Nice idea, but it needs a stronger drawback - losing cogs isn’t a problem if you don’t have any to start with. (And 75% of players don’t have any cogs, at the time of writing.)

per Kevan.

Also “As a weekly action, a Commoner may attempt to burgle the workshop of another Commoner. ” does not sounds that nice, because a Commoner may own more than one workshop.

@Kevan:  Very good point.  Any suggestions as to what would be more appropriate?

@Keba:  Although the rules DO allow a commoner to possess more than one workshop, there is currently no official way to actually gain another one, or any benefit to having multiple workshops.  I’d be quite happy to propose an amendment to this rule if it was accepted and the need arose, although any suggestions as to how you would prefer it to be phrased would be appreciated.

You should also specify what do you want to steal from whom, before you steal. If you just do a 1DICE3 and a 2 or 3 is returned, you can decide which player you want to give your Cogs…

Mabye you should lose 1/3 of what you tried to steal?

Also, another bug: This makes Scavenging inpossible. As Scavenging is as profitable as stealing, but has no risk, noone would try to steal then. We should either change “as a weekly action” to “Once per week” or (and i prefer this solution) increase the amount of the stealable ressources.

@lordcooper: I know you cant have more than one workshop now, but this Rule should assume you can have more than one, because then there is no later change needed.

“If this would result in either player having an illegal value, they instead receive the maximum legal amount of that specific resource.”

The maximum legal amount of any resource is infinity. Also, it doesn’t specify who ‘they’ is.

You might want to rephrase this using the keyword ‘transfer’ (defined in the glossary).

Ah, well, I thougt “weekly action” was defined different. There is no problem with Scavenging then…

Self-killed

Will repropose later.

Feel free to leave any suggestions in the meantime.