Thursday, October 27, 2011

Meta II - choose your favourite philosopher! Plato for dummies edition

Add a new Rule to the Ruleset, named “You think”:

In this chaotic time, Players feel the need to bring order in their life, finding some firm points to build on. That’s the why all Players have (also “are a Followers of”, “Follow”) exactly one Philosophy, that defaults at Sensualism. The only valid values of a Player’s Philosophy are those listed as titles of the subrules to this Rule. As a daily action any Player may change their own Philosophy by spending 1 SP. Any Proposal that would amend the Subrules to this Rule is a Core Proposal.

Create a new Subrule to that rule, called “Sensualism”:

The Followers of Sensualism (also Sensualists) live a happy life. Whenever a Dynastic Proposal they authored is enacted, they gain 1 SP plus 1 SP for every 6 Open Proposals at that time.

Create a new Subrule to rule “You Think”, called “Skepticism”:

The Followers of Skepticism (also Skeptics) are not considered Players for the purposes of any Dynastic rule, except “You think” and its subrules. Whenever a Player stops Following Skepticism they set their SP to 1, and the other values (Philosophy excluded) to the default values for new players.
If a Skeptic has been following Skepticism for more that 36 consecutive hours, they start saying funny things and any Player may change that Skeptic’s Philosophy to Sensualism for the sake of decency.

Create a new Subrule to rule “You Think”, called “Marxism”:

Whenever one third (rounded up) of the Players is a Follower of Marxism (also Marxist), any Marxist may do a Revolution, making all the Employers lose 1 SP and all the Employed gain 1SP and then changing all the Employees’ Employments to Free Agent. They should also make a Blog post written in red only. Only Employees may become Marxist, but any Player may be Marxist.

Create a new Subrule to rule “You Think”, called “Heraclitism”:

There may not be more than one Follower of Heraclitism (also Heraclitus) at any time. Whenever a player Deidles, if their Philosophy would become “Heraclitism”, it is set to “Sensualism” instead, as a punition for stopping the flow.
Heraclitus may not post Proposals, but as a daily action they may vote to Veto any proposal as they were the Emperor by Transferring 2 SP to the author of that proposal. Changing one’s own Philosophy to Heraclitism cost 1 additional SP than what stated in Rule “You Think”.

Create a new Subrule to rule “You Think”, called “Platonism”:

The Followers of Platonism (also Platonists) have one additional values to keep track of: Chariot Control, that is an integer comprised between -1 and 6 included.
When a Player becomes a Follower of Platonism they shall set their Chariot Control to 1. When the Chariot Control of a Platonism Follower’s becomes -1, they start Following Sensualism.
Whenever a Follower of Platonism has a Dynastic Proposal they authored Failed, they lose 1 point of Chariot Control, for pursuing honour and glory rather than Good.
Whenever a Follower of Platonism comments on a Dynastic Proposal using a Voting icon, and they already commented on that Proposal using another, they lose 1 point of Chariot Control, for being impatient and not thinking properly the first time. They may only lose one Chariot Control Point per Proposal this way.
Whenever a Follower of Platonism has a Dynastic Proposal they authored Enacted, and they were Followers of Platonism when they posted it, they gain 1 Chariot Control Point, for using Philosophy for the Good of the Republic, but they do not gain any SP for the enactment of Proposals they Authored or they are Represented by. That would be so demo.
As a daily action a Follower of Platonism whose Chariot Control is exactly 0 may Step Out of that Cave by spending 1 SP to gain 1 point of Chariot Control.
When counting votes on Proposals, all the abstaining Players are divided in as many groups as the Platonists that voted on that proposal with an EVC including their current Chariot Control value. Every group shall contain as many members as each Platonist’s Chariot Control, and every group is considered to be voting the same as the Platonist. If there are not enough abstaining players to fill all these groups, democracy wins and the abstaining players will be considered to be simply abstaining (i.e. not counting their votes).
Employees may only Vote DEF on Dynastic Proposals that were posted by Platonism Followers. Platonism Followers should title their Proposal beginning with “Elite:”.
Employees may not become Followers of Platonism. If a Follower of Platonism becomes an Employee, they become Followers of Stakhanovism, if such a Philosophy is legal, otherwise they start Following Sensualism.

Here is what I’d like this dynasty to look like.
I do like the current SP mechanics, and the rapresentation and (less) the employing system.
But we have a huge amount of players and we’re starting what looks like a grinding machine. Nobody will never need to get an Employment in a long time. Then we’ll have players hoarding SP and players Idling because playing to pay back a debt looks not fun. I’d like to see this dynasty being winnable (?) by a just-deidled player, not by scam, but using fantasy and attention, in the intended game mechanics (by scam is cool too, and by a non-just-deidled player is even better).Yes, many rules mean confusion, and time spent to read the ruleset. But I want this to be a game of possibilities, not of restrictions. If this means risking to break the game, I’m ready to risk this, it’s been broken many times in the past, last time during a dynasty that many seemed to consider boring as hell.
At least let’s have fun.
So here is the draft of my proposal, I’mm too tired to check it properly, please just let me know what you do think. I don’t want to waste more time in writing useless things.
I’m starting to think that some Players really are Rules. :)

Comments

Winner:

27-10-2011 23:21:05 UTC

In my opinion, Platonism should be simplified to fit with the other mechanics.

southpointingchariot:

28-10-2011 00:43:59 UTC

The length and complexity of platonism makes me very hesitant to vote for this.  imperial for now.

scshunt:

28-10-2011 00:45:32 UTC

Not a proposal

arthexis: he/him

28-10-2011 01:28:52 UTC

Sounds like a theme for another dynasty.

Ely:

28-10-2011 14:41:47 UTC

[coppro] it was supposed to be so.
I don’t think I’m going to repropose it, since there’s no support.
Platonism is long, but it is not complex. Wait for Kant if you want complexity.
[art] Well I guess you are right. But I wanted this to be the theme for this one. It actually fitted quite good with the other mechanics.

BTW, maybe Skepticism is game breaking.

Pavitra:

28-10-2011 17:13:41 UTC

against the grammar, but for the flavor.