Friday, December 31, 2021

Proposal: Spoiled Lineage

Timed out, 6 votes to 1. Enacted by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 03 Jan 2022 08:11:12 UTC

Repeal the rule “Imperial Lineage”

Four people are actively playing this dynasty and two of them can’t actually win it.

This would both give me and spyder more of a reason to keep playing, and also allow new people who think the dynasty seems interesting but weren’t playing last dynasty to join us.

Proposal: A Quarter-Mile at a Time

Timed out and failed, 1-2. Josh

Adminned at 02 Jan 2022 20:18:26 UTC

Replace the text ” If there is a Final Destination Stop” in the rule “Road Map” with the following:

If there is a Stop with the type “Endpoint”

Append to the rule “Roadside Tat” the following:

If one Tripper has a Will greater than another Tripper, and both Trippers occupy the same Stop, and that Stop does not have the type “Endpoint”: then the Tripper with the greater Will of the two may, as a Daily Action, pay the other Tripper 3 Coins to exchange a Souvenier with them on a one-for-one basis.

idle request

hopefully for just a few days, im sick & dont wanna slow the game down

Thursday, December 30, 2021

Proposal: Kiosk Seeding

Timed out, 3 FOR, 4 AGAINST. Failed by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 02 Jan 2022 00:48:50 UTC

If https://blognomic.com/archive/dual_carriageway has passed:

Select three different random stops, none of which are Starting Points or Roadside Attraction, and none of which already have the Kiosk type. Add the Kiosk type to each of those three stops.

If it did not pass:

Select three different random stops, none of which are Starting Points or Roadside Attraction. Change the type of the three selected slots to be a Kiosk

Proposal: Tripper Clipper

Reaches a quorum. Passes 5-0—Clucky

Adminned at 01 Jan 2022 19:19:26 UTC

Add a new rule to the ruleset, called Scrapbook, with the following text:

If a Tripper is at the Final Destination stop and possesses three Souveniers that have ‘Selfie of myself’ and the name of a Roadside Attraction in their names then they have achieved victory.

If Proposal: Are We Done Yet? was not enacted then remove “is at the Final Destination stop and” from the above rule.

Overdue a VC I think.

Proposal: Double Decker

Times Out. Passes 4-1—Clucky

Adminned at 01 Jan 2022 19:15:45 UTC

Move everyone who occupies Stop 1 (TDO’s House) to Stop 32 (Purgatoryhausen).

Move everyone else to Stop 26 (Arveg Lane).

Looks like we all get one move and will then have to wait for the present-but-not-playing crew to time out in 48 hours’ time, on January 1st. Maybe we should just nudge everyone forward to more or less where we were before the reset, at proposal speed.

Proposal: Dual Carriageway

Timed Out. Passes 4-0—Clucky

Adminned at 01 Jan 2022 19:11:52 UTC

In “Road Map”, replace “may have a Type” with:-

may have a number of Types

Replace “and a random Type from among those named in the rule “Stop Effects”” with:-

and two random Types from among those named in the rule “Stop Effects” (unless both selected Types are the same, or one is a Roadside Attraction, in which case the second Type is not applied)

Replace “Stop’s Type” with “Stop’s Types” throughout the rule “Stop Effects”.

Doubling up features, to make the journey more interesting.

Proposal: Chaos Project

Timed Out. Passes 4-0—Clucky

Adminned at 01 Jan 2022 19:08:13 UTC

Reword the text “Each Tripper has a Location, which is the number and Name of one of the Stops” in the rule “Road Map” to:

Each Tripper has a Location, which is one of the Stops

Reword the text “If a Tripper’s Location is the number and name of a Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop” in the same rule to:

If a Tripper’s Location is a given Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop.

Reword the text “If there are X Trippers whose Location is the name of a given Stop” in the same rule to:

If there are X Trippers whose Location is a given Stop

Reword the text “a Tripper’s Location may not change to the Name of a Stop” in the same rule to:

a Tripper’s Location may not change to a Stop

The name-and-number requirement for Locations has now caused CfJ-able issues twice; I think this is more flexible as an alternative.

Wednesday, December 29, 2021

Day Trippers

chiiika, Jumble and redtara all become idle, after 10, 10 and 7 days without activity respectively. Quorum becomes 5.

Proposal: Are We Done Yet?

Times out and passes, 5-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 31 Dec 2021 19:21:46 UTC

Add a subrule entitled “Final Destination” to the rule “Road Map” as follows:

Once during the current Dynasty, the GPS may privately randomly select a number between 33 and 66, inclusive, and add that number to the Order number of the most recently created Stop to yield the Final Destination Number; the GPS should then announce via a blog post that the Final Destination Number has been generated.

If the GPS would create a Stop with an Order number that is equal to the Final Destination Number, then instead, they must create a Stop that has the Name “Final Destination,” the Type “Endpoint,” and a Capacity equal to the number of Trippers.

Append to the paragraph in the rule “Road Map” that begins “If every Tripper (ignoring those at a Starting Point; unless all Trippers are at a Starting Point) has fewer than 13 Stops after their Location…” the following:

If there is a Final Destination Stop in the list of Stops, the GPS may repeal this paragraph.

I’d like to make it a range of 1-666, but I truly don’t believe I can come up with (possibly) that many stop names.

Tuesday, December 28, 2021

Proposal: The Early Bird

Reached quorum 3 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 30 Dec 2021 16:03:54 UTC

In “Movement”, replace “A Tripper is Waiting if there exists a Stop before their current Location (ignoring all Starting Points) occupied by another Tripper; otherwise they are Ready.” with:-

A Tripper is Waiting if there exists a Stop before their current Location (ignoring all Starting Points) occupied by another Tripper, or if their current Location is occupied by a Tripper with a higher Will who is not among their Buddies; otherwise they are Ready.

Making Will a tiebreaker for who moves first from a shared location.

Proposal: False Memorabilia Syndrome

Timed out 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 30 Dec 2021 16:01:34 UTC

Remove “As a daily action, a Tripper may spend two of their Souveniers to gain 1 Souvenier with a type of their choice and from a Stop of their choice.” from Roadside Tat.

Add a Parking Effect:-

* ‘’‘Kiosk’‘’: A Parker may lose a Souvenier from a Stop other than this one, to gain 2 Coins. A Parker may pay 4 Coins to generate a Souvenier from any Roadside Attraction and acquire it.

Not sure about combining a Pin and some Dried Leaves to make a Coffee Mug, or anything else. This puts Roadside Attraction Souveniers in stock at a few stops on the road, and still allows the two-for-one swap.

Monday, December 27, 2021

Idle me please and thank you

Visiting my mother’s house for the next week and I’m not sure how much I’ll be able to get online, so idling for a bit is probably best.

Proposal: Hell’s Biggest Arbitrary Seed

Times out 5-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 30 Dec 2021 15:49:09 UTC

Add a new rule to the ruleset, called Attraction Seed:

Once in the dynasty, at their earliest convenience, the GPS must carry out the following atomic action:

*Generate three Attraction Stops, as per the rule Roadside Attractions, without appending them to the list of Stops;
*Randomly select three numbers between 19 and 29;
*Insert the newly generated Attraction Stops into the list of Stops, each immediately after the Stop at one of the numerical positions generated in the second step of this action, in the order in which they were generated, and then renumbering the list accordingly;
*Repeal this rule.

Proposal: Obol

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Dec 2021 11:45:30 UTC

Increase each Tripper’s Coins by 1.

Something to vote on after the hiatus, so that players don’t time out unnecessarily.

Wednesday, December 22, 2021

Proposal: [Core]

Timed out 1 vote to 5. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Dec 2021 18:40:28 UTC

Remove the text “This extends to exerting full control over the actions of another Tripper, defined here as the controlled Tripper’s game behavior being functionally indistinguishable from if the controlling Tripper was logged into their account and playing through it, over a period of more than a day.” from Fair Play.

wtf does “functionally indistinguishable” even mean?

I know this was only recently passed, but it’s terrible rule writing, and if this proposal fails I will show you exactly why.

Proposal: Night Bus

Timed out 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Dec 2021 18:40:00 UTC

Move every Tripper who is at the 15th Stop (Your Ex’s House) to the 29th Stop (Purgatoryhausen).

The six players asleep at Stop 15 had their 48-hour timeout clock reset when a new player joined and moved. Waiting that long again is going to take us into Seasonal Downtime, so perhaps we should just move them on.

Proposal: The Hitchhiker’s Guide

Timed out 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Dec 2021 18:38:13 UTC

To the start of “Carpooling”, add:-

A Tripper may only add another Tripper to their Alliances if they occupy the same Stop.

In “Roadside Tat”, replace “Trippers may, with mutual consent, freely exchange Souveniers” with:-

Trippers who occupy the same Stop may, with mutual consent, freely exchange Souveniers

For each Tripper named in an Alliance who does not occupy the same Stop as the Tripper who has that Alliance, remove that name from that Alliance.

If you want to share a car with someone, you have to get to it first.

Wednesday, December 22, 2021

Proposal: Christmas Coups are so eight years ago

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Dec 2021 17:20:23 UTC

In the rule “Movement” after “If a Tripper has been continuously Ready for at least the past 48 hours” add ” and BlogNomic has not been in Hiatus for any of the past 48 hours”

Proposal: [Core] Timeout time out

Timed out 2 votes to 4. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Dec 2021 17:19:15 UTC

After

An Admin may render a Tripper Idle if that Tripper has asked to become Idle in an entry or comment from the past 96 hours (4 Days), or if that Tripper has not posted an entry or comment in the past 168 Hours (7 days)

add ” for which BlogNomic has not been in hiatus.”

Also what happens if we have a 7 day hiatus sometime?

New arrival request to be added as a formal player

On this day, 12/21/2021 I do humbly request, to be added as a player.

Monday, December 20, 2021

Proposal: Lethefrog

Timed out / quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Dec 2021 20:21:45 UTC

Append to the paragraph starting “If a Tripper’s Location is the number and name of a Stop…” in the rule “Road Map” the following:

A Location which has the Type “Starting Point” may be referred to as a Starting Point. A Tripper’s default Location is the Starting Point with the highest Order number among all Starting Points.

Reword the paragraph beginning “If a Tripper has been continuously Ready…” in the rule “Movement” as follows:

If a Tripper has been continuously Ready for at least the past 48 hours, then any other Tripper may move the Ready Tripper to the Starting Point with the highest Order number among all Starting Points. If a Tripper is occupying a Starting Point, then they may not Walk, and if they would Drive, they may only Drive to a Stop if that Stop is after a Stop occupied by at least one other Tripper.

Append to the list of Stops a new Location with the Name “Purgatoryhausen,” a Capacity of 30, and a Type of “Starting Point.”

If the text “then that Stop is Full and no other Trippers may have their Location set to that Stop” exists in the rule “Road Map” then reword it to

then that Stop is Full and no Tripper may Drive or Walk to that Stop

Proposal: Huell uell uell, what have we here

Timed out 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Dec 2021 20:18:00 UTC

If Proposal: Hu-hell Howser was not enacted, this proposal does nothing.

Otherwise, in the rule Roadside Tat, change “Trippers may freely exchange Souveniers on a one-for-one basis” to read

Trippers may, with mutual consent, freely exchange Souveniers with each other on a one-for-one basis.

In the rule Stop Effects, change Dark One to GPS.

Proposal: Tiredness Kills

Timed out 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Dec 2021 20:14:54 UTC

Add a new rule, “Will”:-

Each Tripper has a Will score, being a publicly-tracked number that defaults to 5. If a Tripper’s Will would be reduced below zero, it becomes zero.

A Tripper with a Will of zero cannot Drive.

To “Movement”, add before the final paragraph:-

If a Tripper is Ready, they may Walk by changing their Location to the first Stop after their current Stop which is not Full.

If “Hu-hell Howser” enacted, replace “the first Stop” with “the first Stop (excluding Attraction Stops)” in the paragraph added above.

In “Road Map”, replace “then no other Trippers may set their Location to that Stop” with:-

then that Stop is Full and no other Trippers may have their Location set to that Stop

Add two Arrival Effects to the list:

* ‘’‘Hazard’‘’: The Mover loses 1 Will.
* ‘’‘Respite’‘’: The Mover gains 1 Will.

Clucky’s straw poll on Discord for Hunger, Fuel or Endurance stats was well-received a week ago, but nobody’s picked it up since. Protosals! Here’s a take on Endurance.

Proposal: Hu-hell Howser

Timed out 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Dec 2021 20:08:59 UTC

Add the following as a new Stop Effect to the list in the rule Stop Effects:

* Roadside Attraction - x: This stop follows the rules for Roadside Attractions. When generating this stop the Dark One must change the x in the stop effect for this stop to an Attraction Name as directed by the rule Roadside Attractions.

Add a new subrule to the rule Road Map, called Roadside Attractions:

A Stop whose Stop Effect is ‘Roadside Attraction’ may be referred to as an Attraction Stop. When an Attraction Stop is generated, its Stop Effect must include an attraction name, which iss generated as follows: ‘Hell’s x y z’, where x is a superlative from the list of superlatives, y is an adjective from the list of adjectives, and z is a noun from the list of Souveniers, each randomly selected.

Roadside Attractions are hard to find and represent a significant detour from the Road Map. A Tripper may only Drive to an Attraction Stop if all of the following are true:
* The Attraction Stop to which they wish to Drive is not more than three Stops after their current position.
* They have in their posession a Souvenier from the Attraction Stop they wish to Drive to;
* They have at least one Buddy.

When their current Location is an Attraction Stop, a Tripper may only Drive to the following Stops:
* The stop numbered exactly one higher than the Attraction Stop in question;
* Any stop that is after their current location that has a Tailback or Blackspot Stop Effect.

While at a Roadside Attraction, if a Tripper generates a Souvenier they must disregard the Souvenier Generation rules contained in the rule Roadside Tat, and may instead add a Souvenier called ‘Selfie of myself and x at y’, where x is the number of Buddies at the same location as them and y is the name of the Roadside Attraction.

Add the following to the end of the rule Roadside Tat:

As a daily action, a Tripper may spend two of their Souveniers to gain 1 Souvenier with a type of their choice and from a Stop of their choice. Trippers may freely exchange Souveniers on a one-for-one basis.

Who doesn’t want to visit Hell’s Safest Flammable Stamp?

Sunday, December 19, 2021

Proposal: Nudge Nudge Nudge

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 21 Dec 2021 13:26:53 UTC

Replace the text “A Tripper is Waiting if there exists a Stop before their current Location (ignoring all Starting Points) occupied by another Tripper” in the rule “Movement” with

A Tripper is Waiting if there exist one or two Stops before their current Location (ignoring all Starting Points) which are each occupied by one or more Trippers

Proposal: Lousy T-Shirts

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 21 Dec 2021 13:26:29 UTC

Rename entries on the “Souveniers” wiki page as follows:

  • “Cup/Coffee Mug” to “Coffee Mug”
  • “Deck of Card” to “Deck of Cards”
  • “Kazoos” to “Kazoo”
  • “Pencil/Pen” to “Pen”
  • “Plate/Bowl” to “Plate”
  • “Purse/Backpack” to “Purse”

In “Roadside Tat”, and in all gamestate Souvenier names, replace “of x” with “from x”.

Fixing some other plurals and indecisive objects in a pastaless way, and changing “of” to “from”.

Sunday, December 19, 2021

Call for Judgment: False False Start

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 17:52:09 UTC

If https://blognomic.com/archive/false_start1 is still pending, fail it. If it has passed the rest of this CfJ does nothing.

In “Road Map” change “If a Tripper’s Location is the name of a Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop” to “If a Tripper’s Location is the number and name of a Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop”

Make all Trippers not Ready. Then return each Trippers Readiness status to its normal definition under the rules.

Providing an option to fix the rules without the reset.

Call for Judgment: False Start

Failed via the passage of “False False Start” by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 17:52:56 UTC

In “Road Map” change “If a Tripper’s Location is the name of a Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop” to “If a Tripper’s Location is the number and name of a Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop”

Make all Trippers not Ready. Then return each Trippers Readiness status to its normal definition under the rules.

Reset the location and coins of all Trippers to their default values.

I performed a scam where, because “occupy” was defined in such a way that no one actually could occupy any location, everyone moved right away because everyone was always ready because waiting required there to be someone occupying a location and you cannot occupy any locations.

Taking this opportunity to do a game reset feels the most fair.

ATIdle

ATMunn times out.

Quorum remains at 7.

Proposal: Slipstream

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Dec 2021 11:25:06 UTC

In “Road Map”, replace “defaulting to the Name of the first Stop in their numerical listed order” with:-

defaulting to the Stop immediately before the Stop occupied by the alphabetically earliest Ready Player (or the first Stop in their numerical listed order, if this is not possible)

Putting new players just behind the pack, rather than right back at the start where they’d get to scoop up everything.

Friday, December 17, 2021

Catnap++

Please idle me.

I unidled because fighting the dictatorship seemed fun, but now that the fight seems mostly over, and I don’t think I have the energy to fully participate in a dynasty. Sorry.

Proposal: Mystery Spot

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 18:20:57 UTC

To the first paragraph of “Road Map”, add:-

A Stop may also be referred to as a Spot.

For some reason I have to double-check this 90% of the times I go to write it, I guess because both are plausible words for a mark on a map, or a place you’d visit.

Proposal: Citrus Iteration [Appendix]

Times out 3-3. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 18:19:55 UTC

Change the Keyword definition of “Flavour Text” to the following:

Flavour Text is text that is a part of the Ruleset or Gamestate, but does not hold the meaning normally given to such text. Flavour Text is considered strictly a string of characters that does not need to be obeyed, does not define legal actions or specify Players by name, and is not interpreted as having any normal English meaning in the context of Blognomic gameplay.

Add a Keyword definition for “Label Text” as follows:

Label Text is text that is a part of the Ruleset or Gamestate, but has meaning within the game only inasmuch as it signifies a specific point of reference. Label Text does not need to be obeyed, does not define legal actions, and does not specify Players by name. Label Text may be referred to by other pieces of ruletext or gamestate, as long as its mentioning is direct and unambiguous (for example, enclosing the referenced text in quotation marks).

Replace the sentence “The names of rules and wiki pages (other than the Ruleset) are flavour text” in the Appendix rule “Names” with:

The names of rules and wiki pages (other than the Ruleset) are Label Text.

 

Taking a crack at this, starting from lemon’s fine work.

Friday, December 17, 2021

Proposal: Spooky Doll

Timed out 2 votes to 6. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 12:25:32 UTC

Add the following to “Roadside Tat”

A Souvenier may be Cursed. Whether or not a Souvenier is Cursed is privately tracked by the Tripper who holds that Souvenier and the GPS. Whenever a Tripper generates a Souvenier, the must secretly roll a DICE15. If the result is a 1, the Souvenier is Cursed. They must then privately inform the GPS that the Souvenier is Cursed. The GPS may not reveal if a Souvenier is Cursed to anyone other than the Tripper who holds the Cursed Souvenier. A Tripper may not willfully discard a cursed Souvenier (though if they possess more than three Souveniers all of which are cursed, they may choose any of them to discard until they only have three remaining). A Tripper may not achieve victory while they possess a Cursed Souvenier.

Add the following Parking Effects

Graveyard: When determining if a Souvenier generated here is Cursed, the Parker rolls a DICE5 instead of a DICE15
Church: The Parker may spend 3 coins. If they do so, one Cursed Souvenier of their choice which they are holding ceases to be cursed—they must then privately inform the GPS of this result.

Proposal: Imagine the Pastabilities

Timed out 6 votes to 3. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 12:24:33 UTC

Rename the “Pressed Pennie” Souvenir to “Pressed Penne”

Fixing the typo in a fun way

Proposal: Fretwork Events

Timed out at quorum, 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 19 Dec 2021 12:22:56 UTC

Replace the text “An Event is an official post that meets a type definition in the dynastic rules, the type definition of which includes the following” in the rule “Event Types” with the following:

An Event is an official post that meets a type definition in the dynastic rules, if and only if that type definition is specified as defining a type of Event; the type definition must include the following:

 

Not sure if this language is too circular.

Wednesday, December 15, 2021

Proposal: Nudge Nudge

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 17 Dec 2021 18:11:54 UTC

Append to the rule “Movement” the following:

If a Tripper has been continuously Ready for at least the past 48 hours, then any other Tripper may move the Ready Tripper to the first Stop which is after the Ready Tripper’s current Stop and which has no Trippers occupying it.

Going back and forth on this one. On one hand, it’s going to bog down play if we have players only being able to move at the speed of wait-for-so-and-so-to-idle. On the other hand, I am pretty sure from past experience that mechanics seeking to punish inactivity tend to also push players toward the slowest nonpunishable pace of activity, and also to encourage lurking, which isn’t fun either. If you’ve got an idea that’s better than the standard hourglass, I welcome suggestions.

Proposal: Good Intentions

Times out 6-2. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 17 Dec 2021 17:35:50 UTC

Replace “As a Daily Action, the GPS may create and append to the list of Stops a new Stop with a Name of their choice, a Capacity of 1, and no Type. In doing so, the GPS may also increase the Capacity of a randomly chosen Stop by 1.” with:-

If every Tripper (ignoring those at a Starting Point; unless all Trippers are at a Starting Point) has fewer than 13 Stops after their Location, the GPS should create and append to the list of Stops a new Stop with a Name of their choice, a Capacity of DICE3, and a random Type from among those named in the rule “Stop Effects”.

Raising the road generation from once per day, to there always being 13 ahead of the rearmost player.

Wednesday, December 15, 2021

Proposal: Plight of the Navigator

Timed out 3 votes to 6. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Dec 2021 08:07:54 UTC

In the rule “Road Map”, after the first paragraph, add the following:

Stops may not have the same Names as one another. If two or more Stops would have identical Names, the Stop among them with the highest number has “Another ” added to the beginning of its Name.

Add the following subrule, called “Navigation”, to the rule “Road Map”:

A Route is a type of Story Post that is a Votable Matter. A Route must have the “[Route]” tag in its title. The body of a Route must outline the Name, Capacity, and Type of one or more Suggested Stops. A Suggested Stop is a type of Stop that is not listed in the publicly tracked list of Stops, instead being tracked only in a single Pending Route. A Suggested Stop is not considered a Stop for rules other than “Navigation”.

If a Pending Route is Unpopular, any Admin may Fail it. If a Pending Route is Popular and has been open for voting for at least 12 hours, any Admin may Enact it by appending that Route’s Suggested Stops, in the order they are listed, to the list of Stops.

Any Tripper who is not the author of a currently Pending Route may post a Route.

where are we going, anyway?

Proposal: Flavourful [Appendix]

Timed out 3 votes to 5. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 17 Dec 2021 08:06:30 UTC

Change the Keyword definition of “Flavour Text” to the following:

Flavour Text is text that is a part of the Ruleset or Gamestate, but does not hold the meaning normally given to such text. Flavour Text does not need to be obeyed, does not define legal actions or variables, and is not interpreted as having any normal English meaning in the context of Blognomic gameplay. Flavour Text may be referred to by other pieces of ruletext or gamestate, as long as its mentioning is direct and unambiguous (for example, enclosing the referenced text in quotation marks).

here’s my take on this whole flavour text thing!

Proposal: The Buddy of my Buddy

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 16 Dec 2021 00:22:51 UTC

Reword the first three paragraphs of the rule “Carpooling” as follows:

If any set of two Trippers each have the other’s name in their Alliance, those Trippers are considered each other’s Buddies. If all the members of any set of three Trippers each have the other two Trippers’ names in their Alliances (for example, if player A has the names B and C in their Alliance; player B has the names A and C in their Alliance; and player C has names A and B in their Alliance), then all three such Trippers are also considered each other’s Buddies.

If any action or effect would change the Location of a Tripper who is Buddies with another Tripper or with two other Trippers, then the Location of both (or all three) Buddies is changed to the new value.

If a given set of two or three mutual Buddies all occupy the same Stop, they only count as 1 Tripper for the purposes of the Capacity of that Stop.

Wording this in a Blognomic-compatible fashion is challenging; amendments welcome.

Proposal: Bat Country

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 18:59:02 UTC

To “Road Map”, add a subrule called “Stop Effects”:-

Certain Types of Stop have Arrival Effects, defined in the following list. When the Location of a Tripper (the “Mover”) is changed to a different Stop, the Tripper making that change must also apply the Arrival Effect of that Stop’s Type to the Mover.

* ‘’‘Mill’‘’: The Mover gains 1 Coin.
* ‘’‘Spoilheap’‘’: The Mover gains 1 Coin (to a maximum of 3) for every Tripper who occupies a Stop ahead of theirs.
* ‘’‘Shrine’‘’: The Mover gains 1 Coin (to a maximum of 3) for every Tripper who occupies a Stop which is a Starting Point.
* ‘’‘Turnpike’‘’: The Mover loses 1 Coin (if they have any).
* ‘’‘Lair’‘’: The Mover loses an instance of their alphabetically earliest Souvenier (if they have any Souveniers).
* ‘’‘Tailback’‘’: The Mover’s Alliances become an empty set.

Certain Types of stop have Parking Effects, defined in the following list. The Parking Effects of a Stop’s Type apply to every Tripper (referred to as the “Parker”) who occupies that Stop.

* ‘’‘Badlands’‘’: The Parker may not Drive to a Stop which is more than three positions ahead of this one.
* ‘’‘Mire’‘’: If the Parker has no Buddies, they may not Drive.
* ‘’‘Blackspot’‘’: The GPS should veto any proposal that was made by the Parker while they were here.

If “Behold, my stuff” failed, remove all bullet points from the created rule that include the word “Souvenier”.

If “Gift Cards for Everyone!” failed, remove all bullet points from the created rule that include the word “Coin” or “Coins”.

Tuesday, December 14, 2021

Proposal: Multitrack drifting exploit patch

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 18:57:08 UTC

Add the following to “Carpooling”

A Tripper who is buddies with two different trippers, and those Trippers are not also Buddies with each other is considered to be Torn. For the purposes of all dynastic rules other than this paragraph and the paragraph which defines Buddies, a Torn Tripper is not considered to be Buddies with any Tripper and no Tripper can be considered Buddies with a Torn Tripper.

 

The on theme alliance idea is that you’re riding in the car together. So while it makes sense to have three people in your car pool, it doesn’t make sense to be riding in two different cars with two different people.

Proposal: Gift Cards for Everyone!

Passes 10-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 18:52:34 UTC

Enact a new rule, titled “Money”, with text as follows:

Each Tripper has a publicly tracked amount of Coins, which defaults to 10.

If https://blognomic.com/archive/behold_my_stuff passed, change the first sentence of the second paragraph of the rule Roadside Tat to the following:

Once per Stop, a Tripper may pay 2 Coins to generate a Souvenier from that Stop and acquire it.


For each Tripper with one or more Souveniers, deduct 2 Coins from their Coin total for each Souvenier that they have.

Borrowing from Tokaido a little bit, since that was stated to be the inspiration for this dynasty. I set the default value to 10 to make individual coins hopefully rather valuable and a limited commodity, rather than something people end up with like 50 of.

Proposal: A Division of Power (Part 2)

Times out 5-6. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 18:50:38 UTC

If at least 8 of the Effective Votes on this proposal are FOR, then repeal the Perdurable Rule “Imperial Lineage”.

Might as well offer these options separately so they don’t fail together.

Proposal: A Division of Power (Part 1)

Passes 9-1. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 17:37:01 UTC

If at least 8 of the Effective Votes on this proposal are FOR, then repeal the Perdurable Rule “Eternal Emperor”.

Might as well offer these options separately so they don’t fail together.

are we there yet?

requesting unidling

Proposal: Major Key [Core]

Unpopular with fewer than a quorum not voting against, at 2-7. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 17:34:30 UTC

Remove the text

Exception: Proposals which would change the text of a Core, Special Case or Appendix rule if enacted cannot be Popular on this basis.

from the rule “Votes”

I feel like this clause hasn’t really helped things. It has resulted in multiple cases where something we wanted passed didn’t actually get passed because not enough people voted, and now there is currently a CfJ out that is expired but no one wants to admin because either they want it to pass, but enacting it now would cause it to do nothing; or they want it to fail but the majority of players appear to want it to pass and they don’t want to annoy people.

Proposal: Can Opener 2 [Perdurable]

Times out and passes 5-1-4. Enacted without effect by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 17:33:29 UTC

If at least 8 of the Effective Votes on this proposal are FOR, then repeal the Perdurable Rules “Eternal Emperor” and “Imperial Lineage.”

Some players have expressed sincere interest in being able to win a round of Blognomic but not be emperor afterward. I’m curious about how prevalent that sentiment is among the current group.

Proposal: Behold, my stuff

Passes 9-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 01:19:52 UTC

Add a new rule to the dynastic ruleset, called Roadside Tat:

Each Tripper can be carrying up to three Souveniers, which are publicly tracked and default to blank (i.e. carrying no Souvenier).

Once per Stop, a Tripper may generate a Souvenier from that Stop and acquire it. Generating a Souvenier entails randomly selecting a Souvenier type from the [[Souvenier]] page on the wiki and adding ‘of x’ to that, where x is the name of the current Stop. If acquiring a Souvenier would cause a Tripper to have more than three Souveniers then they may freely choose one of their existing Souveniers to discard.

Proposal: A Trip Out

Passes 9-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 15 Dec 2021 01:15:53 UTC

To “Road Map”, add:-

A Stop’s number is the number of its position in the numerically ordered list of Stops. A Stop is said to be “before” all other Stops with higher numbers, and “after” all other Stops with lower numbers.

In the same rule, replace “numerically before” with “before”.

Add a new rule, “Movement”:-

A Tripper is Waiting if there exists a Stop before their current Location (ignoring all Starting Points) occupied by another Tripper; otherwise they are Ready.

If a Tripper is Ready, then they may Drive by changing their Location to any Stop which is after their current Location.

Replace “Each Tripper has a Location, which is the Name of one of the Stops in that list” with:-

Each Tripper has a Location, which is the number and Name of one of the Stops in that list

Replace “may have a Type, which is flavor text” with “may have a Type”.

Proposing a movement system: you can only move if you’re at the back of the queue, then you have to wait for everyone else to pass you (so jumping far ahead may not be the best idea). Also unflavouring the Types so that rules can easily refer to them.

Proposal: Can Opener 1

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan with no actual changes made.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 22:32:53 UTC

If Call for Judgment: Perdurability Haplurability is still pending, immediately stop resolving this proposal and return it to pending status.

Throughout the Perdurable Rules, replace the term “Dark One” with “GPS” and replace the term “Soul” with “Tripper”.

Call for Judgment: Perdurability Haplurability

Reached quorum, 7-0. Enacted by TyGuy6. (No visible changes to ruleset/gamestate tracking.)

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 10:32:22 UTC

Uphold the Ascension Address here: https://blognomic.com/archive/rooooad_triiiiip as being legally performed

Once the DOV was enacted, we ceased to be in the 8th Dynasty of Brendan and instead entered an Interregnum

Due to that, the clause ” it is the Eighth Dynasty of Brendan and the player named Brendan is the Emperor,” became false. Thus the paragraph

“Only the enactment of a Votable Matter can change the text of Perdurable Rules, except as specified in a Perdurable Rule; if a Votable Matter would modify a Perdurable Rule, and that Votable Matter is not Unanimous, then that Votable Matter is not Popular.”

ceased to be flavor text and became binding rule text.

This made making any ascension address that changed the term for “soul” illegal, as it changed the text of Perdurable Rules but was not the enactment of a voteable matter.

Monday, December 13, 2021

Proposal: One-Way Ticket

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 22:17:41 UTC

Enact a new rule entitled “Road Map” as follows:

There exists a numerically ordered list of Stops, which is publicly tracked. Each Stop has a Name, which is flavor text; has a Capacity, which defaults to 1; and may have a Type, which is flavor text, defaulting to having no Type. Each Tripper has a Location, which is the Name of one of the Stops in that list and which is publicly tracked, defaulting to the Name of the first Stop in their numerical listed order.

As a Daily Action, the GPS may create and append to the list of Stops a new Stop with a Name of their choice, a Capacity of 1, and no Type. In doing so, the GPS may also increase the Capacity of a randomly chosen Stop by 1.

If a Tripper’s Location is the name of a Stop, then the Tripper is said to occupy that Stop. If there are X Trippers whose Location is the name of a given Stop, where X is at least equal to the Capacity of that Stop, then no other Trippers may set their Location to that Stop.

Unless otherwise specified, a Tripper’s Location may not change to the Name of a Stop which is numerically before the Stop named in their current Location.

Enact a new rule entitled “Carpooling” as follows:

If any set of two Trippers each have the other’s name in their Alliance, those Trippers are considered each other’s Buddies.

If any action or effect would change the Location of a Tripper who is Buddies with another Tripper, then the Location of both Buddies is changed to the new value.

If two Trippers who are Buddies with each other occupy the same Stop, they only count as 1 Tripper for the purposes of the Capacity of that Stop.

Add a single Stop to the list of Stops with the Name “TDO’s House,” a Capacity of 30, and a Type of “Starting Point.”

Ascension Address: Rooooad Triiiiip

WOOOOOO

Repeal all Dynastic Rules except “Event Types” and “Can Opener.”

Set the Special Case rules “Alliances” and “Mantle Limitations” to Active, and set the Special Case rule “Imperial Deferentials” to Inactive; set all other Special Case rules to their default state.

Replace the term “Dark One” with “GPS” and replace the term “Soul” with “Tripper” throughout the Ruleset.

Interregnum chat

A thread for chatting about Brendan 8/9 part 1.

Mantle Pass

The bright, ancient arrow embedded between the crooked black plates of Dark One’s armour flickers and fades down through the visible spectrum, disappearing into a haze of smoke as it reaches the infrared. The Dark One brushes a few flecks of ash from his chestplate.

I pass the mantle to Brendan.

Saturday, December 11, 2021

Call for Judgment: No Money Back, No Guarantee

Times out 6-1. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 18:13:04 UTC

Change the text of the Appendix definition ‘Rule’ to read as follows:

Each individually numbered and titled block of text (using the wikimedia section heading formatting) of the Ruleset is a rule, including rules that are subrules of other rules; with the exception that the top-level headings defined as ‘sections’ in the rule “Ruleset and Gamestate” are considered sections but not rules themselves.

Reposting of Josh’s No Gods, No Masters, minus, at his suggestion on Discord, the need to uphold any specific version of the ruleset.

Declaration of Victory: Time’s Arrow

Enacted after 12 hours with the Dark One’s FOR vote, 8-0. Josh

Adminned at 12 Dec 2021 09:40:56 UTC

I have identified the Dark One’s mortal Weakness and achieved victory.

Story Post: Before the Dawn

I step out of the shadows and assault the Dark One.

Proposal: Shadow Puppets

Vetoed upon Ascension by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 04:57:13 UTC

Add a new rule called “Puppets” and give it the following text

As a weekly action, an unseen soul may attempt a possession. To do so, they roll a DICE2 naming a seen soul as their target in the dice roller comment of the roll. If the result of the roll is a 1, they may perform a single dynastic action as if they were the named Soul. The performance of this action does not count against daily/weekly action limits for the targeted soul attempting to perform the same action.

Soon I too will be a puppeteer!

Saturday, December 11, 2021

Apples and Oranges [Challenge]

i have hidden my precious Bag in the one place no-one would look for it: a box factory! that’s right, my relic lies within the First Dynasty of Jumble. venture there if you dare, but beware the Crushers and Axes!!

Story Post: Sipping from the Timestream [Challenge]

I have no need for regalia, and so have hidden the Golden Crown in the Sixth Dynasty of Josh. Go and claim it, cowering mortals, if you dare.

Proposal: All of the Lights, All of the Lights

Withdrawn upon Ascension by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 04:56:13 UTC

If the sentence “If the Dark One’s response to an Assault Post is a FOR icon then the Soul that posted that Assault Post has achieved Victory” appears in the Ruleset, then reword it as follows:

If the Dark One’s response to an Assault Post is a FOR icon, and the Soul who posted that Assault Post has more Luminance than any other Soul, then the Soul who posted that Assault Post has achieved Victory.

Posting legally this time.

Proposal: Headlights and Footlights

NOPE, I forgot to enact “Something like a Synonymon” before posting this, rendering it illegal.

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 18:25:45 UTC

If the sentence “If the Dark One’s response to an Assault Post is a FOR icon then the Soul that posted that Assault Post has achieved Victory” appears in the Ruleset, then reword it as follows:

If the Dark One’s response to an Assault Post is a FOR icon, and the Soul who posted that Assault Post has more Luminance than any other Soul, then the Soul who posted that Assault Post has achieved Victory.

Wouldn’t want everyone hopping on the bandwagon simultaneously.

Proposal: Common Chronicle

Vetoed upon Ascension by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 04:55:42 UTC

In the Dynastic Rules, replace “past dynasties of BlogNomic” with “dynasties with Rulesets linked on their respective history pages on the BlogNomic Wiki”, “past dynasty of BlogNomic” with “dynasty with a Ruleset linked on its respective history page on the BlogNomic Wiki”, and “the dynastic ruleset of a past dynasty” with “the Dynastic Rules of a Ruleset linked on a dynasty’s history page on the Blognomic Wiki”.

fixing up some wording here (once in “Dimensions”, once in “Relic Recovery”, and once in “The Weakness”). we’ve settled on mechanics which focus around past dynastic rulesets, and if veteran players have access to records of rulesets that aren’t adequately recorded on the wiki that would give them an unfair advantage!! especially when it comes to the Dimension or Weakness of the Dark One.
(awkward wording is to dodge the glitch in the definition of a rule that was recently discovered)

Proposal: Heritage Disconnection

Vetoed up on Ascension by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 04:54:43 UTC

Replace the sentence located under the heading “Heritage Connection” in the Ruleset with the following:

If a Relic’s name is present in the Dynastic Rules of the Dynasty named in a given Challenge, or any Dynasty which had the same Emperor as the Dynasty named in that Challenge, then that Relic is considered to have a Heritage Connection to that Challenge.

unless i’m mistaken, a relic being “from” a dynasty is neither described nor tracked by the rules, so this is a simpler alternative.
(weird wording about “headings” is to dodge the glitch in the definition of a rule that was recently discovered)

Thursday, December 09, 2021

Proposal: Cast Down And Smote

Vetoed upon Ascension by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 04:53:56 UTC

If the ruleset contains an atomic action called Assault the Dark One, change its first step to read:

* Set their own Prominence to zero, and then carry out the effects set out for a Soul whose Prominence is zero in the section of ruletext headed ‘Mortality and Darkness’;

Mischief Managed?

Arthexis idles out, and quorum drops to 7.

Proposal: None More Fore

Vetoed upon Ascension by Brendan.

Adminned at 13 Dec 2021 04:53:28 UTC

If the proposal “Something Like a Synonymon” failed, then replace the word “Bright” with “Foremost” throughout the dynastic ruleset.

Renaming Brightness per comments on Something Like a Synonymon.

Proposal: The Amulet of Yendor

Enacted popular, 7-0. Josh

Adminned at 11 Dec 2021 09:40:27 UTC

Add the following to the end of the section of ruletext headed “The Weakness”:

As a weekly action, any Soul with a Relic may carry out an Assault the Dark One action, which is an Atomic Action with the following steps:

* Set their own Prominence to zero;
* Set their Visibility to Unseen;
* Make a Story Post to the Blog stating that they are Assaulting the Dark One. This is referred to as an Assault Post.

Within 48 hours of an Assault Post having been posted, the Dark One must respond with either a FOR voting icon, signifying that the Soul carrying out the Assault in question is carrying a Relic whose name is the same noun as the Dark One’s Weakness; or an AGAINST icon, signifying that they do not. If the Dark One’s response to an Assault Post is a FOR icon then the Soul that posted that Assault Post has achieved Victory. Otherwise, they do not.

Proposal: Ouija Squeegee [Special Case]

Withdrawn. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 18:32:35 UTC

In “No Collaboration”, replace:-

Idle Souls (or people who are not yet Souls) also face the same restrictions if they intend to become an active Soul during the course of the dynasty.

with:-

Idle Souls and people who are not Souls also face the same restrictions.

Although it sounds like Cuddlebeam is being duly diligent when offering tips to Josh, in that they’re not asking for any mantle, this type of quarterbacking feels against the spirit of the rule, if I can idle out now and pass on all my notes to someone who I can’t otherwise talk to. “If they intend” is also a bit weak for allowing idle players to change their mind and join the game in the future, and does actually allow them to intend to accept a mantle pass all along, as the passing happens during Interregnum.

Wednesday, December 08, 2021

Call for Judgment: Return to Free Elections [Perdurable] [Special Case] [Appendix] [Core]

Timed out and not enacted, 1 vote to 6. Josh

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 22:25:54 UTC

Restore the rule “Prioritisation” to the Appendix with the text and position it had immediately prior to the enactment of “Inevitably”. (See https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset&oldid=18138) Repeal all rules in the Perdurable Section, and remove the Perdurable Section.

Restore the rules “Ruleset and Gamestate” and “Tags” to the text they had immediately prior to the edit shown at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset&diff=prev&oldid=18076.

(There were a couple of bugs with the previous two versions. All that’s different is the revision number in paragraph 2.)

Let’s be clear, what this is proposing is simply to put the power fully back in the hands of the voters. No more Brendan as perma-emperor. No more excluding people who weren’t active in the current dynasty. And no more rules which can’t be modified if a single active player abstains from voting. We didn’t vote in the Perdurable Section.

Proposal: Some people don’t like writing proposals

Passes 9-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 18:30:00 UTC

Append a subrule entitled “Dark Tithe” to the rule “Mortality and Darkness” as follows:

As a Daily Action, any Soul may Hail the Dark One, an Atomic Action with the following steps:
* Making a comment in the Dice Roller elaborating on the awesome might of the Dark One, and in doing so, rolling DICE3
* If the result of the roll was 1, increasing their own Prominence by 1
* If the result of the roll was 2, and the Soul holds a Relic, increasing their own Prominence by 1 and increasing the Luminance of the Dark One by 1
* If the result of the roll was 3, losing 1 Prominence, and then increasing the Luminance of the Dark One by 1

Want to get Seen? Here you go!

Call for Judgment: Carefully Topple the Statue [Perdurable] [Special Case] [Appendix] [Core]

Cannot be enacted, 0 votes to 7. Josh

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 10:21:57 UTC

Restore the rule “Prioritisation” to the Appendix with the text and position it had immediately prior to the enactment of “Inevitably”. (See https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset&oldid=18138) Repeal all rules in the Perdurable Section, and remove the Perdurable Section.

Restore the rules “Ruleset and Gamestate” and “Tags” to the text they had immediately prior to the edit shown at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset&diff=prev&oldid=18119.

It’s now up to every Soul to decide whether we will accept or repeal these autocratic changes made by the mad tyrant Brendan.

Call for Judgment: Carefully Topple the Statue [Perdurable] [Special Case] [Appendix] [Core]

Accidentally made illegal by my edits after a vote had been cast.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 17:33:32 UTC

Restore the rule “Prioritisation” to the Appendix with the text and position it had immediately prior to the enactment of “Inevitably”. (See https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset&oldid=18138) Repeal all rules in the Perdurable Section, and remove the Perdurable Section.

Restore the rules “Ruleset and Gamestate” and “Tags” to the text they had immediately prior to the edit shown at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset&diff=prev&oldid=18119.

It’s now up to every Soul to decide whether we will accept or repeal these autocratic changes made by the mad tyrant Brendan.

Proposal: Something Like a Synonymon

Withdrawn. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 18:26:43 UTC

Replace the sentence “If there is one Mortal Soul whose Prominence is greater than that of each other Mortal Soul, that Soul is Bright” in the rule “Dark Regard” with

If there is one Mortal Soul whose Luminance is greater than that of each other Mortal Soul, that Soul is Bright.

Call for Judgment: Act Five, Take Two

Times out 2-6. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 16:56:34 UTC

Set the Special Case rule “No Collaboration” to Inactive.

Isn’t a 7-0 vote enough evidence that we should just CfJ this?

Call for Judgment: [Appendix] Divergent gamestates

Timed out and failed, 3 votes to 3. Josh

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 17:34:00 UTC

Replace the paragraph

For gamestate which is tracked in a specific place (such as a wiki page), any alteration of that gamestate as a result of a Soul’s action is (and can only be) applied by editing that data in that place. One wiki update may contain one or more alterations, or one alteration may be split over multiple updates, as long as it is clear what is happening and the alterations are otherwise legal. The wiki merely represents the Gamestate tracked there, and is not the same thing. In the event that the Gamestate and its representations are different, any Soul may correct the representations to comply with the Gamestate.

with

For Gamestate which is tracked in a specific place (such as a wiki page), there is a distinction between the Gamestate and the representation of the Gamestate (such as that page). If a Soul’s action would cause the Gamestate to change, then that Soul must update the representation of the Gamestate to reflect that change if it is possible for them to do so by editing the data tracking the Gamestate in the place where it is tracked. One edit may contain one or more alterations, or one alteration may be split over multiple edits, as long as it is clear what is happening and the alterations are otherwise legal. In the event that the Gamestate and its representations are different, any Soul may correct the representations to comply with the Gamestate.

The sentences

For gamestate which is tracked in a specific place (such as a wiki page), any alteration of that gamestate as a result of a Soul’s action is (and can only be) applied by editing that data in that place

and

The wiki merely represents the Gamestate tracked there, and is not the same thing. In the event that the Gamestate and its representations are different, any Soul may correct the representations to comply with the Gamestate

suggest different conceptions of the relationship between gamestate and its representations. If gamestate can ONLY change by updating the representation, then the gamestate and its representation should NEVER diverge (unless the divergence occurs through some non-action, but it’s hard to imagine what that might plausibly be). As it stands, there are numerous problems with saying that the gamestate CAN ONLY change through editing its representation, because a lot of the rules, including this paragraph, assume that the change and the update may occur at different points in time. For example, Rule 1.1 states that “If the Ruleset does not properly reflect all legal changes that have been made to it, any Soul may update it to do so,” presuming that the wiki update not only follows but is legally authorised by the proposal that caused the rule change.

This proposal therefore favours the interpretation that the gamestate and its representations can diverge. There is an obvious problem with this, being that a change might go unnoticed and therefore not be made by anyone to the representation for a long period. Therefore, someone relying on the representation alone might be led astray. For example, an admin might forget to update the wiki to reflect a rules change, so anyone reading the ruleset would be getting an inaccurate representation of the rules. However, the corresponding problem exists in the opposite case. Once a proposal is enacted, it is perfectly reasonable for players to assume that the stated effects of that proposal have in fact taken effect; it seems just as problematic to say that they would be wrong if the admin had, for instance, made a typo in an update.

To give another example, suppose that a proposal was enacted that would increase everyone’s Bucks by 1. My Bucks would go from 10 to 11. However, the enacting admin fails to update my Bucks, leaving them at 10. I then go to buy a Spanner for 5 Bucks, updating my Bucks to 5. According to the “changing the representation changes the gamestate” interpretation, my purchase of the Spanner would be illegal, since the proper adjustment (setting my Bucks to what should be its true value of 6) was not made to the gamestate. In fact, every subsequent action changing my Bucks would be illegal, until the error was caught and fixed. This is a trivial example, but it is conceivable that days or even weeks of dynastic play might be invalidated by a simple accounting error of this sort. This is presumably the opposite of the intention of this paragraph, According to the “representation is different from the gamestate” interpretation, on the other hand, the fix is simple: the in-itself unproblematic purchase of the Spanner takes effect when I updated my Bucks to 5, and then anyone who notices that I’m short 1 Buck can simply add it to my total later. No actions are invalidated.

CfJs, naturally, could be used to resolve cases where divergences between gamestate and its representation are particularly significant, but the vast majority of such divergences are easily and unproblematically fixed.

Call for Judgment: No Gods, No Masters

Timed out 4 votes to 5. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Dec 2021 14:47:28 UTC

Change the text of the Appendix definition ‘Rule’ to read as follows:

Each individually numbered and titled block of text (using the wikimedia section heading formatting) of the Ruleset is a rule, including rules that are subrules of other rules; with the exception that the top-level headings defined as ‘sections’ in the rule “Ruleset and Gamestate” are considered sections but not rules themselves

Uphold that this edit to the ruleset was a true representation of the ruleset at the time that it was made, that all of the data held within it is legal or not legal based on the understanding that a rule is defined as per the definition given in this CfJ, and that subsequent edits to the ruleset have legality or not based on the same assumption. Uphold that the most recent enacted DoV caused all of the text in the section of the ruleset called ‘Dynastic Rules’ to be repealed, and uphold all game actions that led up to that DoV.

The ruleset contains a bug.

The appendix entry “Rule” specifies that:

Each individually numbered section of the Ruleset is a rule, including sections that are subrules of other rules, except that the sections listed as comprising the ruleset in the rule “Ruleset and Gamestate” are considered sections but not rules themselves.

The problem is that “section” is already defined in Ruleset and Gamestate:

This is the Ruleset [...] It comprises five Sections:

So according to the definition of a rule, none of the rules are rules; only sections can be rules, except for the five sections listed in Ruleset and Gamestate, none of which can be rules (sort of, but it doesn’t matter). You with me?

So the ruleset contains no rules. Whatever; it’s still the ruleset and we still have to obey it (“This is the Ruleset for BlogNomic; all Souls shall obey it”). Proposals still work as none of the text defining them refers to anything as being a “rule”; CfJs and DoVs too.

But large chunks of the ruleset are broken if nothing is actually a rule. For example, any reference to ‘the rule “x”’ is busted, as there is no rule x. There are no Special Case rules; just text under a ‘Special Case’ heading, that we have to obey, but which is no, definitionally, a set of rules. Ascension Addresses can’t repeal rules as there aren’t any, so all the ruletext from last dynasty still exists in phantom form. But that might not matter, as any votable matter that specifies that it creates, amends to repeals a ‘rule’ does nothing, as no rules exist or can be legally created under the definition of a rule.

There is an upside: when Kevan proposed to make Upholding a thing he did so without using the word “rule”, so that text made it into the ruleset just fine (although my proposal to make upholding a feature a Ascension did specify changes to a rule, so didn’t legally take effect). Between CfJs being still okay and upholding being a concept that makes sense, a quick fix is possible; so here we are.

Tuesday, December 07, 2021

Proposal: Another Quest!

Timed out 2 votes to 4. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Dec 2021 09:31:19 UTC

Add the following to the ruleset as a rule named “Adventures”

As a daily action, a Soul may perform the following atomic action, known as “Venturing”:
* The Soul selects a Dynasty from among those that they have Dimension Access to.
*The Soul gains DICEX Prominence, where X is twice the stratum of the chosen Dynasty.
* The Soul gains 1 prominence for each Relic they are holding with the Aegis Type.
* The Soul then loses Prominence equal to the Stratum of the Chosen Dynasty.

Making higher stratum gates more valuable (and risky).

Call for Judgment: Alternative attempt

Vetoed by Brendan.

Adminned at 06 Dec 2021 22:10:21 UTC

Change the name of the Player named Brendan to BrendanSheets

Change the name of the Player named Clucky to Brendan

Add a new dynastic rule with the following text

If it is after December 11th, 2021, and there exists a rule called “Perdurable Rules” then as an atomic action any Soul may first change the name of the Player named Brendan to another string which is a valid name for a Soul, then increase the date in this rule by one day, then change their name to Brendan.

 

Second attempt to fix my game incase people don’t think the flavor text hack works.

Call for Judgment: One way ticket to flavor town

Vetoed by Brendan, as per the rule “Dark Tyranny.”

Adminned at 06 Dec 2021 22:12:37 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule with the following text

All Perdurable Rules are flavor text.

Proposal: Dark Tyranny Lite

Times out 3-1. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 21:35:24 UTC

Append to the rule “Dark Regard” the following:

As a Daily Action, the Dark One may increase or decrease by 1 point the Luminance or Prominence of any Soul.

If there is a Soul that is Bright, then as a Daily Action, that Soul may increase the Luminance of any other Soul by 1 point.

Proposal: Slightly Different Idea

Times out 4-4. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 20:31:14 UTC

If a Dynastic Rule entitled “Can Opener” exists, append the following to its text: “The Dark One may not cast a vote of VETO on a Can Opener Proposal; any such vote is disregarded for the purposes of proposal resolution.”.

Enact a new Dynastic Rule entitled “Bottle Opener” with the following text:

A proposal that only enacts, amends, retitles, repeals, or otherwise alters Perdurable Rules is called a Bottle Opener proposal. The Dark One may not cast a vote of VETO on a Bottle Opener Proposal; any such vote is disregarded for the purposes of proposal resolution. If a pending Bottle Opener proposal has a number of FOR votes exceeding or equaling Quorum, has not been withdrawn, and is the oldest pending proposal, then any Admin can enact it, regardless of its Popularity or Unpopularity.

Adds VETO prohibitions to Can Opener proposals, and adds a different attempt at bypassing the restrictions just in case Josh’s is found to not work (though it looks it works to me).

Proposal: Actually, let’s just do this

Times out 6-4. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 20:28:56 UTC

Add a new rule to the dynastic ruleset, called Can Opener:

A proposal that only affects the Perdurable Rules is called a Can Opener proposal. A Can Opener proposal is always Unanimous if it is also Popular.

Unanimity and Perdurability defines Unanimity, but not exclusively, so this is not a clash.

Idlen’t

I request to be made an active player.

Proposal: Not very perdurable

Reached quorum, 8-0. Enacted by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 15:50:59 UTC

Remove the word Perdurable from the core rule Fair Play.

Open them up to scams, at least

Proposal: Reliquescence

Timed out, 4-0. Enacted by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 15:47:44 UTC

In “Relic Recovery”, replace “A Mortal Soul who holds no Relics may create a Relic” with “A Soul who holds no Relics may create a Relic”.

Add a paragraph to that rule:-

A Soul may make a Relic they hold Lost, at any time.

Allowing all Souls to collect Relics the regular way, giving everyone a reason to explore the Gates, and adding a mechanic to discard unwanted Relics.

Proposal: Dictator perpetu-no

Timed out, 3 votes FOR, 5 AGAINST. Failed by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 15:44:20 UTC

Add a dynastic rule entitled Heir Apparent:

At 23:59:00 on 23 December 2021, if no Soul has achieved victory in the current dynasty and there is exactly one Soul other than the Dark One with a higher prominence than every other such Soul, that Soul achieves victory. If no Soul has achieved victory at 00:00:00 on 24 December 2021, the current dynasty ends and Blognomic enters an interregnum until 00:00:00 on 27 December 2021, at which time all dynastic rules are repealed and a new metadynasty begins.

Idle out

Currently I can’t keep much focus on this dynasty due to real life so to prevent too much slow down I request being made idle.

Proposal: Quas Vulgus Elegerit

Timed out, 5-3. Enacted by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 15:44:42 UTC

Repeal the rule “Dark Tyranny”.

Call for Judgment: Inevitably [Appendix]

Timed out, 6-3. Enacted by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 16:46:17 UTC

Delete the rule “Prioritisation” from the Appendix.

Of course I was going to forget something. There are currently two different rules called “Prioritisation” which say different things; this CfJ fulfills the intent of the changes I made while I still had the power to edit the Ruleset. Not sure what the odds of passage are here, but it’s worth a shot.

Proposal: Fixed hopefully obvious fix

Reached quorum (and timed out) 8-0. Enacted by TyGuy6.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 15:37:47 UTC

Amend the Dynastic rule entitled “Relics” by replacing “Any rule named after a House can do nothing except alter or define how that Relic and the Soul holding it interact with Challenges.” with “Any rule named after a House can do nothing except alter or define how a Relic with that House and the Soul holding such a Relic interact with Challenges.”

Something something remembering to check the proposal box is hard.

Replace the phrase “that Relic”, which has an unclear antecedent, with much more explicit wording.

Hopefully obvious fix?

Amend the Dynastic rule entitled “Relics” by replacing “Any rule named after a House can do nothing except alter or define how that Relic and the Soul holding it interact with Challenges.” with “Any rule named after a House can do nothing except alter or define how a Relic with that House and the Soul holding such a Relic interact with Challenges.”

Replace the phrase “that Relic”, which has an unclear antecedent, with much more explicit wording.

Proposal: Act Five [Special Case]

Timed out, 7-0. Enacted by TyGuy6. (Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 15:34:32 UTC)

Subsequently Failed by TyGuy6, as it’s unclear that less than quorum(8) was able to enact it, as per a popularity exception in “Votes”.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2021 16:24:01 UTC

Set the Special Case rule “No Collaboration” to Inactive.

As promised, I have relinquished my free-editing powers over the Ruleset, after creating a new section called “Perdurable Rules.” Those rules now have precedence over all other parts of the Ruleset, and also contain the rule defining that precedence, as well as four other provisions:

First, after the end of this Dynasty, the Perdurable Rules can only be changed if every active player votes in favor of that change.

Second, if no one manages to unseat me by the end of the year, I win all Dynasties hereafter and forever. (If someone does unseat me before then, anyone can repeal this rule.)

Third, only players who manage to become Seen in this dynasty—which is to say, get a proposal enacted, or otherwise gain at least 1 Prominence—can be victorious in any future Dynasty, until there is unanimous will to unseat all of us.

Fourth, I can still undo all of the above if someone discovers that I’ve accidentally inserted a paradox and ruined the game forever.

Sunday, December 05, 2021

Unsuspicious Unidling

Please make me an active player again

Totally Selfless Unidling

Please unidle me.

Proposal: The Escalator of Humility

Passes 5-0 - redtara

Adminned at 07 Dec 2021 15:17:33 UTC

If there is a rule entitled “Challenges” then reword it (but not its subrules) as follows:

A Challenge is an Event (of type “Challenge”) with the following stipulations:

Creation Conditions: Only a Dark Soul who holds at least one Relic, and has no other open Challenges, may create a Challenge, and only as a Daily Action. The Challenge’s body must name that Relic (and no other Relics), and name a single Dynasty that is listed in the Dynastic History on the BlogNomic Wiki (as of November 30th, 2021).

Response Format: There is no format for a Response to a Challenge.

Ending Conditions: Any Mortal Soul who holds a Relic with a Heritage Connection to the Dynasty named in the Challenge may End that Challenge. In addition, if at any time the Dark Soul does not hold the Relic named in the Challenge, then the Challenge is thereafter considered Ended.

Ending Action: To complete the Ending of a Challenge, a Mortal Soul must perform the following Daily Action, which is an Atomic Action:
* Commence to hold the Relic named in the Challenge (and thereby cause the Dark Soul holding that Relic, if any, to cease holding it).
* Gain 1 Luminance.

As a Daily Action, if a Dark Soul has created a Challenge that is still Open, that Soul may gain 1 Luminance.

Jumble Down

Jumble idles out after a week with no posts or comments. Quorum remains 7.

Saturday, December 04, 2021

Proposal: The Escalator of Legitimacy

Illegal, as the Dark One cannot make proposals.

Any Soul may submit a ‘’‘Proposal’‘’ to change the Ruleset or Gamestate, by posting an entry in the “Proposal” category that describes those changes (unless the Soul already has 2 Proposals pending, has already made 3 Proposals that day, or is the Dark One).

Josh

Adminned at 05 Dec 2021 12:15:39 UTC

If there is a rule entitled “Challenges” then reword it (but not its subrules) as follows:

A Challenge is an Event (of type “Challenge”) with the following stipulations:

Creation Conditions: Only a Dark Soul who holds at least one Relic, and has no other open Challenges, may create a Challenge, and only as a Daily Action. The Challenge’s body must name that Relic (and no other Relics), and name a single Dynasty that is listed in the Dynastic History on the BlogNomic Wiki (as of November 30th, 2021).

Response Format: There is no format for a Response to a Challenge.

Closing Conditions: Any Mortal Soul who holds a Relic with a Heritage Connection to the Dynasty named in the Challenge may close that Challenge; a Mortal Soul with Dimension Access to the Dynasty named in the Challenge may also close that Challenge. In addition, if at any time the Dark Soul does not hold the Relic named in the Challenge, then the Challenge is considered closed.

Closing Action: To complete the closing of a Challenge, a Mortal Soul must perform the following Daily Action, which is an Atomic Action:
* Commence to hold the Relic named in the Challenge (and thereby cause the Dark Soul holding that Relic, if any, to cease holding it).
* Gain 1 Luminance.

As a Daily Action, if a Dark Soul has created a Challenge that is still open, that Soul may gain 1 Luminance.

Somehow the Dark One has gained the ability to have more than two proposals pending. I feel obligated to take advantage of this.

Proposal: The Book of Olds

Times out 5-1. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 06 Dec 2021 20:35:05 UTC

If there is a rule entitled “Luminance” then add a subrule to that rule entitled “Illumination” as follows:

If a past Dynasty listed in the Dynastic History on the BlogNomic Wiki (as of November 30th, 2021) has, on its respective history page, an empty or stubbed list of Posts of Interest, that Dynasty is known as a Shadow Dynasty.

If a Soul completes the Posts of Interest section of a Shadow Dynasty’s history page on the BlogNomic Wiki with significant relevant information that is accurate to the best of their understanding, that Dynasty ceases to be a Shadow Dynasty; this action is called an Illumination. Once per Illumination, at its time of completion, the Soul who performed it may simultaneously add that Dynasty’s name to their Gates and increase their Luminance by 3. The restriction on adding Dynasties to one’s Gates based on Stratum do not apply to this addition.

If the Dark One feels that an Illumination was undertaken with poor effort or in bad faith, then the Dark One may revert the resulting changes to a Soul’s Gates and Luminance.

Proposal: Message in a Bottle

Times out 3-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 06 Dec 2021 20:33:34 UTC

If “Atlas Obscura” enacted, then in “Lost Relics”, replace “Whenever a Relic is added to Obscurity, it is added to the top of the list.” with:-

Whenever a Relic becomes Lost with no Location specified for it, it is given a random Location.

The Lost Locations of Relics banished by the Dark One or dropped in other ways are unspecified. This makes them wash up in a random dynasty.

Story Post: Some have claimed that the Dark One has a weakness.

Some even claim that the Stratum of its origin is 1, and that its name begins with the letter A.

Some fools should not spread such rumors, lest the baleful gaze of the Dark One fall upon them.

All who would seek to usurp the Dark One are already doomed.

Proposal: poking the bear

Vetoed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 06 Dec 2021 10:59:58 UTC

Remove the text “Once per day, the Dark Lord may add a rule to the ruleset named after a House. Whenever a new House is named, it’s name cannot match the name of any existing rule. Any rule named after a House can do nothing except define a Daily Action that can only be taken by Souls holding that Relic.” from the ruleset.

Remove the text “The Player named Brendan may freely edit the text of the Ruleset at any time.” from the rule titled “Ruleset and Gamestate”.

Reduce the Prominence of the Dark One by 10.

a tyrant has taken absolute control of the ruleset, but i’m noticing a distinct lack of tyrrany around here. what gives?

Saturday, December 04, 2021

Proposal: Robinhooding It

Withdrawn - redtara

Adminned at 06 Dec 2021 10:02:01 UTC

In rule that is denoted as “Feudal Contract”,

Add a subrule called “Charity” with the description:

As a weekly action the Dark One must do on any day that isn’t a Saturday(in BlogNomic time), the Dark One must reduce their Prominence by Z and then increase all other Soul’s Prominence by 2(where Z is the number of current Active Players there are done when preforming this action).

Proposal: Atlas Obscura

Times out 3-2-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 05 Dec 2021 15:53:20 UTC

Rewrite the rule Lost Relics to read as follows:

A Relic can be Lost or not Lost, defaulting to not Lost. When a Relic becomes Lost, it ceases to be held by any Soul who is holding it. Each Lost Relic has a Location, which must be the name of one of the first 99 Dynasties (following the referencing convention set out in the rule Gates); there is a publicly tracked list of all Lost Relics and their Locations, called Obscurity. Whenever a Relic is added to Obscurity, it is added to the top of the list.

Whenever a Soul has Dimension Access to the Sixth Dynasty of Josh they may, as a daily action, Cast a Relic Into The Timestream. Casting a Relic Into The Timestream entails selecting a single Relic that they hold and making it be Lost by adding it to Obscurity, with a Location that is the valid dynasty of their choice.

A Soul may gain a Lost Relic whose location is a Dynasty to which they have Dimension Access as a daily action, provided that doing so does not cause them to exceed the maximum number of Relics they can hold at a given time, as set out in the rule Relics of Power.

Thursday, December 02, 2021

Proposal: The Stairsteps of Legitimacy

Times out 6-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 05 Dec 2021 14:37:10 UTC

Add a new rule entitled “Luminance” as follows:

Each Soul has a nonnegative integer amount of Luminance, which is publicly tracked.

Enact a new rule entitled “Challenges” as follows:

There exists a list of Challenges, which is publicly tracked, defaulting to an empty list. Each Challenge must have a Dynasty Name, which is flavor text; a Prize, which is the name of a Relic that is not Lost; and a Creator, which is the name of a single Soul.

Enact a new subrule of “Challenges” entitled “Heritage Connection” as follows:

If a Relic is from the same Dynasty as the Dynasty named in a given Challenge, or is from a Dynasty which had the same Emperor as the Dynasty named in that Challenge, then that Relic is considered to have a Heritage Connection to that Challenge.

Trying this again, more iteratively.

Proposal: Superidling II: Unensoulening

Popular at 9-2 despite being created by nobody. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2021 18:24:42 UTC

Make pokes not a soul.

Proposal: Observation Stations

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2021 18:19:31 UTC

Add a new subrule to the rule Mortality and Darkness, called The Curara Nearby:

No player may achieve victory while the Dark One is Seen.

A note for players who are not privy to recent Discord discussions

Thanks to the speedy passage of “Power,” I was able to take advantage of a clear rules injection exploit as follows:

  1. I created a dynastic rule with the name “Solarium,” matching the Power of the Relic I hold
  2. I used that rule to give myself a Daily Action power of freely editing the text of the Ruleset
  3. I edited the Ruleset with that Daily Action to elevate my ability to freely edit text into the second paragraph of the primary core rule; I also removed the ability for non-Dark-One players to raise CfJs
  4. I then deleted the original exploit from the Dynastic rules

I have now gone quite mad with power and will soon begin a series of brutal crackdowns culminating in a year-end doomsday unless I am defeated. In the words of lemon, “this is an unprecedented disaster and we should have heeded tyguy’s advice, but in a fun way!!”

Call for Judgment: Superidling

Only the Dark One may raise a Call for Judgment. Marked illegal by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2021 19:35:48 UTC

Make pokes not a soul.

Proposal: The Heel’s Heel

Times out 5-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2021 18:00:09 UTC

Add a subrule to “Relics of Power” (or “Relics” if the rule has been renamed), called “The Weakness”:-

The Dark One may have a Weakness, being a noun which exists in the dynastic ruleset of a past dynasty, and which is a kind of weapon or kind of tool. The Dark One privately tracks their own Weakness.

If the Dark One has no Weakness, he may select one by making a Story Post naming the Stratum of the Dynasty whose ruleset this Weakness appears in and the first letter of this Weakness, and updating his Weakness accordingly.

If the Dark One has no Weakness, he may not take dynastic actions outside of this rule, nor pass the mantle.

Proposal: Power Adapter

Timed out 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2021 12:40:38 UTC

If the proposals “Dungeons and Dynasties” and “A Quest!” both failed and the Emperor voted AGAINST this proposal, this proposal has no further effect.

Rename the rule “Relics of Power” to “Relics”.

Replace the word “Power” with “House” throughout that rule, and update the gamestate so that each Relic’s House is what its Power was immediately before this proposal enacted.

We’re in danger of using the word “Power” twice to mean two different things (the constellation word of a Relic, and the power level number of a Soul).

Proposal: Type Writer

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2021 04:18:40 UTC

Create a rule, “Event Types” as follows:

An Event is an official post that meets a type definition in the dynastic rules, the type definition of which includes the following:
* A type name, such as “Auction” or “Quest”. A post with the Event type’s name as a tag is an Event of that type, provided it was (legally) posted while the type had a complete definition.
* A Response Format, the format by which a comment on that type of Event is classified as a Response for that Event. While other comments are allowed on an Event, only those comments which conform to its type’s Response Format are officially considered Responses. Whether or not a comment is currently considered a Response may change according to circumstances, but comments submitted on an Event while it is Closed can never be considered Responses.

An Event type definition may also optionally stipulate:
* Creation Condition(s). Unless they are met, an Event of that type may not be posted. They may include a format for the body of the post.
* Closing Condition(s). Unless they are met, an open Event of that type may not be closed.
* Closing Action(s). A Soul must do these when they Close an Event of that type.

An Event is either Open or Closed, defaulting to Open. Except as otherwise specified, any Soul may post or may Close an Event. To close an Event is to submit a comment on that post saying it is Closed or is being Closed, and then immediately take its Closing Action(s). Admins may update the “status” fields of Events to reflect their current statuses.

This is meant to be a generic class of official post. We’ve had a lot of similar things, already, in various dynasties, but each one had to redefine the steps to create, validate, respond to, and conclude the Events. There were a lot of weird bugs, scams and misnomers as we figured each one out. It’ll still be up to the dynasties to name and define the Event types, this just standardizes some terms and sets the stage. We can make this a Special Case rule, once it feels right.

Thursday, December 02, 2021

Proposal: A Quest!

Times out 2-6. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 04 Dec 2021 04:17:27 UTC

Add a new rule to the ruleset titled “Questing” as follows:

As a daily action, a Soul may carry out the atomic action “Questing”, as follows:
Select a dynasty from among the dynasties they have access to, and post a comment in the dice roller stating that dynasty.
Roll DICEX, where X is that Dynasty’s Stratum. Y is equal to the result. If X is equal to 1, do not roll a die, and set Y to 1 instead.
If X is equal to or greater than 3, and Y is equal to X, increase Y by 1.
For each Aegis that the soul is holding, increasing Y by one.
If Y is greater than 5, increase the Soul’s power by 1.
The Soul increases their Prominence by Y, and makes a story post detailing the events of this atomic action.

If https://blognomic.com/archive/dungeons_and_dynasties did not pass, add a new rule to the ruleset titled “Power” as follows:

Each Soul has an amount of power, defaulting to 0.

 

This isn’t intended to replace the challenge system, but can also function in the absence of it. I constructed it as a way to gradually increase prominence, with greater returns as you get access to higher dynasties.

Proposal: Power

Popular at 7-2. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2021 19:03:36 UTC

Replace the following text in rule Relics of Power:

A Relic’s Power is flavour text.

with:

Once per day, the Dark Lord may add a rule to the ruleset named after a Power. Whenever a new Power is named, it’s name cannot match the name of any existing rule. Any rule named after a Power can do nothing except define a Daily Action that can only be taken by Souls holding that Relic.

All praise the Dark Lord.

Proposal: Let’s fill the board up more with ideas[Core]

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 3-7 by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2021 17:36:13 UTC

In “Core Rules”,

In Subrule “Proposals”,

Replace

Any Soul may submit a Proposal to change the Ruleset or Gamestate, by posting an entry in the “Proposal” category that describes those changes (unless the Soul already has 2 Proposals pending, or has already made 3 Proposals that day).

With

Any Soul may submit a Proposal to change the Ruleset or Gamestate, by posting an entry in the “Proposal” category that describes those changes (unless the Soul already has 3 Proposals pending, or has already made 4 Proposals that day).

Maybe we could try something new with this.

Proposal: Unilateral Bargaining

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2021 17:32:51 UTC

Add a new subrule to “Mortality and Darkness” entitled “Dark Wrath” as follows:

If there are no Mortal Souls, or if there are no Dark Souls other than the Dark One, the Dark One may and should decrease the Prominence of all Souls by 1.

If there are no Seen Souls other than the Dark One, the Dark One may and should increase the Prominence of all Souls by 1.

Proposal: Wikipedia: The IRL Flavour Text

Passes 8-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2021 16:55:36 UTC

Change “https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Former_constellation#List_of_former_constellations”

to

“https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Former_constellation&oldid=995862721#List_of_former_constellations”.

Making it link to a permanent revision means the article can’t be edited.

Proposal: Feudal Neutral

Passes 7-1. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2021 16:54:12 UTC

In “Feudal Rewards”, replace “When a Proposal written by a given Soul is enacted, that Soul gains 2 Prominence” with:-

When a Proposal written by a given Soul is enacted and does not amend any Core, Special Case or Appendix rules, that Soul gains 2 Prominence

Not sure it’s a good idea to give players a reason to think twice about voting for core amendments, when they already struggle to reach quorum.