Wednesday, November 01, 2023

Proposal: Stay Fresh!

Timed out 1-2. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 03 Nov 2023 01:35:28 UTC

Add the following to “Style”

Each Wizard has a Freshness, which by default is 3. A Wizard is considered to be Fresh if their Freshness is greater than 0. Anything that would set a Wizard’s Freshness below 0 sets it to 0 instead.

Change the effect of “Expose” to be

Every non Fresh Wizard participating in the Duel loses 1 star for each of their styles which is None

Add the following step to the atomic action “Commencing a Duel”, right after “Apply the effects of the Duel’s selected Gewgaws, if any, that occur after spells are cast”

Reduce the Freshness of every Wizard by 1

Set the Freshness of every Wizard who was not idle on Wed 01/11/23—00:30:27 UTC to be 0.

Add a new spell called “Disarm” with the effect “The wizard in the targeted position’s Staff becomes None. For the remainder of this Duel, if they cast a spell targeting a position in the wizards ring they instead target the position one more than it (wrapping back around to the first position if needed).”

Add a new spell called “Trim” with the effect “The wizard in the targeted position’s Beard becomes None and pays 1 star to the Wizard casting this spell (If they do not have a star, their beard is still set to none by no payment is made)”

Add a new spell called “Defrock” with the effect “The wizard in the targeted position’s Robes becomes Plain. For the remainder of this Duel they do not lose any stars from the effects of Burn spells”

Make Disarm, Trim, Defrock and Gust all have the Belligerent trait and a speed of 2

New players shouldn’t get burned just because they haven’t had time to get their styles aligned yet. And I like Gust so I want more spells like it.

Proposal: Mirror Mirror on the Wall

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 02 Nov 2023 17:08:35 UTC

In the subrule “Gewgaws” add the following text:

;Prismatic Mirror: Before the spells selected for a Duel are cast, each Trendy Wizard named in that Duel’s Wizard Ring loses 1 Star, and each Wizard who selected the spell Unify loses 1 Star.

Trying to avoid a flood of everyone becoming Trendy and just coasting on easy Stars by encouraging a shift in Styles whenever the Prismatic Mirror comes up in a Duel.

Proposal: Wishlist

Timed out 1-3. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 02 Nov 2023 17:07:14 UTC

Add the following to “Gewgaws”

If there is currently an open duel, a Wizard may Request a singular Gewgaw to be added to the next duel by sending a private message to the Battle Master informing them of this request. A Wizard may also send another message to change their request, or to stop requesting a Gewgaw.

The Battle Master should uphold all private messages sent to them by a Wizard requesting a Gewgaw or to change or cancel their request as if they had been legally sent, even if they were sent prior to this rule’s enactment. When the Battle Master creates a new duel post, they may remove this paragraph from the ruleset

In “Creating a Duel”

Randomly roll DICE6. On a 2, 3, 4 or 5, randomly select 1 Gewgaw to affect this Duel. On a 6, randomly select 2 different Gewgaw to affect this Duel, rerolling duplicates. When a Gewgaw is randomly selected, it is done so by secretly randomly picking a Wizard who requested a Gewgaw while the previous duel was open, and selecting the Gewgaw that they requested. If the Battle Master is unable to complete this step because fewer Gewgaw were requested than are required to be added, then the remaining Gewgaw selections for this duel are skipped

Letting people request which Gewgaw they want to see. note that the selection is secretly random as to not tip off who requested gewgaw and who didn’t.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 9

Wizard Ring

1. Snisbo
2. Bucky
3. lendunistus
4. Raven1207
5. Zack
6. Kevan
7. JonathanDark
8. Vovix

Gewgaw is again the Contemplation Orb

Snipe is banned

Spell list is here: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_9

Proposal: Hermetic Order

Exceeded Quorum, 6-0 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Nov 2023 23:49:45 UTC

Sort the subrules of the rule “Spells” by their Speed, from highest to lowest (with tied Speeds being sorted alphabetically).

Monday, October 30, 2023

Proposal: Garment Catch-Up

Unpopular 1-5 with less than a Quorum not voting against. -Bucky

Adminned at 01 Nov 2023 22:23:06 UTC

Add the following text to the rule “Styles” immediately before the last paragraph:

A Wizard who has only default Styles, and who is not a participant in any pending or resolved duel with Duel Number 6 or greater, may change the Style of their Hat, Staff or Beard to a non-default Style for that type.

With Expose in the pool, newbies should have a chance to adopt a Style before being thrown into the Ring. Everyone who can’t take this action has already had a chance to Style as part of the duel that disqualifies them from taking this action.

Proposal: Top of the Class

Timed out, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Nov 2023 06:50:44 UTC

Add a new rule named “Achievements” and give it the following text:

Each Wizard has a publicly-tracked Achievements, which is a list of Achievement names that defaults to empty. The possible names in the list of Achievements are defined in the table below along with the criteria required for each Achievement. The criteria for an Achievement must be met between the moment just before the first Spell is cast during a Duel and the moment just after the last Spell’s Effects are applied during that same Duel.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name !! Criteria
|-
| - || -
|}

If a Wizard has at least 3 Achievements, that Wizard is considered to be an Archmage. While there is no Duel that is Pending, a Wizard achieves victory based on meeting one of the following criteria:
* If a Wizard is the only Archmage out of all Wizards, they achieve victory.
* If a Wizard is an Archmage and their Stars exceed all other Archmages’ Stars, they achieve victory.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel”, after the bullet point beginning with “Reply to the duel post”, add this bullet point:

* If it is on or after November 15 2023, for each Achievement, add it to the list of Achievements for each Wizard who met the criteria for that Achievement during this Duel if that Wizard does not have that Achievement in their list already.

 

This time, I’m just introducing the core mechanic for Achievements without defining any Achievements first, and I tightened up some of the language of when Achievement criteria apply. Achievements won’t even start to be acquired until 2 weeks from now, which gives us plenty of time to come up with a list and tweak anything that was added.

Sunday, October 29, 2023

Proposal: It’s Too You

Exceeded Quorum 5-0 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Nov 2023 06:48:14 UTC

Add the following text to the end of the rule “Personality Traits”:

A Wizard’s Personality Trait is Dominant if it exceeds all their other Personality Traits.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel”, change

Give each Wizard who selected a spell to cast in the current Duel a number of Stars equal to the Charm of that Spell

to

Give each Wizard who selected a spell to cast in the current Duel a number of Stars equal to the Charm of that Spell, minus one (to a minimum of zero) if any of the Spell’s Traits is their dominant Personality Trait

Proposal: High Achiever

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 30 Oct 2023 09:49:32 UTC

Add a new rule named “Achievements” and give it the following text:

Each Wizard has a publicly-tracked Achievements, which is a list that defaults to empty. The possible entries in the list of Achievements are defined below along with the criteria required for each Achievement:

;Trend Setter: The Wizard successfully cast Unify while being the only Trendy Wizard.
;Unique Magnifique: The Wizard successfully cast Spotlight while being the only Unique Wizard.
;Saintly: The Wizard’s Benevolent trait value is at least 5 and is greater than all other of their Personality Traits’ values combined.
;Fireproof: The Wizard was in the target position of one or more Burn spells but did not lose any Stars from the effects of any of the Burn spells.
;Elite Sniper: The Wizard successfully cast Snipe and prevented the Wizard that they named from casting Magical Armor.
;Expert Forager: The Wizard successfully cast Gather and did not lose Stars from any other Spell.

If a Wizard has at least 3 Achievements, that Wizard is considered to be an Archmage. The first Wizard to be an Archmage achieves victory. If there is more than one Archmage, the Archmage with the higest Stars among all Archmages achieves victory. If more than one Archmage has the highest Stars, no Archmage achieves victory until only one Archmage has the highest Stars among all Archmages.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel”, after the bullet point beginning with “Reply to the duel post”, add this bullet point:

* For each Achievement, add it to the list of Achievements for each Wizard who met the criteria for that Achievement during this Duel if that Wizard does not have that Achievement in their list already.

An attempt at setting up the win conditions.

Saturday, October 28, 2023

Call for Judgment: Brought To You By The Letter L

Popular by Quorum, 5-0. -Bucky

Adminned at 30 Oct 2023 16:14:10 UTC

In the subrule “Expose” replace the text “the Duel l” with “the Duel”.

In the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List 8” in the text for the spell “Expose” replace the text “the Duel l” with “the Duel”.

If there exists a wiki page named “Wizard Duel Spell List 9”, on that page in the text for the spell “Expose” replace the text “the Duel l” with “the Duel”.

When Expose was first introduced in the proposal Dressed for Success it had this unfortunate typo. Since there is no such thing as “the Duel L” (that’s a lower-case L in the text) it’s likely that the Spell would not work, or at least could be challenged. I’m making this a CfJ because I’m pretty sure this was a typo and not intentional.

Proposal: Synergy Improvements

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 30 Oct 2023 09:46:46 UTC

Change the contents of the rule “Synergy” to:

Speed: 5
Effect: The next time the Effects of a Spell are applied to this Wizard during the current Duel, apply the same Effects to the Wizard who cast it.

Synergy now doesn’t need the Misdirection exception (Misdirection is faster) but this speed change makes it outspeed Gust.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 8

The wizard ring is:

1. lendunistus
2. Zack
3. JonathanDark
4. Bucky
5. Vovix
6. Raven1207
7. Snisbo
8. Kevan

The Gewgaw for this duel are both the Contemplation Orb and the Silver Candelabra

Siphon is banned

Spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_8

Friday, October 27, 2023

Proposal: Birds of a Feather

Unpopular 1-6 with a quorum opposed. -Bucky

Adminned at 29 Oct 2023 04:05:03 UTC

In the rule “Personality Traits” add the following text:

A Wizard’s Dominant Trait is that Wizard’s single Personality Trait with a value of at least 3 and higher than any of that Wizard’s other Personality Traits. If a Wizard does not have a single Personality Trait whose value meets the preceeding criteria, that Wizard does not have a Dominant Trait.

In the rule “Spells” add a subrule named “Simpatico” and give it the following text:

Effect: All Wizards in this Duel with the same Dominant Trait as the Wizard casting this spell, including this Wizard, gain 1 Star. If no other Wizards have the same Dominant Trait as the Wizard casting this Spell, this Wizard gains 3 Stars instead of 1. This spell has no effect if the Wizard casting it has no Dominant Trait.
Traits: The Dominant Trait, if any, of the Wizard casting this Spell

Proposal: Star Skimming

Reached Quorum, 5-2. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 28 Oct 2023 21:14:14 UTC

In the effect of “Siphon”, replace “randomly select one of those Wizards to lose 1 Star” with:-

the Wizard among them with the lowest-numbered position in the Wizard Ring loses 1 Star

Changing Siphon’s victim selection to use the same non-random tiebreak as spellcasting.

Thursday, October 26, 2023

Proposal: Tome Improvements [Appendix]

Reached Quorum, 5-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 28 Oct 2023 21:08:18 UTC

For each subrule of “Spells”, put {{Flair top|Antique box}} on a new line immediately before its heading, and {{Flair bottom}} on a new line at the end of the rule.

In the Appendix’s keyword definition of “Gamestate”, replace “any images or Templates contained within those Wiki Pages” with:-

any images or Templates contained within (or indirectly invoked by Templates contained within) those Wiki Pages

Proposing to bring one of Zack’s Flair templates into the spell list manually. There’s a preview of how this will look in my wiki sandbox.

I think it’s enough to say that indirect usage of templates makes those templates gamestate - meaning that Template:Flair/Antique_box.css will become gamestate upon enactment, and will trigger “If a wiki page becomes gamestate as a result of a Votable Matter enacting…” to revert it if it gets changed during the voting period.

Proposal: Armorrific

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Oct 2023 12:19:05 UTC

Set the speed of magical armor to be 90

Right now, Magical Armor might not actually work. Which given the cost of casting it seems wrong.

Not updating the current round because at this point it might not be ready by tomorrow.

Proposal: Whats your number?

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Oct 2023 12:10:56 UTC

Add the following to “Engaging in a duel”

If the input for a spell refers to a numerical position in the Wizard ring, Wizards may instead reference the name of a Wizard (or a nickname for the Wizard, as long as it is clear which Wizard they are referring to) and if they do the Battle Master may assume they are targeting the numerical position held by that Wizard in the wizard ring at the start of the duel

 

A lot of people keep trying to target Wizards by name. Which only actually works for snipe. I have to keep being like “you need to target numerical positions”. This removes some of the process. Also allows people to mention stuff like “Raven” or “Lendun” and have it still work.

Thursday, October 26, 2023

Call for Judgment: Ungreed

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 0 votes to 5 by Kevan.

Adminned at 26 Oct 2023 08:47:36 UTC

Subtract 5 stars from the Wizard known as lendunistus’s stars.

I don’t think the reading of greed as used in duel 6 works. I think it’s worth clarifying, as JD is doing with Greed is Too Good, but I also don’t think that lendun should be getting the stars from it as written. If we had a different battle master who interpreted it differently, lendun’s greed might have done nothing, meaning this result came about only through Clucky’s interpretation of the rules (which I think in this case, was incorrect). Regardless, nothing should ever come down to interpretation and be able to be done in different ways depending on who processes it, so… CFJ time

Proposal: Greed is Too Good

Reached Quorum, 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 26 Oct 2023 18:38:40 UTC

In the subrule “Greed” replace the word “cast” with “selected”.

On the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List 7” in the Effect for Greed, replace the word “cast” with “selected”.

The original intention of Greed was to set up a guessing game where if a Wizard risks selecting to cast Greed and is the only Wizard to do so, they would be rewarded with 5 Stars. With the latest rules, even though the wording of Greed is ” If no other Wizard cast the Greed spell this Duel”, since spells of the same Speed are cast in order of the Ring lowest to highest, the first Wizard to cast Greed meets the criteria since technically no other Wizard has “yet” cast the Greed spell this Duel. This makes Greed a much easier guessing game for Wizards at the front of the Ring.

The simplest fix to get it back to the intended use is to change “cast” to “selected”.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 7

Wizard Ring:

1. JonathanDark
2. lendunistus
3. Bucky
4. Raven1207
5. Vovix
6. Snisbo
7. Kevan
8. Zack

https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_7

Gift is banned

The Gewgaw is the Bonsai Volcano again

Proposal: Single Unban

Reached Quorum, 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 26 Oct 2023 18:36:51 UTC

If the proposal “Unban list” is enacted, this proposal does nothing.

Add the following text at the beginning of the rule “Fizzle”:

Fizzle is excluded from random selections to be removed from a Wizard Duel’s spell list as long as the spell Snipe remains on that spell list.

Proposal: The Other Hand

Exceeded Quorum, 6-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 26 Oct 2023 18:33:29 UTC

In “Engaging in a Duel”, after “privately communicating with the Battle Master the name of the spell and any inputs for that spell.” add:-

A Wizard may also clear their selection of a spell for an open duel by privately communicating this intention to the Battle Master.

Seems more feature than bug that a group or an individual can choose to delay the next round to wait and see how a particular proposal pans out - with the risk of giving away the fact that they are waiting for something. Allowing the withdrawal of spell choices would back that idea up, and remove an existing downside to submitting an early Spell instruction.

Tuesday, October 24, 2023

Proposal: [Core] A Polite Knock

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 26 Oct 2023 18:32:32 UTC

In the subrule “Idle Wizards”, before the text “Admins may render themselves” add the following text:

Any Admin who is aware that a Wizard is within 24 hours of being rendered Idle due to not posting an entry or comment should attempt to communicate with that Wizard and inform them of this fact.

Proposal: Unban list

Timed out 1-3 with 1 DEF. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 26 Oct 2023 18:31:49 UTC

Change the final step of the Perform a Duel atomic action to read:

* Randomly choose a spell which is neither mentioned in any Gewgaws affecting this duel nor which has the tag [Always Available] from the Spell List for the current duel, and remove it from the spell list.

In the rule spells, add the following point after “a set of traits” (or “a speed”, if “a set of traits” does not exist):

*a number of tags

To the subrules of the rule Spells called “Snipe”, “Misdirection”, “Fizzle”, and “Gather”, add the following:

Tags: [Always Available]

If Proposal: This Round’s Banned Spell Is… failed, this proposal instead does nothing.

Counterplay spells should always remain active. Some spells entire risk is that they are obvious and can be shut down, but if snipe/misdirection are removed, then there’s no reason not to go for those risky spells. Also sets up the framework to easily add more spells to an unban list later if we want.

Proposal: Myers and Briggs Wizard Sorting System

Exceeded Quorum, 2-0 with 6 DEFs and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 25 Oct 2023 20:33:49 UTC

Add a new rule called “Personality Traits” and give it the following text:

Each Wizard has a set of Personality Traits, where each Personality Trait is a number that is publicly tracked and defaults to 0. The Personality Traits are:

* Selfish
* Benevolent
* Belligerent
* Reclusive

In the rule “Commencing a Duel” before the bullet point that begins with “Each Wizard’s Spell is cast” add this bullet point:

* For each Wizard who selected a spell to cast in the current Duel, increase each of that Wizard’s Personality Traits that match the Spell’s Traits, if any, by 1.

In the rule “Spells” add the following bullet point after “a speed”:

* a set of traits

and in the same rule add this paragraph:

If a Spell has Traits, the Traits are a list of one or more Personality Traits.

In the subrules “Greed”, “Gather”, “Snipe”, and “Spotlight” add this text:

Traits: Selfish

In the subrules “Burn”, “Doom Cloud”, and “Expose” add this text:

Traits: Belligerent

In the subrules “Gift” and “Unify” add this text:

Traits: Benevolent

In the subrules “Misdirection” and “Magical Armor” add this text:

Traits: Reclusive

In the subrule “Siphon” add this text:

Traits: Selfish, Belligerent

This shapes a Wizard’s personality scores according to the spells they select. We can use this in conjunction with other mechanisms to influence what types of spells Wizards are incentivized to cast and thus move the Stars economy up instead of down. For example, if the eventual win condition requires a Wizard to be the least Belligerent, Wizards will be less likely to cast Spells with that Trait.

Technically, this information could be derived rather than tracked, but then we’d have to establish when derivation of these traits should have begun. I’d rather just have actual gamestate tracking. It also makes it easier to see personality traits at a glance and over time.

Tuesday, October 24, 2023

Proposal: This Round’s Banned Spell Is…

Exceeded Quorum, 7-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 25 Oct 2023 20:31:31 UTC

In the rule “Creating A Duel”, after

Set the contents of the wiki page titled “Wizard Duel Spell List X” where X is the duel number to be the current spell list in the ruleset

add the step:

* Randomly choose a spell that is not mentioned in the effect of any Gewgaws affecting this duel from the wiki page from the previous step, and remove it from the spell list on that page.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 6

The Wizard Ring for this duel is

1. lendunistus
2. Bucky
3. Kevan
4. Snisbo
5. JonathanDark
6. Vovix
7. Zack
8. Raven1207

The Spell List is https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_6

There is one Gewgaw for this duel: Bonsai Volcano

Sudden Coincidental Loss of Interest

Idling myself. Quorum falls to 5.

Proposal: Moving Frame of Refrence

Exceeded Quorum, 7-0 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 25 Oct 2023 20:29:35 UTC

Remove “Whenever a Spell’s Effect relies on information about another Wizard’s personal gamestate in order to resolve (eg how many Stars that Wizard has, what kind of Style their Hat is etc), the frame of reference for that information is the moment immediately before the duel was resolved.” from the ruleset

Shouldn’t be needed anymore and I’d rather have people’s attire changes actually effect the current round

Proposal: Weather War

Exceeded Quorum, 7-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 25 Oct 2023 20:24:46 UTC

In the rule “Misdirection”, set the Speed to 10

Create a new Spell called “Gust” as a subrule of rule 2.2 with the following text:

Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring
Effect: The wizard in the targeted position’s Hat becomes None. For the remainder of this Duel, they don’t lose stars from the effects of Doom Cloud spells.
Speed: 2

Proposal: Crystal Kingdom

Times out unpopular 3-3. -Bucky

Adminned at 25 Oct 2023 19:39:54 UTC

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

Each Wizard has a publicly tracked number of Crystals which is by default 0. A Wizards Star Power is equal to their Stars, plus five times the number of crystals they have.

If a Wizard ever has 0 stars but more than 0 crystals, they immediately lose 1 crystal and gain 5 stars

Add a new spell called “Crystalize” with a cost of 5 and the effect “Gain a Crystal”

Add a new spell called “Detonate” with an effect “If you have at least 1 crystal, reduce your crystals by 1 and reduce all other players stars by 5. Otherwise nothing happens.”

Add a new spell called “Enrich” with an effect “If you have at least 1 crystal, reduce your crystals by 1 and gain 10 stars. Otherwise nothing happens.”

If https://blognomic.com/archive/sidereal_drift passed, then in “Wizards” replace “The Lode of a specified group of Wizards is a number equal to the total number of their Stars” with “The Lode of a specified group of Wizards is a number equal to the total number of their Star Power”

...And Returns with a Snap

Snisbo is un-idled. Quorum remains at 5.

Proposal: Less weaponized idling [Special Case]

Fewer than Quorum not voting AGAINST, 3-5. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 24 Oct 2023 23:19:52 UTC

Append to the Special Case rule “Dynastic Tracking” the following:

When a Wizard updates the gamestate tracking page, that edit is considered equivalent to posting an entry or comment, exclusively for the purposes of determining whether that Wizard can be rendered Idle by an Admin per the rule “Idle Wizards.”

Any number of dynasties see proposals wind down and dynastic-action activity accelerate as they get toward the endgame, when the four-day idling rule suddenly becomes much more powerful. If you’re participating, you’re not idle. Updated in an attempt to compromise on the public nature of dynastic actions versus gamestate-tracking edits.

Call for Judgment: Premature Supernova

Reached Quorum 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 23 Oct 2023 17:37:43 UTC

Unidle the Wizard named Snisbo

Treat all private communication between the Wizard named Snisbo and the Battle Master during the current duel as if the Wizard named Snisbo was an active Wizard when those communications were sent

Snisbo has actively been participating in the dynasty and just failed to make a comment.

I’m not sure when the 4 day rule went into effect, but the combination of that and not being able to unidle for four days feels super harsh, especially when they have still been actively participating in the dynasty. Gonna try to think through a way to clean up the idling rules tomorrow, but for now want to get Snisbo back in the game

Vanishing in a sparkle of stars

Snisbo has idled out after 96 hours (reduced timer mentioned at this link). Quorum remains at 5.

Monday, October 23, 2023

Proposal: Rituals

Fewer than Quorum not voting AGAINST, 1-5 with 2 DEFs. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 24 Oct 2023 23:18:00 UTC

Create a new rule entitled “Rituals” as follows:

Some Dynastic Actions are Ritual Actions, which any given Wizard can perform no more than once in the intervening period of time between the Commencements of two successive Duels.

Thinking about moving things like Style changes into this, and maybe something like adding Gewgaws to a selection pool too. But I’m not sure if I’m missing anything with this wording and would appreciate feedback.

Proposal: [Appendix] Flair

Timed out 1-3. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 24 Oct 2023 23:14:45 UTC

Add a new rule to the Appendix called “Flair” as follows:

Flair is a type of wiki template used to style the Ruleset. The Battle Master may freely add or remove flair from the Dynastic Rules, except where regulated by the ruleset. Flair has no effect on the rules or gamestate unless specified by the ruleset.

To add a flair to the ruleset:
* For single-line flair, insert <nowiki>{{Flair|Flair name}}</nowiki> between two lines of wikitext.
* For multi-line flair, insert <nowiki>{{Flair top|Flair name}}</nowiki> before the first line and <nowiki>{{Flair bottom}}</nowiki> after the last.

To create a new flair, a Wizard or Idle Wizard can create a wiki page called “Template:Flair/Flair name.css” where “Flair name” is the name of the flair. The CSS styles of a flair may not add or remove text from the ruleset, or otherwise obscure/alter the contents of the ruleset except in appearance. Any Wizard or Idle Wizard may edit a flair’s CSS if it is not in the ruleset, or if it does not meet these criteria, to make it so.

The wiki page [[List of Flairs]] is flavourtext and should be kept up-to-date with a list of all available flairs.

Something like this was used in Kevan 29 for Zone Rules, and it made the ruleset more visually interesting and easier to parse. I personally think the variety made things more fun and every dynasty could all benefit from having it as an option. For some examples of Flairs I’ve already created, see https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=List_of_Flairs.

Proposal: Guilded Age

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 2 votes to 6 by Kevan.

Adminned at 24 Oct 2023 09:46:25 UTC

Add the following new rule called “Guilds” directly after “Wizards”:

Every Wizard may belong to exactly one Guild, which is tracked on the Duel Sheet. A Guild must have a name, and may have a colour and a familiar (which are flavourtext). A Guild is said to have a number of stars equal to the sum of stars held by its members.

Any wizard may create a guild if they have not done so within the last 7 days. When a Wizard creates a guild they automatically join that guild and become its Archmage.

A Wizard may leave their current guild or join a Guild if they have not changed their Guild since the last Duel. If a Wizard joins a Guild and is expelled from that same Guild before the next Duel commences, they may join another guild they are not expelled from.

Add the following subrule to “Guilds” called “Archmages”:

Each Guild has an Archmage, which defaults to the member of that Guild with the most Stars. If the Archmage of a Guild leaves that Guild, they cease to be the Archmage of that Guild.

An Archmage may change their Guild’s name, color, and/or familiar if it hasn’t been changed within the last 96 hours (4 days) by making a Story Post on the blog announcing the changes.

Add the following subrule to “Guilds” called “Expulsion”:

The Archmage of a guild may expel a Wizard from their guild. A Wizard may not be a member of a guild they are expelled from.

The list of Wizards who have been expelled from a particular guild is publicly tracked. An Archmage may un-expel a Wizard from their guild by removing them from that list.

Not sure how everyone feels about a teams mechanic so I made it pretty barebones; As written it doesn’t technically require competition between teams but I like the additional room for creativity and I think it opens up some interesting possibilities for collaboration and potential win conditions.

Proposal: Sidereal Drift

Reached quorum 6 votes to 3 with all players voting. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 24 Oct 2023 09:17:34 UTC

In “Wizards”, replace “Each Wizard has a publicly tracked non-negative integer number of Stars, which defaults to twenty or the lowest number of Stars held by any Wizard, whichever is higher.” with:-

Each Wizard has a publicly tracked non-negative integer number of Stars, which defaults to the Lode of all other Wizards.

The Lode of a specified group of Wizards is a number equal to the total number of their Stars, divided by the number of Wizards in that group.

When a Wizard (the “Returner”) is unidled having been previously non-idle in the dynasty, the Lode of all other Wizards is compared what the Lode of all Wizards was at the point immediately after the Returner last went idle: if the first Lode is higher, the Returner’s Stars are increased by the difference between those values; if the Lode is lower, the Returner’s Stars are decreased by the difference.

Changing the new player Star default to always the average (since numbers seem to be tending towards zero), and saying that an unidling Wizard has their Stars adjusted to match how the overall Star count has changed since they left.

Saturday, October 21, 2023

Proposal: A Unique Snowflake

Reached Quorum 5-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 23 Oct 2023 17:54:54 UTC

In the rule “Style” replace the text “A Wizard is Unique if all of their Styles are Out of Fashion” with the following text:

A Wizard is Unique if, for each of their Styles, they are the only Wizard with that Style, the Style is Out of Fashion, and the Style is not “None”.

Fixing a scam that makes it all too easy to be Unique. Because “None” is always 0 Fashion Score, it’s always Out of Fashion, and since everyone started with “Plain” Robes, making “Plain” In Fashion, it’s simple to do like Kevan did and just change Robes to be something other than “Plain”, and instantly you are Unique by the current definition.

I’m really shocked that Kevan didn’t actually use this scam. He was the only Wizard to change his Style so far, and he specifically changed his Robes, hence my Snipe on him casting Spotlight because I thought he was going to take advantage of this.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 5

Wizard Ring:

1. Brendan*
2. JonathanDark*
3. Raven1207
4. lendunistus
5. Vovix
6. Zack
7. Snisbo
8. Kevan*

Spell List: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_5

No Gewgaw were selected for this duel

Proposal: Hatterday Night Feaver

Reached quorum 5 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Oct 2023 08:21:14 UTC

Remove the spell “Attire” from the Spell list

Add the following to “Style”

If there is currently an open duel, a Wizard may request a style change by sending a private message to the Battle Master indicating which of their Styles they wish to change, and what they wish their new value for that Style to become. A Wizard may only request one one change in Style per duel, so if they send a new request to change their style the old request is overwritten. A Wizard may never request to change any of their Styles to none.

Add the following to the first step of the atomic action for resolving a duel

For each Wizard which requested to change their Style while this duel was open, update that Wizard’s requested Style to match their request

Proposal: Free!! Hats!!!!

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 3 votes to 4 by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Oct 2023 08:18:17 UTC

Select a random Style of Hat other than None. Set the Hat of every Wizard except the Battle Master to that Style.

For each Wizard’s EVC on this Proposal which includes the text “I hate fun”: instead of setting that Wizard’s Style of Hat to the one selected above, select a random Style of Hat other than None for that Wizard, and set that Wizard’s Style of Hat to that Style.

Friday, October 20, 2023

Proposal: More Random Fixes

Timed Out. Passes 5-2—Clucky

Adminned at 23 Oct 2023 04:21:15 UTC

If Spells have a Speed make the following three changes

1) Set the Speed of Snipe to be 100

2) Remove “However, if another Wizard were to cast Snipe and successfully named the Wizard that casted Magic Armor, the spell is considered casted for the condition in the first sentence of this effect but the Wizard who casted Magic Armor will not gain the effects of the Magic Armor.” from Magical Armor.

3) Set the speed of Synergy to be 2. Change its effect to be

If this Wizard is in the targeted position of one or more Spells with speed less than this one, secretly randomly select one of those Spells, or select that Spell if it is just one Spell. After the Effects of the selected Spell are applied to this Wizard, apply the same Effects to the Wizard who cast the selected Spell. If this Effect triggers due to Misdirection, the Spell whose target changed is the Spell that this Effect applies to.

Also make the following changes

In “Duels” replace

The Battle Master is permitted to publicly announce how many Wizards are yet to select a spell for a given duel.

with

The Battle Master is permitted to publicly announce which Wizards are yet to select a spell for a given duel, but may not reveal any details about what spells Wizards have selected for casting other than to the Wizard who made the selection.

In “Creating A Duel” replace

Secretly randomly roll DICE6. On a 4 or 5, secretly randomly select 1 Gewgaw to affect this Duel. On a 6, secretly randomly select 2 Gewgaws to affect this Duel, rerolling duplicates, or if there are only 2 Gewgaws to select from, select both.

with

Randomly roll DICE6. On a 2, 3, 4 or 5, randomly select 1 Gewgaw to affect this Duel. On a 6, randomly select 2 different Gewgaw to affect this Duel, rerolling duplicates, or if there are only 2 Gewgaws to select from, select both.

also replace

and (if one is selected) the Gewgaw

with

and (if any are selected) the Gewgaw

Replace “Gewgaws” with “Gewgaw” throughout the ruleset.

Making some tweaks to speed. Making it so that I can name and shame, while also making it clear that I can’t reveal secrets. Fixing the gewgaw creation rules to give us more duels gewgaw and remove the secret part as its not really needed. And then lastly just make the plural of “Gewgaw” “Gewgaw” so there are a few places like “Apply the effects of the Duel’s selected Gewgaw, if any, that occur before spells are cast” that technically still currently imply there can only be one such Gewgaw.

Proposal: Trend Setters

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 21 Oct 2023 20:25:37 UTC

In the subrule “Attire”, replace the entire text of that subrule with the following:

Inputs: A Style for each of Hat, Robes, Staff and Beard other than “None” for each
Effect: Set this Wizard’s Hat, Robes, Staff and Beard to match the chosen Style for each.

Adding some incentives for using the Attire spell, with extra incentive for going for unique styles to keep the fashion trends dynamic.

Making it simpler per the observation that it’s too disadvantageous to have to use Attire 4 times to change all of the Styles.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 4

Wizard Ring for this duel is:

1. lendunistus
2. Snisbo
3. Brendan
4. Raven1207
5. Zack
6. JonathanDark
7. Vovix
8. Kevan

The spell list is https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_4

The Gewgaw is a Pewter Elephant

Proposal: Slower and Steadier

Reached Quorum 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 21 Oct 2023 20:17:57 UTC

Reword the step in the rule “Commencing a Duel” which begins “Each spell selected for casting by a Wizard is cast…” to the following:

* Each Wizard’s Spell is cast starting with the highest-Speed Spells and continuing to the next highest-Speed Spells, until all Spells have been cast. If multiple Wizards cast Spells with the same Speed, then those Spells are cast in the same order as those Wizards’ order in the Wizard Ring, lowest to highest. When a Spell is cast, apply the effects of that Spell according to the Spell List for the current Duel, with those effects being applied to the Wizard casting the Spell unless otherwise stated. Idle Wizards who are targeted by a Spell are still considered Wizards for the purposes of resolving a Spell’s effects, and may have their gamestate changed by other Wizards’ Spells, but the Idle Wizards’ Spells are not cast.

Reword the effect in the Spell rule “Misdirection” as follows:

For the remainder of this Duel, if the Wizard casting this Spell is in a targeted position for the Input of any other Wizard’s Spell, the targeted position is changed to the Input position.

Set the Speed of the Spell rule “Snipe” to 10, and change its effect to:

If and only if the named Wizard has selected to cast the named Spell in this duel, then a) consider the named Wizard to have selected the Spell Fizzle instead, and b) increase the Stars of the Wizard casting this Snipe Spell by 2.

Add a new Spell called “Fizzle” with a Speed of 0 and the following effect:

The Wizard casting Fizzle is disappointed.

Revised after discussion in the comments and on Discord. The goal here is to allow us to do things like counter counterspells, and to eliminate the idea of things being said to occur simultaneously when they actually can’t.

Proposal: Artefacts Nouveau

Exceeded Quorum 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 21 Oct 2023 00:47:28 UTC

Add three Gewgaws to the list in that rule:-

Silver Candelabra
Before the spells selected for the Duel are cast, each Wizard who has selected a Spell not selected by any other Wizard for that Duel gains 1 Star.
Stygian Censer
Wizards may not select numerical positions as inputs which are not adjacent to their own position.
Ice Prism
Spells which contain the word “random”, “randomly” or a DICE value in their Effect are instead considered to have an Effect of “nothing happens”.

Friday, October 20, 2023

Proposal: Free Hats!!

Unpopular, fewer than Quorum not voting AGAINST, 1-4 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting AGAINST. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 21 Oct 2023 00:46:12 UTC

For each Wizard except the Battle Master, select a random Style of Hat other than None, then set that Wizard’s Hat to the selected Style.

If the EVC of a Wizard other than the Battle Master contains the name of a single Style of Hat, set that Wizard’s Hat to that Style, instead of selecting one randomly for that Wizard.

Proposal: Dressed For Success

Exceeded Quorum, 5-0 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 20 Oct 2023 22:27:27 UTC

Add a new spell called Expose with the following effects and speed

Effect: Every Wizard participating in the Duel l loses 1 star for each of their styles which is None

Update the Speed of Attire to be 2

Wanna get more people engaging with styles. Also realized that Spotlight and Unify are currently broken with Attire. Easiest fix just seems to make attire fast.

Proposal: Minor Magical Mendings

Quorum Reached. Passed 6-0—Clucky

Adminned at 20 Oct 2023 19:30:54 UTC

In the subrule “Siphon”, after the text “If any Wizards other than this Wizard received any Stars from one or more Spells” add this text:

this Duel

In the subrule “Creating a Duel”, replace “Optionally select a Gewgaw to affect this Duel” with this text:

Secretly randomly roll DICE6. On a 4 or 5, secretly randomly select 1 Gewgaw to affect this Duel. On a 6, secretly randomly select 2 Gewgaws to affect this Duel, rerolling duplicates, or if there are only 2 Gewgaws to select from, select both.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel”, replace the word “closed” with “resolved”. Set the state of all existing Duels that are not Open or Pending to Resolved.

If the rule “Wizard Marks” exists, remove the paragraph beginning with “The Battle Master should perform the Update Marks action” and in the rule “Commencing a Duel” add this text after “Remove all string entries in the Wizard Marks”

, then add each string received from a Wizard since the previous Duel was resolved as an entry in the Wizard Marks.

A few scattered fixes:

* A potential scam with Siphon
* A probability curve for Gewgaws
* A wording issue where the end of the Duel was called “closed” even though no such state is defined
* Addressing Clucky’s issue of when the latest set of Wizard Marks should be posted.

Proposal: Leaving Your Mark

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 20 Oct 2023 18:20:58 UTC

Add a new rule called “Wizard Marks” and give it the following text:

There is a publicly-tracked Wizard Marks which is a list of strings, defaulting to an empty list, where each string may contain 1-100 alphanumeric, whitespace, and punctuation characters.

At any time, a Wizard who has not done so since the most recent Duel was resolved may secretly communicate to the Battle Master a string that they wish to add to the Wizard Marks.

The Battle Master should perform the Update Marks action, which is an atomic action in which the Battle Master adds each string received from a Wizard since the previous Update Marks to the Wizard Marks, if it has been at least 6 hours since the last time the Battle Master has done so. If the Battle Master has never performed the Update Marks action this dynasty, they should perform it at least 6 hours after receiving a string from a Wizard.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel” after the bullet starting with “Reply to the duel post” add this bullet point:

* Remove all string entries in the Wizard Marks.

This allows anonymous public messages, which has many uses, and could be a good alternative to Alliances. The 6-hour prohibition between updates is to obfuscate who the likely author of a message is based on their time zone.

Wizard Marks fade after each Duel, but since Duels can’t be resolved until every Wizard has selected a Spell, this should still give each Wizard a chance to also submit a message. Even if the messages in the Wizard Marks are cleared before everyone has had a chance to read them, the gamestate history will still have them, so they are viewable long-term. I just didn’t want them collecting indefinitely over time in the gamestate page.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 3

The Wizard Ring for this duel is:

1. Brendan
2. lendunistus
3. Vovix
4. Kevan
5. Snisbo
6. JonathanDark
7. Zack
8. Raven1207

The Spell List is https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_3

Thursday, October 19, 2023

Proposal: Self Balancing Spell List

Passes 6-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 20 Oct 2023 16:05:18 UTC

Add the following to the end of the first paragraph in “Engaging in a Duel”

If a Wizard changes which spell they are casting in a given duel, they are only considered to have selected their new spell for casting, and so are not considered to have selected the previous spell.


Add the following to “Spells”

Each Spell has a Charm, which is by default 0. The Charm of each Spell is publicly tracked on the gamestate tracking page.

Add the following in between the first and the second steps in the atomic action to resolve a duel

Give each Wizard who selected a spell to cast in the current Duel a number of Stars equal to the Charm of that Spell

Add the following in between the third and the fourth steps in the atomic action to resolve a duel

Set the Charm of any Spell which was selected for casting this duel to 0. Increase the Charm of any Spell which was listed in the Spell List for this duel but was not selected for casting by any Wizard this duel by 1.

Add a Gewgaw named “Pewter Elephant” with the following effect

Before the spells selected for a Duel are cast, each Wizard who selected a Spell with positive Charm gains 1 additional Star.

The idea is that if no one casts a spell, everyone who cast the spell next round gains a bonus star. Reward keeps going up and up until eventually it becomes worth it to cast the spell just for the stars.

Proposal: Wizard teamwork makes the etc etc

Withdrawn. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 20 Oct 2023 16:00:58 UTC

Activate the Declared Alliances special case rule.

One of the votes against from this proposal’s first attempt has idled out, and I’m a vote in favor who has since unidled, so I think it’s worth trying. There are obviously already alliances in play; why not make them explicit?

Too Duel, Too Fateous

This one isn’t grabbing me. See you on the next go round.

Quorum drops to 5.

Proposal: Protection

Exceeded Quorum, 4-0 with 2 DEFs and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 23:26:30 UTC

In the rule “Spells” add a subrule named “Magical Armor” with the following description:

Effect: If the Wizard that cast this spell didn’t previously during Wizard Duel X-1 or Wizard Duel X-2(X being the current duel number), then that Wizard is not effected by any spells casted during Wizard Duel X. However, if another Wizard were to cast Snipe and successfully named the Wizard that casted Magic Armor, the spell is considered casted for the condition in the first sentence of this effect but the Wizard who casted Magic Armor will not gain the effects of the Magic Armor.

Proposal: Gewgaw Power!

Withdrawn—clucky

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 22:38:08 UTC

In “Creating a duel” replace

* Optionally select a Gewgaw to affect this Duel

with

* Randomly select a Gewgaw to affect this Duel, known as the Prime Gewgaw for the duel
* Secretly randomly select a different, second Gewgaw to affect this Duel, known as the Shadow Gewgaw for the duel

in “Creating a duel” replace “and (if one is selected) the Gewgaw” with

and the Prime Gewgaw

In “Commencing a duel” after “, or failure to have any effect at all” add

. Also reveal the Shadow Gewgaw for the Duel

In “Commencing a Duel” replace “Apply the effects of the Duel’s selected Gewgaw” with “Apply the effects of all the Duel’s selected Gewgaws” wherever it occurs

Add a new Gewgaw called “Golden Coin” with the following effect

Before the spells selected for a Duel are cast, the cost of spells is reduced by 1, to a minimum of 0, for the purposes of this duel

Add a new Gewgaw called “Drained Crystal” with the following effect

This Gewgaw has no effect

Proposal: The Need for Speed

Exceeded Quorum, 4-1 with 2 DEFs and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 16:43:41 UTC

In the rule “Spells”, add the following bullet after the bullet “a set of inputs”:

* a speed

and in the same rule add this text:

A spell’s speed is a non-negative integer. If a spell does not have a speed defined, its speed defaults to 1. Any action that would lower a spell’s speed below 0 instead sets it to 0.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel”, replace “Each spell selected for casting by a Wizard is cast simultaneously.” with the following:

Each spell selected for casting by a Wizard is cast starting with the Spells with the highest speed, where Spells with equal speed are cast simultaneously, and then repeating this step in decreasing numerical order by speed until all selected spells are processed. Spells cast at a lower Speed cannot affect Spells cast at a higher Speed.

In the subrule “Misdirection” add this text:

Speed: 2

and in the same subrule replace the text “any Spell this Duel” with this text:

any Spell with a lower Speed than this Spell

and in the same subrule remove the text “This also applies to a targeted position changed by another Wizard’s Misdirection spell.” if it exists.

In the subrule “Siphon” replace the text “receives” with “received” and add this text:

Speed: 0

I know that this might not be strictly necessary, as Clucky pointed out in Discord, but it helps establish the base mechanic of Speed. It also keeps Misdirection from being too overpowered. I anticipate more uses for Speed if this is enacted.

Proposal: Abracadabra

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 16:36:32 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Magic Words”:-

The terms “Duel”, “Squabble”, “Scuffle”, “Affray”, “Brouhaha”, “Clash”, “Quarrel”, “Standoff”, “Bout”, “Quibble” and “Battle” are the Magic Words: they are all considered to be synonyms of each other, outside of this rule.

If they have not already done so during the current dynasty, a Wizard (or the Battle Master) may add a Magic Word to the Forbidden Words list, which is tracked at the end of this paragraph. The Forbidden Words are:

If a Forbidden Word appears in the ruleset outside of this rule, then any Wizard may choose a single non-Forbidden Magic Word and replace the Forbidden Word with that, throughout the dynastic ruleset (except for this rule).

Making the discussed Duel terminology part of the ruleset: the words are all (and always will be) synonyms, but players can opt to veto and change the current main one.

Proposal: Thisdirection

Passes 6-0 with 2 unresolved deferentials. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 16:11:40 UTC

To the start of the Misdirection rule, add:

Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring, which is adjacent to that of the caster.

In the effect of Misdirection, change “is changed to a randomly-selected position that is not this Wizard’s position. This also applies” to:-

is changed to the Input position. This does not apply

Misdirection retargetting at pure random seems less interesting than having to consciously select a target.

(This also switches off whether the effect stacks, so that a spell doesn’t get caught in an infinite loop under this version of it, if two Wizards Misdirect to each other and one gets hit by an external spell.)

Proposal: Fashion is my Passion

Passes 7-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 15:55:02 UTC

Add a paragraph to the rule “Style” which reads:

If a Style is not In Fashion, it is Out of Fashion. A Wizard is Unique if all of their Styles are Out of Fashion.



Add a Subrule to the Rule “Spells” named “Spotlight” with the following text:

Effect: If this Wizard is Unique, they gain 5 stars.



Add a Subrule to the Rule “Spells” named “Unify” with the following text:

Effect: All Trendy Wizards gain 1 star

The antithesis of Trendy: Unique.



Also, I like the idea that 5 star spells only come at some risk (in this case, easily called and sniped), plus a mass benefit spell to make it less appealing to go for the reward of being Unique

Wednesday, October 18, 2023

Story Post: Wizard Duel 2

The Wizard Ring for this duel is:

1. JonathanDark
2. Raven1207
3. Josh
4. lendunistus,
5. Brendan
6. Kevan
7. Zack
8. Snisbo
9. Vovix

The spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_2

Proposal: Free hats!

Withdrawn. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Oct 2023 15:40:46 UTC

For each EVC on this proposal: if that EVC contains the name of a Style of Hat, set the Hat of the Wizard who posted that EVC to the Hat Style so named.

Proposal: Whatcha Gonna Do ‘Bout It?

Unpopular, 1-6. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 18 Oct 2023 22:17:21 UTC

Change the name of the dynastic tracking page to be “Locker Room”

Add the following paragraph to “Duels”

If every pending votable is either unpopular or does not reference “Duel” or “Duels” then no proposals may be enacted and any Wizard or the Battle Master may replace all instances of “Duel” with “Bout” and “Duels” with “Bouts” throughout the ruleset and then delete this paragraph.

Hopefully addressing the “Duels” concern, while also not doing the semi-dangerous “edit pending proposals” step. Instead until this proposal passes, you can use “Duels” and everything will work fine. But after this proposal is enacted, you should switch to using “Bouts”.

Proposal: Are You Feeling What I’m Feeling?

Exceeded Quorum 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 18 Oct 2023 22:02:10 UTC

In the rule “Spells” add a subrule named “Synergy” and give it the following text:

Effect: If this Wizard is in the targeted position of one or more Spells, secretly randomly select one of those Spells, or select that Spell if it is just one Spell. After applying the Effects of the selected Spell to this Wizard, apply the same Effects to the Wizard who cast the selected Spell. If this Effect triggers due to Misdirection, the Spell whose target changed is the Spell that this Effect applies to.

Proposal: You want thingamabobs?

Reached Quorum 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 18 Oct 2023 15:34:16 UTC

Enact a new subrule of “Creating A Duel” entitled “Gewgaws” as follows:

There exist a number of Gewgaws, which may be included by the Battle Master as part of a Duel to change the way that Duel is conducted. The list of Gewgaws, and the effect each such Gewgaw has when it is included in a Duel, is as follows:

Contemplation Orb
Before the spells selected for a Duel are cast, each Trendy Wizard named in that Duel’s Wizard Ring gains 1 Star.
Bonsai Volcano
After the spells selected for a Duel are cast, each Wizard who lost Stars in this Duel due to the effects of a Burn spell loses another Star.

In the rule “Creating a Duel” before the list item beginning “Clear the contents of the wiki page…” add the following item:

* Optionally select a Gewgaw to affect this Duel

In the rule “Creating a Duel” reword the text “which consists of the Wizard Ring and Spell List for that duel” to:

which consists of the Wizard Ring and Spell List, and (if one is selected) the Gewgaw, for that Duel

In the rule “Commencing a Duel” insert the following as the first step in that rule’s atomic action:

* Apply the effects of the Duel’s selected Gewgaw, if any, that occur before spells are cast

In the rule “Commencing a Duel” insert the following as the step in that rule’s atomic action before the step that begins “Reply to the duel post…”:

* Apply the effects of the Duel’s selected Gewgaw, if any, that occur after spells are cast

Proposal: Cleanup on Aisle 3

Reached Quorum, 3-0 with 3 DEF while Battle Master’s vote is FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 18 Oct 2023 15:29:46 UTC

In “Creating a Duel” after “Set the Wizard Ring to be all Wizards, ordered randomly” add “(the Battle Master may make this determination using a private method of their choosing)”

In “Engaging in a Duel” after “Wizards who are named in the Wizard Ring for a duel are considered to be participants in that duel.” add “Each participant in a duel may cast one instance of a spell in that duel”

In “Duels” after “Duels are either Open, Pending or Resolved” add ” and are by default Open”

First issue just makes it easier for me to schedule duels as the dice roller doesn’t have a “randomly sort this list” function

Second issue I don’t think is actually needed—my reading of the next sentence makes it clear you can only cast one spell. But i think its better safe than sorry

Third issue the default rules technically handle anyways but again, best to be clear.

Proposal: Pedantry

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 3 votes to 6 by Kevan.

Adminned at 18 Oct 2023 07:45:58 UTC

Throughout the ruleset and gamestate, including in all pending proposals, change “duel” to “squabble”.

A duel should only have two participants. What we have here is a good ole fashioned fracas. “Squabble” because I like the idea that no-one actually dies, someone just gets their feels hurt and then we all go back to our little nerd scrolls.

Proposal: And the Crowd Goes Wild

Reached Quorum, 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 20:44:25 UTC

In the rule “Commencing a Duel”, replace the text “specifying which spells were cast and how many stars each wizards gained or lost from those spells” with this text:

specifying each spell that was cast, and for each of those spells: the name of the Wizard that cast that spell and the resulting effect that Spell caused including details such as Wizards targeted, Stars gained or lost with the names of the Wizards who gained or lost them, target positions changed, any other effects that the Spell had, or failure to have any effect at all

We need more details in the Duel results including the names of Wizards who cast the spells. Also, some Spells don’t directly cause a Gain or Loss of Stars or at all, so let’s get those details as well.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 1

Wizard Ring for this Duel is

1. Raven1207
2. Josh
3. Snisbo
4. Vovix
5. lendunistus
6. Zack
7. Kevan
8. JonathanDark


Spell List: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_1

Tuesday, October 17, 2023

Proposal: Sniper No Sniping

Reached Quorum 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 17:17:47 UTC

Add a new spell called “Snipe” and give it the following text

Inputs: The name of another Wizard participating in the current duel and the name of a spell other than Snipe from the spell list for the current duel
Effects: If the named Wizard has selected to cast the named spell in this duel, their casting of that spell does nothing and the Wizard casting this spell gains 2 stars.

Sudden Catastrophic Loss of Interest

Idle me, please.

Proposal: Out of Chaos comes Order

Withdrawn, 0-4 with 1 DEF. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 13:13:09 UTC

In the rule “Spells” add this text:

The Speed of a Spell is a non-negative integer that determines the order in which Spells are cast during a Duel and may be specified by a Wizard when communicating the Spell to be cast for that Duel to the Battle Master. It defaults to 0 if not specified. When a Wizard specifies the Speed of a Spell for a Duel, they must choose a value between 0 and the amount of Stars they have at the time that they communicate this information to the Battle Master.

and in the same rule replace “If a spell has a cost, the cost is deducted from a Wizard’s stars when they cast the spell, unless they have fewer stars than the cost, in which case the spell fails and has no effect.” with:

If a spell has a cost, the cost is deducted from a Wizard’s Stars in an action called Pay the Cost, as described in the rule “Commencing a Duel”, unless they have fewer stars than the cost, in which case the spell fails and is considered to have no effect for that Wizard when its Effect is resolved in this Duel.

In the rule “Engaging in a Duel” after the text “the name of the spell” add:

, optionally the Speed of that spell

and in the same rule replace the text “A wizard who is a participant in an open duel” with:

While there is no pending duel, a wizard who is a participant in an open duel

In the rule “Spells” if the text “immediately before the duel was resolved” exists, replace it with this text:

immediately before resolving the Effects of the selected Spells whose Speed matches the Current Speed

In the rule “Commencing a Duel” remove the bullet point starting with “Each spell selected for casting by a Wizard is cast simultaneously”. In the same rule, add the following text at the end of the rule:

When a spell is cast, apply the effect of that spell according to the spell list for the current duel, applying the effect to the caster of the spell unless otherwise stated. Idle Wizards who are targeted by a spell are still considered Wizards for the purposes of resolving a spells effects and so may still have their gamestate values changed by other spells, but do not cast spells themselves.

In the same rule, add the following bullet points to the beginning of the bulleted list:

* For each Wizard that specified a Speed for their selected Spell, decrease that Wizard’s Stars by that Speed.
* Set the Current Speed to the highest Speed among all of the selected Spells.
* Repeat the following sub-steps until every selected Spell of all participants in this Duel has been processed.
** Pay the Cost of all selected Spells whose Speed matches the Current Speed and that have a Cost.
** Resolve the Effects of all selected Spells whose Speed matches the Current Speed as if they were cast simultaneously. This step is when each of those Spells is cast.
** Decrease the Current Speed by 1.

A Wizard can spend Stars to try to get their selected Spell cast sooner than other Wizards, but it only applies to the next upcoming Duel.

Proposal: James Dean Daydream

Reached Quorum 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 13:09:51 UTC

Add the following to “Style”

The Fashion Score for a Style is equal to the total number of Stars held by all Wizards who have that Style. The Fashion Score for None is always 0.

A Style is In Fashion if its Fashion Score is greater than the Fashion Score for all other Styles of that same type.

A Wizard is Trendy if all their Styles are In Fashion

Wizards Baby

Unidle me

Proposal: Between stimulus and response

Quorum Reached. Passes 5-0—Clucky

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 03:19:29 UTC

To the end of the rule Spells, add:

Whenever a Spell’s Effect relies on information about another Wizard’s personal gamestate in order to resolve (eg how many Stars that Wizard has, what kind of Style their Hat is etc), the frame of reference for that information is the moment immediately before the duel was resolved.

Giving the ruleset some concrete direction on how to resolve spells simultaneously.

Monday, October 16, 2023

A wizard did it!

I’d like to unidle, please!

Proposal: Spell Economy

Quorum Reached. passes 6-0—Clucky

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 02:44:46 UTC

Replace the text of the rule “Spells” with

Spells are defined as subrules of this rule, with the name of the Spell being the name of the subrule and rest of the spell information being tracked in the subrule itself. The definition of a Spell may have:
* a cost
* a set of inputs

and must have:
* an effect

If a spell has a cost, the cost is deducted from a Wizard’s stars when they cast the spell, unless they have fewer stars than the cost, in which case the spell fails and has no effect.

Remove “Inputs: None” wherever it appears in the ruleset.

If the rule “Doom Cloud” exists:

- Set the cost of “Doom Cloud” to 1 by adding the line “Cost: 1” before its effect.

- Change the effect of “Doom Cloud” to “Every other Wizard participating in the Duel loses 2 Stars.”

I predict we are going to want more spells like Doom Cloud where you expend stars to gain stars, so might as well formalize this sooner than later.

I’m a Hairless Wizard

One more wizard for the fray! Unidle me please

I’m a Hairless Wizard

One more wizard for the fray! Unidle me please

Proposal: Wizard Teamwork makes the Wizards Dreams Work

Withdraw—Clucky

Adminned at 17 Oct 2023 02:41:54 UTC

Activate the Declared Alliances special case rule

Proposal: Nothing Up My Sleeve

Exceeded Quorum, 7-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Oct 2023 16:42:17 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Style”:-

Each Wizard has a single publicly-tracked Style for each of their Hat, Robes, Staff and Beard, from the possible Styles for each type listed below:

* Hat: Pointy, Phrygian, Hooded, None.
* Robes: Starry, Cloaked, Ragged, Plain.
* Staff: Hooked, Crooked, Knobbed, None.
* Beard: Flowing, Clipped, Wispy, None.

A Wizard’s Styles default to Plain Robes and None for Hat, Staff and Beard.

Add a subrule to Spells called “Attire”:

Inputs: A single possible Style other than “None”.
Effect: Change this Wizard’s Hat, Robes, Staff or Beard (whichever is applicable) to match the chosen Style.

Proposal: Negative Energy

Passes 8-0—Clucky

Adminned at 16 Oct 2023 16:37:01 UTC

In the rule “Wizards”, change the text “integer number of Stars” to “non-negative integer number of Stars”, and add the following sentence after the first sentence in the rule:

If any action would cause a Wizard’s Stars to be below 0, that action sets the Wizard’s Stars to 0 instead.

This allows a Spell to still be completed legally even if it would attempt to set a Wizard’s Stars to less than 0. For example, if you target a Wizard with Burn and they already have 0 Stars, this lets Burn still reduce the Stars of the neighboring Wizards.

Proposal: Defense Against the Dark Arts

Passes 6-0—Clucky

Adminned at 16 Oct 2023 16:36:01 UTC

Add the following subrules to “Spells” (provided that rule exists) where the first line of each blockquote is the name of the subrule and the rest is the contents

Misdirection

Inputs: None
Effect: If this Wizard is in a targeted position for the Input of any Spell this Duel, the targeted position is changed to a randomly-selected position that is not this Wizard’s position. This also applies to a targeted position changed by another Wizard’s Misdirection spell.

Siphon

Inputs: None
Effect: If any Wizards other than this Wizard receives any Stars from one or more Spells, other than Siphon, randomly select one of those Wizards to lose 1 Star, then this Wizard gains 1 Star. This Wizard can also receive Stars from other Spells and still trigger this Effect.

Doom Cloud

Inputs: None
Effect: If this Wizard has less than 1 Star at the start of the Duel, this Spell has no Effect. Otherwise, this Wizard loses 1 Star, and every other Wizard loses 2 Stars.

Proposal: All In

Reached Quorum, 5-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Oct 2023 06:36:42 UTC

Remove the string “Battle Time,” from both “Duels” and “Creating a Duel”.

Then replace “If there is an open duel, and the current date and time are after the battle time for that duel” in the rule “Commencing a Duel” with:-

If there is an open duel, and every Wizard participating in it has selected a spell to cast in that duel

Then remove every paragraph and bullet point that includes the phrase “Battle Time”.

Then add to “Duels”:-

The Battle Master is permitted to publicly announce how many Wizards are yet to select a spell for a given duel.

Changing the “duel resolves after ~44 hours” cycle to “duel resolves when all players have chosen their spells”.

One of my main takeaways from the Great Machine dynasty was that a ruleset which requires players to actively play the dynastic game (in the Great Machine, all players were required to create Agendas, and the game would not proceed until everyone had done so) makes for better Nomic than one where playing the dynastic game is optional.

I’m a Wizard, ‘Agrid

I would like to be unidled.

A Challenger Approaches

Unidle me, please!

Proposal: Spells Are Fun! So Much Fun!

Exceeded Quorum, 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 16 Oct 2023 06:20:06 UTC

Add the following subrules to “Spells” (provided that rule exists) where the first line of each blockquote is the name of the subrule and the rest is the contents

Greed

Inputs: None
Effect: If no other Wizard cast the Greed spell this Duel, gain 5 stars

Gather

Inputs: None
Effect: Gain DICE3 Stars

Burn
Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring
Effect: The wizard in the targeted position loses 3 stars. Their neighbors lose 1 star

Gift
Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring which is not the position of the Wizard selecting the spell
Effect: The wizard in the targeted position gains 3 stars

 

Proposal: Yer A Wizard, ‘Arry

Popular (5-0)—Enacted by Clucky

Adminned at 15 Oct 2023 19:43:29 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Wizards” with the following text

Each Wizard has a publicly tracked integer number of Stars, which defaults to twenty or the lowest number of Stars held by any Wizard, whichever is higher.

Add a new dynastic rule called “Spells” with the following text

A Spell has a Name, a possible set of Inputs, and a Effect. Spells are defined as subrules to this rule, with the name of the Spell being the name of the subrule and rest of the spell information being tracked in the subrule itself.

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

A Duel consists of a Number, Battle Time, A Wizard Ring and A Spell List. Duels are either Open, Pending or Resolved.

The Battle Time for a duel is a UTC Date and Time.

A Wizard Ring consists of the names of the Wizards (including possibly Idle Wizards) who are actively participating in a Duel, as well as their numerical position in the ring (starting at 1). Each Wizard is considered to be neighbors with the Wizards numerically adjacent to them in the ring (so Wizard in position 4 is neighbors with Wizards 3 and 5). Additionally, the Wizard Ring loops so the Wizard in position 1 is adjacent to the Wizard in the last position and vice versa.

The Spell List is a link to a wiki page which contains the spells available to cast in that duel. The spell list for all duels is considered game state.

Add a subrule to “Duels” called “Creating a Duel” with the following text

If there is no open or pending duel, the Battle Master may Schedule a Duel by performing the following atomic action:

* Set the Duel Number to be one higher than the previous duel number or 1 if it’s the first duel
* Set the Battle Time to the soonest date and time which is 15:00:00 UTC and at least 44 hours from the current date and time.
* Set the Wizard Ring to be all Wizards, ordered randomly
* Clear the contents of the wiki page titled “Wizard Duel Spell List X” where X is the duel number
* Set the contents of the wiki page titled “Wizard Duel Spell List X” where X is the duel number to be the current spell list in the ruleset
* Make a story post to the blog titled “Wizard Duel X” where X is the duel number which consists of the Battle Time, Wizard Ring and Spell List for that duel

Add a subrule to “Duels” called “Engaging in a Duel” with the following text

Wizards who are named in the Wizard Ring for a duel are considered to be participants in that duel. A wizard who is a participant in an open duel may select which spell they want to cast or change which spell they are casting in that duel by choosing a spell from the spell list for the duel and privately communicating with the Battle Master the name of the spell and any inputs for that spell.

Add a subrule to “Duels” called “Commencing a Duel” with the following text

If there is an open duel, and the current date and time are after the battle time for that duel, the Battle Master may make a comment in the blog post for that duel indicating that the battle is about to commence and the duel is now pending. At this point the duel becomes pending.

If there is a pending duel, the Battle Master may resolve the duel by performing the following atomic action

* Each spell selected for casting by a Wizard is cast simultaneously. When a spell is cast, apply the effect of that spell according to the spell list for the current duel, applying the effect to the caster of the spell unless otherwise stated. Idle Wizards who are targeted by a spell are still considered Wizards for the purposes of resolving a spells effects and so may still have their gamestate values changed by other spells, but do not cast spells themselves.
* Reply to the duel post specifying which spells were cast and how many stars each wizards gained or lost from those spells
* At this point, the duel becomes closed and the Battle Master is encouraged to promptly schedule the next duel

Ascension Address: WIZARD DUEL!!!!

Wizard duel!

WIZARD DUEL!!

WIZARRRRRRRRRRD DUELLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!

 

Replace “Punters” with “Wizards”
Replace “Bookie” with “Battle Master”
Name the game state tracking page “Duel Sheet”
Set all Special Case rules to their default values

Imperial styles for this dynasty are

Provocateur/Guide Proposal Style
Laissez-faire/Dungeonmaster Player Protection
Casual Workload
Scam-Neutral to Scam-Averse attitude to scams
Servile Information Sharing
Instinctual Predictability

 

Saturday, October 14, 2023

Declaration of Victory: Born Ready

It has a number of FOR Votes greater than 2/3rds of the number of Punters,
it has been open for at least 12 hours,
and either the Bookie has Voted FOR it

So this is popular—Clucky

Adminned at 15 Oct 2023 05:29:40 UTC

Per https://blognomic.com/archive/closing_time1 I have achieved victory in this dynasty

Story Post: Closing time

After a long, tiring day, the humble bookkeeper flips the sign on the door to “closed”.

Running his gnarled old finger down the accounts ledger, he gives an occasional raised eyebrow, dusty sigh, or dry harrumph.

Finally, he writes four names on the back of a discarded betting slip.

The paper says:
* KEVAN: account balance 75 Readies
* BUCKY: account balance 148 Readies
* JONATHANDARK: account balance 166 Readies
* CLUCKY: account balance 347 Readies

“Good day for Clucky”, he grunted, “I’ll deal with that in the morning.” Then he closed the shutters, turned off the lights, and started making his way towards bed.

Friday, October 13, 2023

Story Post: Results Post 13 October

On 13 October the following sporting events took place:

A game of Giolitti was played between DiFieri and Carpino. Di Fieri had a Pocket of 50 while Carpino had a pocket of 41, but the Grand Canal was Devil, so Carpino was declared the winner.

A Blogbots bout took place between Bad Door and Hard Hat. Bad Door was trashed in round 31 and Hard Hat was declared the winner. Clucky won Readies for a bet on this Event.

A Boxing match took place between Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon and Wild Man Danny Bannister. Wild Man Danny Banniester was knocked out in Round 13 and Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon was the winner.

A Clingboom match was held. Acid Yoda died in round 3 while Laser Mideg and Cheesecutter Purplebeard were killed in round 4; Buzzsaw Darth Cliche was thus the winner.

A game of Nomichtook place between Gothmogg Hall and Penanggalan Hall. Penanggalan Hall won, 69 to 61.

Failed to Place

Snisbo idles out after seven days with no posts or comments. Quorum drops to 3.

Thursday, October 12, 2023

Story Post: Last One…Really…Probably

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with CarolAIna Reaper in the October 12 Blogbots Event

Story Post: Just a Few More

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with Hard Hat in the October 12 Blogbots Event

Story Post: When in Romb

I accuse Jonathan Dark of Meddling with Paparoni in the October 12th Giolitti event

Story Post: When In Roma

I accuse Jonathan Dark of Meddling with Di Fieri in the October 12th Giolitti event

Story Post: Results Post 12 October

On 12th October:

A Boxing match took place between Alicia “Thunder City Cobra” Woo and Wild Man Danny Bannister. Wild Man Danny Bannister was knocked out in the 11th round and Alicia “Thunder City Cobra” Woo was awarded the win.

A Blogbots match took place between Hard Hat and CarolAIna Reaper. Hard Hat was trashed after 16 rounds and CarolAIna Reaper was the winner. Clucky won Readies from a Bet on this Event.

A Giolitti match took place between Di Fieri and Paparoni. Di Fieri had a pocket of 58 to Paparoni’s 43; the Grand Canal was World. Di Fieri won and JonathanDark won Readies from a Bet on this Event.

Proposal: Elite sports investigators are not free

Reached quorum 3 votes to 2. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Oct 2023 08:33:43 UTC

Add the following to the end of the bulleted list in the rule Accusations:

* If it is not true, the Accusing Punter is fined 10 Readies for wasting the Bookie’s time

Story Post: Penalty-Free Accusation Part 6 of 6

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with Hard Hat in the October 11 Blogbots Event

Story Post: Penalty-Free Accusation Part 5 of 6

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with Ducktank in the October 11 Blogbots Event

Story Post: Penalty-Free Accusation Part 4 of 6

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with Bad Door in the October 10 Blogbots Event

Story Post: Penalty-Free Accusation Part 3 of 6

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with The Killing Joke in the October 10 Blogbots Event

Story Post: Penalty-Free Accusation Part 2 of 6

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with Credit Score: F in the October 9 Blogbots Event

Story Post: Penalty-Free Accusation Part 1 of 6

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with BAD in the October 9 Blogbots Event

The proposal “Take the Money and Run” changed the bullet list in Accusations to a new list, but the new list did not contain a penalty for false Accusations. Thus, there’s currently no downside to making Accusations.

Here comes one of many…

Wednesday, October 11, 2023

Story Post: Results Post 11 October

On 11 October:

Scaletti played against DiFieri at Giolitti. Scaletti’s pocket of 49 beat Di Fieri’s 42, but the Grand Canal was Death, so the game was declared to be a draw.

A ClingBoom match took place. Laser Mideg was killed in round 3, Cheesecutter Purplebeard in round 5, and Buzzsaw Darth Cliche in round 6, leaving Acid Yoda the victor.

Ducktank met Hard Hat at Blogbots. Ducktank was scrapped in round 19 and Hard Hat was the winner. Clucky won Readies for a bet on this event.

Tuesday, October 10, 2023

Proposal: Skin in the Game

Withdrawn—adminned by Clucky

Adminned at 12 Oct 2023 20:11:58 UTC

If the proposal “Take the Money and Run” was not enacted, this proposal has no effect.

In the subrule “Accusations”, add the following bullet point after the bullet that begins with “If it is true and the Accused Punter won any Readies”:

* If it is true and the Accused Punter did not place a Bet on that Sporting Event directly or as part of an Acca, the Accused Punter is fined 50 Readies

Meddling without a Bet is a harsher penalty for not taking any risks at all, since Meddling is free. 10 Readies is too cheap, but 50 will give a Punter pause.

I didn’t use Clucky’s recommended “Accused Punter did not win any Readies” because a Punter could place a Bet and not win any Readies due to betting on the wrong outcome, which is not what Bucky’s complaint was about tampering with events that a Punter didn’t bet on.

Story Post: Results Post 10 October

On 10 October, Penanggalan Hall met Ichneumon Hall at Nomich. Ichneumon Hall won, 64 to 51.

On 10 October, The Killing Joke faced Bad Door at Blogbots.The Killing Joke was trashed after 19 rounds, leaving Bad Door the winner. Clucky won Readies for a bet on this event.

Monday, October 09, 2023

Proposal: Take the Money and Run

Timed out 3-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 12 Oct 2023 05:10:31 UTC

Change the bullet point list in “Accusations”

to

* If it is true, the Accused Punter is fined 10 Readies for tampering with a sporting fixture
* If it is true and the Accused Punter placed a Bet on that Sporting Event as part of an Acca, and the Accused Punter has not been fined under this bullet point yet for any Bet in that Acca, the Accused Punter is fined an amount of Readies equal to the stakes of the final Bet in that Acca, plus any Readies won from the final bet in that Acca.
* If it is true and the Accused Punter won any Readies from a Bet on that Sporting Event that was not part of an Acca, the Accused Punter is fined an equal amount of Readies to how many they won from the Bet, plus the Stakes of that bet.

 

If we change the fine so your bet becomes null and void, rather than simply erasing your profits, it solves the whole Acca-conundrum.

Reducing the base fine a bit to counter act the fact that this will probably cause the overall fine to go up (as you now lose your original bet too)

Proposal: Holistic Accazations

Timed Out—Fails 1-3—Clucky

Adminned at 11 Oct 2023 21:18:02 UTC

In the rule Accusations, change

* If it is true, the Accused Punter is fined 20 Readies for tampering with a sporting fixture; if the Accused Punter gained any Readies from Cashed Bets on that Event, they are also fined that amount of Readies

to:

* If it is true, the Accused Punter is fined 20 Readies for tampering with a sporting fixture
* If it is true and the Accused Punter placed a Bet on that Sporting Event as part of an Acca, and the Accused Punter has not been fined under this bullet point yet for any Bet in that Acca, the Accused Punter is fined an amount of Readies equal to their largest winnings from any Bet in the Acca.
* If it is true and the Accused Punter won any Readies from a Bet on that Sporting Event that was not part of an Acca, the Accused Punter is fined an equal amount of Readies.

tl;dr: Getting caught tampering with one event in your Acca costs you the whole Acca. Getting caught tampering with a second event only costs the base 20, because your winnings have already been confiscated.

Proposal: Acca Over Easy

Popular by Quorum, 3-0. -Bucky

Adminned at 11 Oct 2023 19:19:43 UTC

In “Betting” after “and cannot exceed 100” add ” (Unless it is the second or later Bet in an Acca in which case there is no limit on how high the Stake can be)”

Right now I think acca’s whose stakes go over 100 break the game

Proposal: Hi, Bernation

Enacted popular, 4-0. Josh

Adminned at 11 Oct 2023 09:58:57 UTC

Set the Special Case rule Dormancy to Inactive.

Story Post: Results Post 9 October

On 9 October, a Blogbots match took place between BAD and Credit Score: F. Credit Score: F was trashed after 21 rounds, leaving BAD the winner. Clucky won Readies for a bet on this Event.

On 9 October, a Giolitti match took place between Micheli and Di Fieri. The Grand Canal was Angel, and Di Fieri won with a Pocket of 67 to Micheli’s 43.

Sunday, October 08, 2023

Call for Judgment: Sports!

Popular at 3-0—Clucky

Adminned at 09 Oct 2023 16:39:38 UTC

In “Form Sheet” replace

the Bookie may randomly select a Sporting Event which is not already currently being held on that date

with

the Bookie may create a Sporting Event on that date by randomly select a Sport for which a Sporting Event of that Sport is not already currently being held on that date

Uphold the creation of all Sporting Events done by the Bookie up to the point where this CfJ was created.

Move the 12/10 Sporting Event of Blogbots to between Ducktank vs Hard Hat to 11/10 and move the 11/10 Sporting Event of Giolitti between Di Fieri vs Paparoni to 12/10. Cancel any open acca which contain Bets for either of these events.

The intent behind how events get scheduled was clear and followed with the exception of two Blogbots events on the 12th which shouldn’t be allowed. But rather than just removing the second one for being illegally created, I realized that technically I think maybe all the new events were illegally created. So lets uphold those and remove the second Blogbots event so Josh can schedule something else.

Story Post: Results Post 8 October

On 8th October, a ClingBoom match took place. Cheesecutter Purplebeard and Laser Mideg were both knocked out in the fourth round; Acid Yoda and Buzzsaw Darth Cliche were both taken out by a Stickybomb in the fifth. The result was a draw.

On 8th October, a Boxing match took place between Wild Man Danny Bannister and Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon. Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon was knocked out in round 15. Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon was declared the winner.

Saturday, October 07, 2023

Story Post: What’s Good for the Goose

I accuse Clucky of Meddling with Laser Mideg in the October 7 Clingboom Event

Story Post: Fishy Fish Part 4

I accuse Jonathan Dark of Meddling with Acid Yoda in the October 7 Clingboom Event

Story Post: Fishy Fish Part 3

I accuse Jonathan Dark of Meddling with Laser Mideg in the October 7 Clingboom Event

Story Post: Fishy Fish Part 2

I accuse Jonathan Dark of Meddling with Buzzsaw Darth Cliche in the October 7 Clingboom Event

Story Post: Fishy Fish Part 1

I accuse Jonathan Dark of Meddling with Cheesecutter Purplebeard in the October 7 Clingboom Event

Proposal: Tiny Tamper

Timed out and enacted, 3-0. Josh

Adminned at 09 Oct 2023 18:03:43 UTC

In the rule “Meddling”, change

applying it to a specific Participant in a single, specific Open Sporting Event

to

applying it to a specific Participant (or all Participants if the Meddling is defined as Symmetric) in a single, specific Open Sporting Event

Story Post: Results Post 7 October

On 7 October, a Clingboom match took place between Cheesecutter Purplebeard, Buzzsaw Darth Cliche, Laser Mideg and Acid Yoday. Laser Mideg won after 7 rounds. JonathanDark and Clucky both won Readies on this bet.

On 7 October a Boxing match took place between Wild Man Danny Bannister and Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon. Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon was knocked out after 11 rounds. Roberto “Silver Phantom” Calderon won.

Friday, October 06, 2023

Proposal: Seems Kinda Sus

Times out unpopular 2-2. -Bucky

Adminned at 09 Oct 2023 03:18:23 UTC

Add a subrule to “Meddling” called “Heat”

Each Punter has a non-negative integer amount of Heat, which is privately tracked by the Bookie and is by default 0.

Whenever a Punter plans a Sport’s Meddling, their heat is increased by 1.

When the Bookie Scopes a Punter, they roll a DICE10. If the result is greater than or equal to the Punter’s current Heat the Punter passes. Otherwise, the Punter is fined 20 Readies and their Heat is reduced by 2 (to a minimum of 0),

In “Sports Resolution” replace

the Bookie applies all Meddlings that were planned against Participants in that Event. (If the same Meddling would be applied multiple times to the same Participant in an Event, it is instead only applied once.)

with

the Bookie takes all Meddlings that were planned against Participants in that Event and puts them a random order. For each such Meddling (in the new order) the Bookie Scopes the Punter who initiated the Meddling. If the Punter passes the Scope, the Meddling is applied (unless the same Meddling has already been applied to the same Participant in the same Event, or the same Symmetric Meddling has already been applied to the same Event). Otherwise it is not applied.

Replace the sub-rule “Accusations” in “Meddling” with

The bookie should, at their earliest convivence, remove all Meddling’s that were created before the proposal “Seems Kinda Sus” passed, unless the Punter who planned that meddling clearly communicated with the bookie that they wanted the meddling to persist upon “Seems Kinda Sus” being enacted in which case that Meddling in question remains and the Punter who planned it gains 1 heat. The Bookie should then delete the subrule “Accusations.

The bookie may not generate any resolutions.

Story Post: Results Post 6 October

On 5 October Gothmog Hall met Penanggalan Hall at Nomich. Penanggalan Hall won, 56-64.

On 6 October The Killing Joke played Bad Door at Blogbots. Bad Door won, trashing Killing Joke in 25 rounds.

Thursday, October 05, 2023

Proposal: Environmental Tampering

Passes 4-0. Enacted by Clucky. Unfortunately race condition means this didn’t really do what we wanted it to though

Adminned at 07 Oct 2023 00:08:24 UTC

In the rule “Meddling”, change

applying it to a specific Participant in a single, specific Event

to

applying it to a specific Participant (or all Participants if the Meddling is defined as Symmetric) in a single, specific Event

In the subrules of the rule “Sporting Events”, add the sentence “This is Symmetric.” to the descriptions of the Meddlings Centofanti and House Bots.

Wednesday, October 04, 2023

Story Post: Tit for Tat

I Accuse Clucky of having Meddled with Carpino in the Sporting Event of Giolitti that occurred on the 30th of September. Since at the time the Bookie was reporting the amount of winnings, and based on the Odds at the time, it appears that Clucky placed 40 Readies on Micheli, which is substantial enough to me to indicate he was reasonably confident in the win. I suspect he colluded with someone else who also Meddled and ensured that the Grand Canal was the Devil, while Clucky increased the pocket of Carpino and then bet on his rival, knowing that the win condition would be reversed.

Of course, the opposite could have happened, which also begs the question: if someone uses “Meddling (Centofanti): Instead of being chosen at random, the Grand Canal is Devil.” then who is the Participant for whom the Meddling was applied? The rules require a Meddle to be “applying it to a specific Participant”.

Does this have to be a Story Post? I don’t think so, but I’ll do it anyway for consistency.

Story Post: Low Risk High Reward

I accuse JonathanDark of meddling in the 4 October game of Blogbots. There is no way Ducktank wins that cleanly.

Story Post: Results Post 4 October

On 4 October Credit Score: F played against Ducktank at Blogbots. Credit Score: F was trashed after 25 rounds of play. Ducktank wins. JonathanDark wins Readies from this event.

Proposal: Ombudsman

Enacted, 4-0. Josh

Adminned at 06 Oct 2023 14:30:53 UTC

In the rule A Good Day At The Races, change

If it is, or is after, Saturday 14th of October 2023 and the Results Post for the Sporting Events from October 13th 2023 have been up for at least 24 hours

to

If it is, or is after, Saturday 14th of October 2023, the Results Post for the Sporting Events from October 13th 2023 has been up for at least 24 hours, and there are no univestigated Accusation Posts

Allowing time for the smorgasbord of corruption on Super Friday to be investigated

Tuesday, October 03, 2023

Proposal: Resolving Resolutions

Reached Quorum, 4-0 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 05 Oct 2023 22:55:43 UTC

In “Sports Resolution” replace

The Bookie may generate the resolution, using their Resolution Method for that sport, to any Sporting Event in advance of the time at which it takes place. A day’s sporting events all take place on that day at exactly noon UTC; as soon as possible thereafter the Bookie should make a Results Post, a post in the Story Posts category detailing all sporting events that have taken place that have not appeared in a previous Results Post, including any results that may be associated with those events, and summarising all random choices that were made as part of determining those events’ results (excluding Meddlings). It should also state which Punters have won Readies as a result of Bets placed on each of those Events. If the event’s resolution was not generated, this fact shall be disclosed, and the event is considered cancelled and any actions dependent on it occurring - aside from removing Bets on it from public tracking - are skipped. When generating the resolution of a Sporting Event, the Bookie applies all Meddlings that were planned against Participants in that Event. (If the same Meddling would be applied multiple times to the same Participant in an Event, it is instead only applied once.)

with

A Sporting Event may be either Open, Pending, Resolved or Closed and by default is Open. This is publicly tacked as the Sporting Event’s Status.

The Bookie may generate the resolution, using their Resolution Method for that sport, to any Open Sporting Event provided it is later than 24 hours in advance of the time at which it takes place. At this point the sporting event becomes Pending. If it is on or after noon UTC on a Pending Sporting Event’s date, that sporting event automatically becomes Resolved. When generating the resolution of a Sporting Event, the Bookie applies all Meddlings that were planned against Participants in that Event. (If the same Meddling would be applied multiple times to the same Participant in an Event, it is instead only applied once.)

A day’s sporting events all take place on that day at exactly noon UTC; as soon as possible thereafter the Bookie should perform the following atomic action: first ensure that there are no Open Sporting Events whose date is on or before the current date (using the above process if any are still open), and then make a Results Post, a post in the Story Posts category detailing all Resolved sporting events, including any results that may be associated with those events, and summarizing all random choices that were made as part of determining those events’ results (excluding Meddlings). It should also state which Punters have won Readies as a result of Bets placed on each of those Events. At this point, all Resolved sporting events become Closed.

In “Meddling” replace

A Punter may plan a Sport’s Meddling, applying it to a specific Participant in a single, specific Event of that Sport (identified by the Sport and the date on which it will occur) that has not yet occurred, by privately informing the Bookie of this. If the Bookie does not receive the attempt to plan a Meddling until after the corresponding Event’s resolution has been generated, that attempt is considered untimely; it does not result in the Meddling being planned, and the Bookie shall privately inform the Punter who sent it that it was not timely.

with

A Punter may plan a Sport’s Meddling, applying it to a specific Participant in a single, specific Open Sporting Event of that Sport (identified by the Sport and the date on which it will occur), by privately informing the Bookie of this.

In The Gamblers replace

At any time, a Punter may place a Bet on any Sporting Event

with

At any time, a Punter may place a Bet on any Open or Pending Sporting Event


Mark all sporting events for which a results post has already been created for a Closed. If the resolution for any open sporting events has already been generated by the Bookie, the Bookie should update those events to be Pending at his earliest convivence.

Trying to clean up timing around resolutions here.

This gives Josh a 24 hour window to still generate resolutions, at which point stuff becomes locked from meddling. Feels like enough time to get meddlings in while hopefully not making Josh’s job too much harder.

Story Post: Results Post 3 October

On 2 October, a ClingBoom match occured with a line-up of Acid Yoda vs Laser Mideg vs Buzzsaw Darth Cliche vs Cheesecutter Purplebeard. Buzzsaw Darth Cliche won.

On 3 October Bandersnatch Hall played Gothmog Hall at Nomich. Bandersnatch Hall scored 53 to Gothmog Hall’s 52. Bandersnatch Hall won. Clucky won Readies from a bet on this Event.

Call for Judgment: All bets are one!

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 04 Oct 2023 07:34:50 UTC

Bets have a bunch of characteristics. We’ve been playing as though the bettor can choose the important ones - the event, outcome and stake - from any valid value. However, the rule that “a Punter may place a Bet on any Sporting Event that they have not previously placed a Bet on by privately announcing this to the Bookie” only allows that Punter to create it with themselves as the Punter placing it. It does not provide any way for the placing Punter to select the Stake, or change which wager they place it on. These have instead had the default values all along - Stakes of 1 Ready, and almost always on a different position than the Bookie paid out on. Given the extreme divergence between platonic gamestate and the tracked information that we’ve been relying on, a general patch-and-uphold is preferable to unwinding everything. Therefore…

In the rule “Betting”, change

by privately announcing this to the Bookie

to

by privately announcing the Bet’s elements (aside from their own name) to the Bookie

and uphold the creation of each Bet where the Bookie created it with Stakes, Outcomes and/or Sporting Events specified by the placing Punter instead of their respective default values.

Proposal: Compounding Problems

Timed out Unpopular, 2-2. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 05 Oct 2023 22:51:15 UTC

If the proposal “Acca cadabra” was not enacted, this proposal has no effect.

In the subrule “Accusations”, after the text “tampering with a sporting fixture” add the following text:

, or if the Sporting Event was part of an Acca placed by the Accused Punter they are fined 20 * N * N instead where N is the number of Bets in that Acca

I’m proposing an exponential fine for being correctly accused of Meddling in a Sporting Event where the Accused has placed an Acca, because the winnings have a multiplying effect on the subsequent winnings and thus the Meddling should be punished at an exponential rate relative to the size of the Acca. This keeps the Acca risk appropriately high for the high reward even with Meddling.

Monday, October 02, 2023

Proposal: Sounder Math

Withdrawn. Josh

Adminned at 03 Oct 2023 21:02:15 UTC

In the subrule “Odds”, replace the text “3 plus the total of the Track Record of all other Participants for this Sport” with this text:

3 plus the total of the Track Records for this Sport of the other Participants of this Sporting Eventt. If Y would be 0, it is 1 instead and X is doubled.

and replace “set X for the Odds of that Outcome to the total of the Track Record of all Participants for this Sport” with this text:

set X for the Odds of that Outcome to the total of the Track Records for this Sport of all Participants of this Sporting Event, with a minimum of 1,

For each Sporting Event scheduled more than 36 hours after this proposal’s enactment time, if its sport is not “Giolitti” and its Odds changed, recalculate its Odds under the new rule and nullify all Bets placed on it.

Proposal: Meddle Me This

Enacted popular, 6-0. Josh

Adminned at 03 Oct 2023 21:01:19 UTC

Replace

If it is, or is after, Saturday 14th of October 2023 then the Bookie should

with

If it is, or is after, Saturday 14th of October 2023 and the Results Post for the Sporting Events from October 13th 2023 have been up for at least 24 hours, then the Bookie should

Patching a loophole where there might not be enough time to catch meddling in the final events

Sunday, October 01, 2023

Proposal: Acca cadabra

Timed out and enacted 5-1. Josh

Adminned at 03 Oct 2023 21:00:07 UTC

Add the following to the end of the rule Betting:

An Acca is a series of bets placed on any number of different Sporting Events that all take place on the same day. A Punter may, at any time, have up to one open Acca, and may place an Acca by sending the Bookie a message containing all of the Bets that it will incorporate, with the details of each bet as per the criteria in this rule, except for a single Stake that covers the entire Acca.

When the Bookie is Cashing Bets, the Bets in an Acca are processed as follows:
* They are resolved in order, from the first Sporting Event in the Form Sheet to the last;
* The Stake for the first Bet is the Stake of the Acca;
* The Stake for each subsequent Bet is the winnings from the previous bet in the Acca, plus the Stake of the previous bet in the Acca, if the previous bet in the Acca was won; otherwise it is 0.

High risk, high reward

Proposal: Back Room BBQ

Timed out. Fails 1-4 with an unresolved imperial DEF. Josh

Adminned at 03 Oct 2023 20:59:35 UTC

Add the following sub rule to “The Gamblers” called “The Back Room”

Props are publicly tracked and consist of the following information

* The name of the Punter offering the Prop (the Offer)
* Optionally, the name of the Punter accepting the Prop (The Accept). A Prop without an Accept is considered to be Empty
* The Buy In, which must be a positive integer number of Readies
* The Reward, which must be a positive integer number of Readies which is greater than the Buy In
* The Event, A single, specific Sporting Event (identified by the Sport and the date on which it will occur) in which the Prop was created before the Sporting Event had occurred
* The Outcome, An outcome (from the Potential Outcomes for the Sport of that Sporting Event)

A Punter may at any time Offer a Prop by reducing their Readies selecting the Buy In, Reward, Event, and Outcome and then Reducing their Readies by the Reward—A Punter may perform this action if it would cause their Readies minus the Stakes of any open Bets that Punter to be less than zero.

If the sporting event for an Empty Prop has not yet occurred, A Punter who is not the Offer for that Prop may Accept the Prop, marking themselves as the Accept by transferring the Buy In in Readies from themselves to the Offer for that Buy In - A Punter may perform this action if it would cause their Readies minus the Stakes of any open Bets that Punter to be less than zero.

When making or accepting a Prop, the Punter doing so should privately message the Bookie so that the Bookie may better track that Punters Readies.

After a Sporting Event has occurred, then the Bookie should process each Prop for that sporting event as follows:

- If the Prop has an Accept, and the Outcome of the Sporting Event matches the Outcome of the Prop, then the Accept gets the reward for the Prop in Readies.
- Otherwise the Offer gets the reward for the Prop in Readies.

Story Post: Results Post 1 October

On 1 October, Wild Man Danny Bannister played Rebekka “The Sandman” Dante at Boxing. Rebekka “The Sandman” Dante knocked out Wild Man Danny Bannister in 18 rounds, and thus wins.

Proposal: This One Has Potential

Withdrawn. Josh

Adminned at 03 Oct 2023 08:55:50 UTC

In the subrule “Odds”, replace the text “total of the Track Record of all Participants for this Sport” with this text:

total of the Track Record of all Participants for this Sporting Event

I think this resolves the issue that Josh pointed out in Discord

Proposal: Odds Fixer

Timed out and passed, 3-0. Josh

Adminned at 03 Oct 2023 08:52:22 UTC

In the subrule “Odds”, replace the text “the total of the Track Record of all other Participants for this Sport.” with this text:

the total of the Track Record of all other Participants for this Sporting Event.

and replace the text:

For the Outcome of “Draw”, if it exists

with the text:

For the Outcomes of “Draw” and “All Participants Die”, if either exists

and before the bullet that begins with “Optionally, resolve the ratio” add this bullet:

* For any other Outcome that does have a rule for its Odds already covered by the preceding bullet points and where only one Participant is referenced in that Outcome, set Y for the Odds of that Outcome to that Participant’s Track Record for this Sport and set X for the Odds of that Outcome to 5 plus the total of the Track Record of all other Participants for this Sporting Event.

 

This should address Clucky’s concerns in his comments for More Odds Oddities