, but NoOneImportant and Darth Cliche may choose to vote FOR, as there’s now a fix.
There are 8 unresolved DEFs on this proposal.
Quorum is 13.
NoOneImportant:
I’ll change my vote if it looks like the Fix is likely to pass.
Ienpw III:
It’s passing 6-1
NoOneImportant:
I guess that’s OK… although 3 more against votes would sink it…
CoV
Klisz:
CoV
*sigh*
Ienpw III:
As Wakukee is not voting, everyone voting DEG should change votes (but only if you vote FOR).
digibomber:
Kevan:
Ornithopter:
Because a proposal 3 spaces down the queue looks like it might pass, which is a weird position to have to take.
spikebrennan:
ais523:
NoOneImportant:
Dear god… can anyone code up an auto-vote-counting script? ;)
Ornithopter:
I can’t, but I can count the votes, so someone else won’t have to when this times out.
FOR - 6
alethiophile
Darth Cliche
Ienpw III(proposer)
NoOneImportant
Ornithopter
tecslicer
AGAINST - 7
ais523
digibomber
Hix
Kevan
Scaramouche
spikebrennan
Truman Capote
DEF (no vote) - 6
Bucky
Darknight
Josh
Oze
SingularByte
Wakukee
NO VOTE - 5
Apathetic Lizardman
Dustin
Falkuon
Nausved
Qwazukee
Nausved: