Saturday, March 13, 2010

Proposal: Blueprint: I will pay with Gems

Timed out 3 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 16 Mar 2010 09:47:59 UTC

Add a new subrule titled “Magical Transducer” to Rule 2.2 (Inventions):

Cost: 7 Gems Power Requirement: -10
This Part has no effect beyond its negative Power Requirement.

Are 7 Gems a lot? I do not know…

posted by Keba at 13 Mar 2010 23:06:58 UTC Comments (8)

Comments

Darknight:

03-14-2010 03:33:03 UTC

imperial

Klisz:

03-14-2010 03:39:21 UTC

against  Too expensive; I’d say -15 Power Requirement at the least.

Klisz:

03-14-2010 03:39:35 UTC

Also. This is steampunk, not magic.

Keba:

03-14-2010 07:47:35 UTC

I was discussing with ais, which amount of Gems should be ok. At first, I thought of 2 Gems…

If you weren’t a family member, you could trade 10 Iron and 7 Coal for these 7 Gems. (if you never traded with Purpblebeard that week before or else a bit cheaper.

Also, there is a Part, which costs 5 Iron and has a Power Requirement of 5. Compare this parts. I think, meanwhile, this one is not that expensive.

Additionally, as Kevan stated elsewhere, most Parts should be useless most times. If they weren’t, they would be simply part of each Invention, which wouldn’t mean much fun… So, if you think it’s too expensive, where is the problem with this one?

Kevan:

03-14-2010 17:11:02 UTC

against We already have two Iron-based Parts which do nothing but reduce Power Requirement. I think it’s more interesting if different resources are used for different things.

Qwazukee:

03-15-2010 06:51:38 UTC

for

ais523:

03-15-2010 10:00:36 UTC

imperial

Purplebeard:

03-15-2010 12:25:30 UTC

for