Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Proposal: Good riddance, Puck

Adminned at 22 May 2009 21:12:03 UTC

Part 1:

If there exists a rule entitled “Social Structure”, then add a subrule to it with the following text:

Grudges.
There is a GNDT column called “Grudge” whose legal values are the names of all non-Host Contestants.  A Contestant is said to have a Grudge against any one or more Contestants named in eir Grudge column.  A Contestant may not simultaneously have a Grudge against, and Support, a particular other Contestant: if any change in Gamestate required or permitted by the Ruleset would, but for this sentence, cause a Contestant to simultaneously have a Grudge against, and Support, a particular other Contestant, then the Grudge will exist and the Support will revert to its default value).

Part 2:

Change the sentence in the rule “Social Structure” that presently reads:

A Contestant’s Support defaults to the Contestant immediately below them in the GNDT, skipping the Host, with the bottom Contestant defaulting to the top Contestant.

so that it reads:

A Contestant’s Support defaults to the Contestant immediately below them in the GNDT, skipping the Host and any Contestant whom the Contestant has a Grudge against, with the bottom Contestant defaulting to the top Contestant.

Deliberately omitting the mechanics of how one can acquire or lose a Grudge.  This can be fleshed out later.

Fails with 10 :against: and 5 :for:

Comments

Kevan:

05-20-2009 20:28:59 UTC

against This sounds a little too similar to the existing “Vote” statistic (although “Grudge” is a much better name for it).

Ienpw III:

05-20-2009 20:33:42 UTC

for Yup, it’s good

spikebrennan:

05-20-2009 20:35:00 UTC

Perhaps there can be an amendment such that you can only Vote for someone that you have a Grudge against (but you can simultaneously have a Grudge against several other Contestants).

Kevan:

05-20-2009 20:43:00 UTC

Oh, I didn’t read it as being against multiple contestants (“whose legal values are the names of all non-Host Contestants” suggested otherwise). I guess that’s okay, so long as we keep it to the right-hand edge of the GNDT to stop it offsetting the columns too much.

for

Influenza:

05-20-2009 21:21:50 UTC

for

Yoda:

05-20-2009 21:38:24 UTC

against No need for another statistic that is so similar to Vote.

Yoda:

05-20-2009 21:39:12 UTC

Also, it could potentially make the GNDT columns unnecessarily large.

ais523:

05-20-2009 21:46:08 UTC

against I’m inclined to agree with Yoda; having three social-interaction statistics is a bit much, especially when two of them do much the same thing.

Klisz:

05-20-2009 21:46:52 UTC

for

Klisz:

05-20-2009 21:48:39 UTC

CoV against  per ais; if he doesn’t like it then neither do I.

Also, I posted at the same time as him.

Ienpw III:

05-20-2009 21:53:53 UTC

cov against

Qwazukee:

05-20-2009 22:09:06 UTC

for

Darknight:

05-20-2009 22:18:53 UTC

imperial

Ienpw III:

05-20-2009 23:08:20 UTC

Upon further reflection…
CoV again
for

smith:

05-21-2009 04:34:31 UTC

against

delta:

05-21-2009 08:35:38 UTC

against

arthexis:

05-21-2009 15:33:10 UTC

against

Bucky:

05-21-2009 16:57:42 UTC

imperial

SingularByte:

05-22-2009 08:44:13 UTC

against