Thursday, November 30, 2023

Proposal: Influencers

Timed out 4 votes to 1 with 1 unresolved DEF. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2023 16:38:35 UTC

If “Challenging Times” is enacted, this Proposal has no effect.

Add a new rule named “Influence” with the following text:

Every Heir has Resources, which is a list of zero or more of the following named Resources, defaulting to all Resources named in the table below. Each Resource may be represented in gamestate tracking by the first letter of that Resource’s name. Each Resource has an associated Beneficial Aspect and a Hindering Flaw which is also listed in the table below.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Resource !! Beneficial Aspect !! Hindering Flaw
|-
| Wealth || Fortuitous || Impoverished
|-
| Alliances || Ambitious || Naive
|-
| Popularity || Charismatic || Rank
|-
| Religion || Pious || Knavish
|-
| Military || Courageous || Reckless
}

At any time, an Heir may execute the Exert Influence action, which is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Select a Resource that Heir has in their Resources.
* Select a Claim.
* Set an number named Influence to 5.
* If the selected Resource has a Beneficial Aspect that matches one of the Features of that Heir, increase the Influence by 5.
* If the selected Resource has a Hindering Flaw that matches one of the Features of that Heir, decrease the Influence by 5.
* If that Heir has the selected Claim, increase the Influence by 5.
* Remove the selected Resource from that Heir’s Resources.
* Choose to either add to or subtract from the selected Claim’s Strength by the Influence, and then perform the addition or subtraction, modifying the ruleset directly to do so.

A alternative to “Challenging Times”. I’m curious if this one will be more acceptable.

Proposal: Real Estate

Timed out / quorumed 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2023 16:29:29 UTC

If the proposal “Common Ground” failed, this proposal has no further effect.

In “Estates”, replace “If a Heir is not the Palatine of any given Estate” with:-

If a Heir is not the Palatine of any Estates

For each Heir who is the Palatine of more than one Estate, remove all but the oldest of that Heir’s Estates from the game.

Throughout the “Estates” rule, replace the word “reputation” with “prestige”. Set the prestige of all Estates to be equal to whatever their reputation was immediately prior to this proposal enacting.

Rename the “Reputable Estate” claim to “Prestigious Estate”, and replace “highest reputation” with “highest prestige” in that Claim.

A patch for the “any given Estate” issue (which I agree with SingularByte is made explicit by use of the word “given”), cleaning up any Estate spam that may have happened.

Also avoiding the reuse of the word “reputation” for Estates, when it’s already being used for an unrelated Heir trait.

Proposal: Stepping Aside

Timed out 5 votes to 0 with 1 unresolved DEF. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Dec 2023 16:26:51 UTC

Enact a new rule “Successors”:-

At any time an Heir who has a positive Reputation may take the following atomic action of nominating a Successor:

* Set their own Forename to Nameless
* Set their Age to 3DICE20+10. If their Age decreases by more than 20 as a result of this then the Successor is an Offspring; otherwise the Successor is Distant.
* If the Successor is an Offspring and the Heir has any Aspects; they lose one Aspect at random, then gain a random Aspect
* If the Successor is Distant; they lose all Aspects and Flaws, then gain a random Aspect
* Lose 4 Reputation

If the proposal “Thou Is Spouseless” enacted, add after the first point of the above list:-

* Set their Spouse to None

If the proposal “Common Ground” enacted, add before the final point of the above list:-

* If the Successor is Distant and the Heir is the Palatine of an Estate; set that Estate’s Palatine to the Old King

Replace “Within 24 hours of having gained a Feature for the first time in the dynasty, an Heir may once choose to randomly select, and apply to themselves, an additional Aspect and a single Flaw.” with:-

An Heir is Travelling if they have gained a Feature for the first time in the dynasty within the past 24 hours, or if they have nominated a Distant Successor within the past 24 hours. While an Heir who has no Flaws is Travelling, they may choose to randomly select, and apply to themselves, an additional Aspect and a single Flaw.

Feels like we might need the Reinitialisation rule to break up the opening die rolls a bit. Here’s a more genealogical spin on it.

Proposal: A Persuasive Argument

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 21:43:00 UTC

If the proposal “Black Rod” failed, this proposal does nothing. Otherwise:

Create a rule called Bribery as a subrule of Tyngwall, with the following text:

As an Act of Subterfuge, any Heir may Bribe the Parliamentarians. When you do so, you should privately communicate with the Old King to state which Existing Business you wish to influence, and whether you wish to increase or decrease support for it.

You may only Bribe the Parliamentarians three times for a given Meeting of Tyngwall.

If desired, up to three times per week, you may decrease your Reputation by 4 in order to imply that that you have performed a Bribe the Parliamentarians action without being required to actually follow through with that Bribe.

In the rule Tyngwall, replace “For each piece of Existing Business, how many non-Heir Parliamentarians support it and how many oppose it;” with
“For each piece of Existing Business, how many non-Heir Parliamentarians support it and how many oppose it as per the rule Support;”

Create a rule called Support as a subrule of Tyngwall, with the following text:

For a given piece of Existing Business, the number of non-Heir Parliamentarians that support it and how many oppose it should be calculated as follows:
* First, generate a random number from 0 to the number of non-heir Parliamentarians inclusive; this is the number of initial supporters.
* If nobody has Bribed the Parliamentarians to influence that particular Existing Business, take no further steps for this Existing Business. Otherwise:
* From oldest Bribe to newest, add 10 to the supporters for each Bribe that was to increase support, and subtract 10 for each Bribe that was to decrease support.
** If a given Bribe would move the number of Supporters to an invalid value, it should instead move it to the closest valid value to that invalid value.

Delete all but the first sentence of the rule Reputation, and replace the deleted text with:

Whenever an Heir performs an Act of Subterfuge atomic action, they lose 4 reputation.

Whenever an Heir gains a claim as a direct result of one of the steps of an Act of Subterfuge atomic action that they performed, they lose an additional 4 reputation.

Whenever an Heir begins meeting the conditions of a claim, if they did so outside of an Act of Subterfuge atomic action, they gain 4 reputation.

Whenever an Heir loses a claim, they lose 4 reputation.

This is an attempt to give the average player some sway in the Tyngwall. I wouldn’t object on principle to there being some kind of penalty for people inside the Tyngwall trying to bribe, or for there to be some ability for people outside the Tyngwall to propose New Business, but this was already getting wordy and I only have the one slot right now.

Proposal: Less Urgent Required Reading

Popular, 6-1. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 21:40:53 UTC

If the call for judgement “Required Reading” failed:

Give the “Eldest” claim a Condition of “have the highest Age among all Heirs” and remove its Requirements.

As promised, here’s the proposal version of the call for judgement.

Wednesday, November 29, 2023

Proposal: Claim to Fame

Withdrawn. Josh

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 16:55:55 UTC

In “Claims” add “An Heir’s Total Claim Power is equal to the sum total strength of all their Claims.”

In “Transition of Power” replace

When The Old King Perishes, the Heir whose single strongest Claim is stronger than all other Heirs’ strongest Claims achieves victory. If multiple Heirs are tied for strongest, their next-strongest Claims are successively compared.

with

The Heir Apparent is determined by the following steps. If a single Heir has a higher Claim Strength among all Heirs, they are Heir Apparent. If two or more heirs are tied for having the highest Total Claim Power the Heir Apparent is determined by the following tiebreaks (with each step only applying to the heirs who were still tied after the previous step)
* Whoever has the highest strongest single claim
* Whoever has the highest second strongest claim
* Successively compare next highest claims until a Heir Apparent is determined or the still tied Heir’s claim list is exhausted
* Highest Age
* Highest Reputation

If after applying all of these tiebreak steps, two or more Heirs are still tied, there is no Heir Apparent. 

When The Old King Perishes, the Heir Apparent (if there is one) achieves Victory.

Exiled to Distant Lands

I’m idling myself; quorum is unchanged at 7.

Proposal: Thou Is Spouseless

Timed out and enacted, 6-0. Josh

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 16:50:25 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule named “Marriage” with the following body:

Each Heir has a Spouse, which is a publicly tracked value that defaults to None. If an Heir’s Spouse is set to the name of a Prospect, they are considered to be Married to that Prospect. Each Prospect has a name and description (which are flavor text), Requirements, optionally a Benefit (which applies to the Heir Married to that Spouse), optionally an Alimony and optionally a Gift. If an Heir is Married to a Prospect, no other Heir may have their Spouse set to the name of that Prospect. The list of Prospects is as follows:

Marriage is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Set your Spouse to the name of a Prospect whose Requirements you have met
* Apply the effects of the Gift of that Prospect (if they have one)

Divorce is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Apply the Alimony of the Prospect you’re currently Married to (if they have one)
* Set your Spouse to None

Add two new claims: one named “Partnership” with a strength of 20 and the condition “You are Married to a Prospect” and one named “Faithful” with a strength of 10 and the condition “You have not performed the Divorce action during this dynasty”.

fleshed out version of the Maidenless proposal

Proposal: Black Rod

Timed out, 4-2 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 15:49:06 UTC

Add the following to the end of the first paragraph in the rule Claims:

Each Claim has a Disown list, which is a list of the names of Heirs. An Heir whose name is on the Disown list for a Claim may not gain, hold or otherwise have any right to that Claim.

For each Claim in the ruleset, add a line that says ‘Disown: -’

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

A Meeting of the Tyngwall takes place each Sunday at noon, to shape the future of the Kingdom.

The Tyngwall is made up of 120 Parliamentarians. The criteria to be a Parliamentarian are as follows: a Parliamentarian must be over 40 years of age. If an Heir meets the criteria to be a Parliamentarian then they are a Parliamentarian; otherwise, they are not. All Parliamentarians in the Tynwald who are not Heirs may be assumed to be other minor Barons and landholders in the Kingdom.

Each Meeting of the Tyngwall is represented by a single post to the BlogNomic blog; such a post for the next scheduled Meeting may be made by any Heir or Old King if there is no such post. The title of such a post must take the format of the word ‘Tyngwall’ followed by the date upon which that Meeting will take place, and its body should include the Agenda for that Meeting, including any Existing Business due to be discussed.

The Agenda for each meeting of the Tyngwall is as follows: 1, Settle Existing Business; and 2, Propose New Business. The Existing Business of each Meeting of the Tyngwall is each item of New Business that was proposed to the previous meeting of the Tyngwall.

Prior to the date and time at which the Meeting takes place, any Heir who is also a Parliamentarian may respond to it indicating their support or opposition to any Existing Business, and proposing a single item of New Business.

Once, after midnight on the Wednesday and before midnight on the Saturday of that week, the Old King should secretly randomly generate the following information and post it in a comment to the Meeting due to take place that Sunday:
* For each piece of Existing Business, how many non-Heir Parliamentarians support it and how many oppose it;
* Two pieces of New Business that those non-Heir Parliamentarians will propose.

Add a new subrule to that rule, called Business:

All Business (New or Existing) must take the following format: the name of a specific Claim, and the name of one of the following decrees (specifying the value where a range of outcomes is possible):
* Endorse: Increase its Strength by any value between 1 and 10 inclusive
* Denegrate: Decrease its Strength by any value between 1 and 5 inclusive
* Disown: Add the name of a specific Heir to the Disown list for that Claim

Add another new subrule to the rule Tyngwall, called Resolving a Meeting:

At any time after a Meeting takes place, any Heir or Old King may resolved its effects as follows: for each piece of Existing Business, calculate whether more Parliamentarians support it than oppose it; if they do, enact its effect; otherwise do nothing.

When a Meeting takes place and has been thus resolved, all of its Existing Business ceases to be Business.

If Proposal: King Alan the First was enacted then, after ‘a Parliamentarian must be over 40 years of age’, add ‘; a Parliamentarian must have a name from the Feminine list’.
If Proposal: A Stain Upon Your Honour was enacted then do nothing as dishonour has never been an impedement to political involvement.
If Proposal: A prince must always seem to be very moral, even if he is not was enacted then, after ‘a Parliamentarian must be over 40 years of age’, add ‘; a Parliamentarian must have one of the Astute, Menacing, Ambitious, Charismatic, or Knavish Features’.
If Proposal: Common Ground was enacted then, after ‘a Parliamentarian must be over 40 years of age’, add ‘; a Parliamentarian must be the Palatine of an Estate’.

Proposal: Challenging Times

Timed out, 2-4 with 1 DEF. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 14:12:35 UTC

Add a new rule named “Challenges” with the following text:

Every Heir has Resources, which is a list of zero or more of the following named Resources, defaulting to all Resources named below. Each Resource may be represented in gamestate tracking by the first letter of that Resource’s name:
* Wealth
* Alliances
* Popularity
* Religion

An Heir may Challenge any Claim gained by any other Heir by starting a Challenge Event, which is defined as follows:
* The Creation Condition for a Challenge Event is that there is no other Challenge Event that is Open and that the Challenge Event post has a post body that contains the name of the Heir being challenged and the name of one of that Heir’s Claims in which that Heir is the only one who has that Claim. Only one Heir and one Claim may be contained within the post body. The Heir who authored this Challenge Event post is known as the Challenger. The Heir whose name is mentioned in the blog post body is known as the Challenged.
* The Response Format for a Challenge Event is a comment from either the Challenger or the Challenged containing the name of a single Resource that the author of the comment has in their Resources and that has not been mentioned in any other comment by the author for this instance of the Challenge Event.
* The Ending Condition is that either at least 48 hours have passed since this instance of the Challenge Event was posted or both of the Challenged and Challenger have a valid Response for every Resource they have in their Resources.
* The Ending Action is to perform the Resolve Challenges action.

The Resolve Challenges action is an atomic action with the following steps:
* For each valid Response from the Challenger, remove the Resource in that Response from the Challenger’s Resources and decrease the Strength of the Claim by 10 in the ruleset.
* For each valid Response from the Challenged, remove the Resource in that Response from the Challenged’s Resources and increase the Strength of the Claim by 10 in the ruleset.
* For each time this combination of Challenged and Claim have been involved in a previous Challenge Event, not including this one, increase the Strength of the Claim by 10 in the ruleset.

I wanted to offer a strategic option of spending Resources to weaken someone else’s Claim Strength or defend your own, so that Claims are a little more dynamic and it’s not a forgone conclusion that the Heir with the currently-strongest Claim will achieve victory. I think it’s a little more thematic to use Resources like “Alliances” and “Popularity” to convince the court that a Claim shouldn’t be as strong as it is, thus favoring other Claims by weakening the strongest one.

Please note the mechanic that makes it harder to pile on to a single Heir and Claim with multiple Challenge Events. It’s still possible, but would require some coordination and would wipe out a lot of Resources that then couldn’t be used later.

Also note that there’s not a mechanism for an Heir to increase the Strength of a Claim outside of a Challenge. I thought about adding a way to do so by spending more Resources, but I had a hard time coming up with something balanced. I’m hoping maybe we can agree to address this separately from this Proposal.

I’m thinking that this could be combined with Aspects and Flaws to to change the amount that is increased or decreased depending on the Resource that is used, but I didn’t want to add that just yet.

Tuesday, November 28, 2023

Call for Judgment: Required Reading

Timed out 3-3 and fails -SingularByte

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 08:12:46 UTC

Give the “Eldest” claim a Condition of “have the highest Age among all Heirs” and remove its Requirements

Don’t really wanna have to waste a proposal slot on this, but also felt wrong to add it onto my current proposal

Proposal: Common Ground

Times out 6-2 and is enacted -SingularByte

Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 08:07:43 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Estates”

An Estate consists of a Palatine, which is a (possibly idle) Heir or The Old King, the name of which is publicly tracked; a publicly tracked Name, which is a string and is always flavor text and cannot be the same as another Estate; and a publicly tracked positive integer reputation

If a Heir is not the Palatine of any given Estate, that Heir may create a new estate by choosing a name for it (which is not the name of any current estate), setting themselves to be the Palatine, and setting the reputation to be 3 + DICE7.

Add a new entry called “Reputable Estate” to the list of claims. Give it a Strength of 30 and Conditions of “Be the Palatine of an Estate that has the highest reputation among all Heirs”

Mentorship Announcement

Desertfrog will be mentored by Josh.

Proposal: That Was Then, This Is Now

Enacted popular, 7-0. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 21:25:34 UTC

In Claims, replace “An Heir who meets the conditions for a Claim is considered to have that claim.”
with

An Heir who meets the conditions for a Claim is considered to have gained that claim until such a time as they no longer meet those conditions.

If the Proposal “A Stain Upon Your Honour” failed, the rest of this proposal does nothing. Otherwise:

In Reputation, replace “Whenever an Heir begins meeting the conditions of a claim as a direct result of one of the steps of an Act of Subterfuge atomic action that they performed, or when they lose a Claim, they lose 4 reputation.” with

Whenever an Heir gains a claim as a direct result of one of the steps of an Act of Subterfuge atomic action that they performed, they lose 4 reputation.
Whenever an Heir loses a claim, they lose 4 reputation.

This should hopefully fix my previous proposal by calling out that you can actually lose claims.

Proposal: Maybe They’re Born With It

Withdrawn. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 21:24:13 UTC

Add a rule named “Traits” with the following text:

Every Heir has Traits, which is either empty or a pairing of a Positive Trait and a Negative Trait, defaulting to empty. A Positive Trait and a Negative Trait are Opposites of each other if they are listed in the same row in the table below.

If an Heir’s Traits are empty, they may set their Traits by choosing one Positive Trait and one Negative Trait from the corresponding columns in the Traits table, as long as the chosen traits are not Opposites of each other. An Heir with non-empty Traits may not change their Traits unless otherwise specified in another rule.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Traits
|-
! Positive !! Negative
|-
| Strong || Weak
|-
| Nimble || Clumsy
|-
| Charming || Repellant
|-
| Eloquent || Dull
|-
| Brave || Cowardly
|}

I think we can work Traits into either the Conditions of some Claims or as part of having Partners if that’s ever re-worked. Or maybe they will be a part of some other future mechanic. Either way, I feel like having a choice in Traits establishes what kind of Heir you are, sort of like creating the background for a character in an RPG.

Proposal: Perishable

Enacted popular, 8-0. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 21:23:08 UTC

In “Transition of Power”, replace “When The Old King Perishes” with

The Old King is either Ill or Perished, defaulting to Ill; his condition is publicly tracked. When the Old King becomes Perished

Per the “long-shot scam” noted on Rules of Succession, which I don’t think flies but which we may as well explicitly head off in advance.

Call for Judgment: Heiry Situation

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Nov 2023 16:54:01 UTC

In the rule Attributes, change “When an Heir first becomes unidle during the dynasty, their Age becomes 3DICE20+10” to “When an Heir joins the dynasty for the first time, their Age is set to 3DICE20+10”.

Uphold that the initial Ages set for the Heirs called Desertfrog and redtara were set correctly.

the thing over the water

Unidle me please!

Proposal: A prince must always seem to be very moral, even if he is not

Enacted popular, 9-0. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 21:17:42 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule to the ruleset as a subrule to the rule Attributes, called Features, with the following text:

Each Heir may have up to four Features, of which up to three may be Aspects and of which zero or one may be a Flaw, which are publicly tracked; valid Aspects and Flaws can be found in lists in this rule. No Claim may be proposed that can be satisfied purely by the possession or lack of a Aspect or Flaw.

Valid Aspects are as follows:
* Hale
* Astute
* Comely
* Menacing
* Ambitious
* Charismatic
* Courageous
* Resilient
* Pious
* Fortuitous

Valid Flaws are as follows:
* Rank
* Impoverished
* Knavish
* Naive
* Reckless

The starting value for Features is one Aspect selected at random. Within 24 hours of having gained a Feature for the first time in the dynasty, an Heir may once choose to randomly select, and apply to themselves, an additional Aspect and a single Flaw.

For each Heir, randomly select an Aspect and apply it to them.

Finally here!

After a minor misunderstanding during the registration process, I now hereby Formally Perform the Announcement of the Occurrence of my Arrival and my Intention to Become a Player.

oh I can add flavour text here too!

I wonder what would happen if I changed the status of this post “vetoed” or “illegal”...

Monday, November 27, 2023

Proposal: Drama of Documents

Timed out and failed, 2-4 with 1 unresolved DEF. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 21:17:00 UTC

If Heirs have age, add a new rule called “Falsifying Documents” with the following text:

An Heir, as an Act of Subterfuge, can change their age to match the age of the heir with the highest age.

The eldest starts with a high random advantage this can remove it, but you are sacrificing yourself somewhat

Proposal: A Stain Upon Your Honour

Timed out and enacted popular, 7-3. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 20:41:27 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule called “Reputation”, with the following body:

Each Heir has a publicly tracked Reputation which is an integer defaulting to 0 and which has a starting value of DICE20 - 5, and which is permitted to be negative.

Whenever an Heir begins meeting the conditions of a claim, if they did so outside of an Act of Subterfuge atomic action, they gain 4 reputation.
Whenever an Heir begins meeting the conditions of a claim as a direct result of one of the steps of an Act of Subterfuge atomic action that they performed, or when they lose a Claim, they lose 4 reputation.

If a rule named “Claims” exists, add a claim called “Positive Reputation” with a strength of 15 and a condition of “You have a reputation greater than 0.”

As Heirs, we’re likely to want to claim the throne through underhanded means, and the reputation system is intended to act as a currency for that. Currently there’s no real consequence to going negative, beyond losing a minor claim.

Proposal: King Alan the First

Timed out and enacted, 6-2. Josh

Adminned at 29 Nov 2023 20:39:40 UTC

To the rule “Attributes”, add:-

Each Heir has a publicly tracked Forename, which is a flavour text string defaulting to “Nameless”. An Heir whose Forename is Nameless may perform the atomic action of naming: choosing either of the two lists on the wiki page [[Mediæval English names]], selecting a random numbered name from that list, and changing their Forename to it.

(If the rule “Attributes” does not exist, create it with the quoted text above.)

If the word “Bride” exists in the ruleset and “Husband” does not, replace “choosing either of the two lists on the wiki page [[Mediæval English names]], selecting a random numbered name from that list” in the Attributes rule with:-

selecting a random name from the Masculine list on the wiki page [[Mediæval English names]]

Named characters might be a useful mindset for this one.

Proposal: Thou Who They Is Maidenless Shalt Not Proceed

Withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Nov 2023 18:07:44 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule named “Marriage” with the following body:

Each Heir has a Partner, which is a publicly tracked value that defaults to None. If an Heir’s Partner is set to the name of a Bride, they are considered to be Married to that Bride. Each Bride has a name (which is flavor text), a Benefit and Requirements. The list of Brides is as follows:

Marriage is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Set your Partner to the name of a Bride whose Requirements you have met

Divorce is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Set your Partner to None

If a rule named “Claims” exists, add two new claims: one named “Partnership” with a strength of 20 and the requirement “You are Married to a Bride” and one named “Faithful” with a strength of 10 and the requirement of “You have not performed the Divorce action during this dynasty”.

we’re in medieval times, after all
very barebones right now but I’ll try to figure something out with this

Proposal: Any claim is better than no claim

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 2 votes to 7 by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Nov 2023 18:06:49 UTC

To the rule “Transition of Power”, after “their next-strongest Claims are successively compared”, add “, with Heirs lacking such a claim losing the comparison to Heirs that have such a claim.”

If there is a rule “Attributes”, append the following sentence to the rule “Transition of Power”:

In the event that all successive Claims have been exhausted, the Heir with the lowest Age among those whose Claims were exhausted last achieves victory.

Append the following sentence to the rule “Transition of Power” as a separate paragraph:

Should the Old King Perish without causing an Heir to achieve victory, and no Heir has previously achieved victory during the current dynasty, a Civil War begins. If that Civil War is still ongoing 48 hours after it begins, the game enters a Metadynasty and this rule then repeals itself.

Proposal: Primogeniture

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Nov 2023 09:04:36 UTC

Add a new rule called “Attributes” with the following text:

Each Heir has a publicly tracked Age, which is a non-negative integer defaulting to 18.  When an Heir first becomes unidle during the dynasty, their Age becomes 3DICE20+10.

For each Heir, roll 3DICE20+10 and set their Age to the result.

If a rule titled “Claims” exists, add a new Claim named “Eldest”, with a Strength of 50 and a requirement of “have the highest Age among all Heirs”.

Adding a basic placeholder Claim and a little bit of starting asymmetry

Proposal: Rules of Succession

Reached quorum 8 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Nov 2023 08:56:04 UTC

Replace all instances of “The Old King” with “Old King” in all sections of the Ruleset, including Core, Special Case and Appendix.

Create a new dynastic rule titled “Claims” with the following text:

A Claim is a subrule of this rule and has a nonnegative integer value for Strength and one or more Conditions to meet. An Heir who meets the conditions for a Claim is considered to have that claim.

Create a new rule titled “Transition of Power” with the following text:

When The Old King Perishes, the Heir whose single strongest Claim is stronger than all other Heirs’ strongest Claims achieves victory. If multiple Heirs are tied for strongest, their next-strongest Claims are successively compared.

Setting the core victory condition for the dynasty: whoever has the best claim to the throne when the king dies gets to be king. When will he die? Who knows…

Ascension Address: The King is Dead, Long Live the King

Rumors and whispers spread through the court. King Vovix is old. King Vovix is ill. Everyone has a time to go, and his time is soon. As the old king lives out his final days, many eyes turn towards the soon to be empty throne. Some wait patiently for the day to come, while others begin to plot to expedite the succession process… Distant relations and junior princes work to strengthen their claims to the throne, as the favorites plan to eliminate any potential rivals. There are many contenders, many paths to the throne, and many merits to consider. But in the end, there is only one King…”

Repeal all Dynastic Rules and fail all non-Core proposals.
Replace “Wizard” with “Heir”
Replace “Battle Master” with “The Old King”
Name the new gamestate tracking page “The Hall of Records”

I have no idea what I’m doing as far as Imperial Styles, but I guess Guide/Protective/Hands-Off/Scam-Neutral/Servile/Instinctual sounds reasonable. I will say The Old King may have a favorite Heir here :)

Duel and Duality

A post-match commentary post, for the dynasty that has just ended.

Monday, November 27, 2023

Declaration of Victory: The real stars were the friends we made along the way

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0 with the Battle Master in favour. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Nov 2023 16:57:15 UTC

I am the only Archmage and have achieved victory per the rule “Achievements”.

Saturday, November 25, 2023

Story Post: Wizard Duel 18

Wizard Ring:

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

No Gewgaw

Defrock is banned

Spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_18

Proposal: Losing Strategy

Vetoed for the new dynasty. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 27 Nov 2023 18:27:46 UTC

Add the following to “Wizards”

Each Wizard has a number of Low Marks, which by default is zero

In “Commencing a duel” after the step “Reduce the Freshness of every Wizard by 1” add the step

If a single wizard has fewer stars than every other wizard, increase that Wizard’s Low Marks by 1

Add a new Achievement called “Drop-Out” with Criteria “Have at least three Low Marks at the end of the current duel’s televised period”
Add a new Achievement called “Masochist” with Criteria “Have a net loss of at least eight stars, not including any stars lost from the cost of casting a spell, during the current duel’s televised period”

 

Thursday, November 23, 2023

Proposal: Speak Friend And Enter [Core]

Timed out / quorumed 8 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 25 Nov 2023 19:13:51 UTC

In the core rule “Wizards”, remove “The process of applying for access to the BlogNomic blog is outlined in the FAQ.” and add to the end of the first paragraph:-

(See the [[FAQ#Can_I_join_in.3F|FAQ]] for guidance on how to apply for access to the BlogNomic blog.)

Making this a bit milder.

(It was suggested on Discord that the FAQ is locked-down gamestate since it’s linked from the ruleset, but in moving to fix this, it turns out that it actually isn’t: it’s only “wiki pages that the Dynastic Rules explicitly mention” that are automatically gamestated. But it’s worth toning this down all the same.)

Thursday, November 23, 2023

Wizard In Training

Forest will be mentored by Kevan. As far as I can tell, the rules are changed so the mentorship lasts until “A Wizard may dissolve a Mentorship they are part of at any time, by announcing this in a blog post.” rather than having a set length anymore. Sorry if I’ve missed something here.

Proposal: Whiteout

Timed out 4 votes to 3. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 24 Nov 2023 20:04:45 UTC

Remove the Achievement named Blackout from the list of Achievements.

this thing has just been fodder for scam attempts so far, and it doesn’t look like that’s going to change

Call for Judgment: Change Takes Time

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 23 Nov 2023 21:28:39 UTC

In the Rule “Personality Traits”, append

This cost increase is calculated based on the Wizard’s Personality Traits at the start of the current duel.

Increase the Stars of the Wizard named Bucky by 1.

Personality traits change before spells are actually cast, so right now a cast spell affects dominant traits/imbalance for its own cost calculations. I feel like the intended working here is for personality traits to be checked at the start of the round, as otherwise casting a spell with a trait not strictly lower than your highest will make that trait dominant immediately for that same round.

EDIT: previous wording was ambiguous depending on whether “selecting” can be done multiple times, this should be more scamproof.

A Wizard Joins the Duel

I Wizard myself into existence, wizarding my way into wizarding, so that I may duel! I JOIN THE DUEL!

Monday, November 20, 2023

Proposal: Tuning Fork

Reached quorum 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Nov 2023 15:38:09 UTC

To the end of the Forked style benefit, replace “you may add 1 Star” with:-

you may (no more than once per Duel) add 1 Star

Not sure if this works, but let’s say it doesn’t.

Sunday, November 19, 2023

Story Post: Wizard Duel 17

The Wizard Ring is:

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

The Gewgaw are the Stygian Censer and Pewter Elephant

Greed has been banned

The spell list can be found at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_17

Proposal: No Final Battle

Reached quorum 7 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Nov 2023 13:40:34 UTC

In “Creating a Duel” replace “If there is no open or pending duel,” with “If there is no open or pending duel and no Wizard has met the criteria for achieving victory under the rule ‘Achievements’,”

Proposal: Clean Sweep

Timed out 2 votes to 2. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Nov 2023 13:39:39 UTC

In the rule “Style”, add “Broom” to the list of Staff styles.

To “Special Styles”, add:-

Broom
   Benefit: When you cast Gather, you gain 3 Stars instead of DICE3 Stars from it.

In the rule “Upgrade”, replace:

  • “Depends on the Style” with “Depends on the type of Style”
  • “One of the Style types of Hat, Robes, Staff, or Beard” with “A Special Style”
  • “The Style of the Wizard casting this Spell is changed to the Special Style corresponding to the type chosen in the Inputs.” with “The Wizard’s Style for whichever type corresponds to the Input is changed to the Input.”

Saturday, November 18, 2023

Proposal: Special Styles Need Special Treatment

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Nov 2023 16:15:08 UTC

In the rule “Spells”, add the following to the start of the subrule “Defrock”:

Cost: 2 if the Robes of the Wizard in the targeted position is a Special Style, otherwise 0

In the rule “Spells”, add the following to the start of the subrule “Disarm”:

Cost: 2 if the Staff of the Wizard in the targeted position is a Special Style, otherwise 0

In the rule “Spells”, add the following to the start of the subrule “Gust”:

Cost: 2 if the Hat of the Wizard in the targeted position is a Special Style, otherwise 0

In the rule “Spells”, add the following to the start of the subrule “Trim”:

Cost: 2 if the Beard of the Wizard in the specified numeric position is a Special Style, otherwise 0

special styles aren’t seeing any use right now, since all it takes to remove them is a spell - this hopefully incentivizes using them a little more

Proposal: The Core of Tracking [Core] [Special Case]

Timed out / quorumed 5 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Nov 2023 16:13:22 UTC

Append the following to the end of the rule “Ruleset and Gamestate”:

The gamestate tracking page for this dynasty is the Duel Sheet page of the wiki. Unless otherwise stated, all publicly tracked gamestate information is tracked on it.

In the rule “Victory and Ascension”, add the following step to the end of the Atomic Action mentioned in that rule:

* Optionally change the gamestate tracking page referred to in the rule “Ruleset and Gamestate” to a different page that does not exist and does not start with the word “Ruleset”.

Repeal the Special Case rule “Dynastic Tracking [Active] [Standard]”.

not sure if having this as a special case rule makes sense anymore

Saturday, November 18, 2023

Proposal: A Charming Period Piece

Quorum Reached. Passes 6-0—Clucky

Adminned at 19 Nov 2023 19:58:19 UTC

In “Achievements” replace with

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 before the creation of the reply to the duel post specifying which spells were cast.

with

The criteria for an Achievement must be met between the moment just before the effects of the Duel’s selected Gewgaws, if any, that occur before spells are cast are applied and the moment just before the creation of the reply to the duel post specifying which spells were cast.

Bucky pointed out that charm does not currently fall in the televised period, which kinda breaks superstar. I don’t think this breaks the televised period for anything else, so seems like a fine change

Story Post: Wizard Duel 16

Wizard Ring:

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

DOOM CLOUD is banned

There is no gewgaw

Spell list is at: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_16#Achievements

Thursday, November 16, 2023

Proposal: 2x Emote Multiplier

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 18 Nov 2023 10:08:45 UTC

Add a Gewgaw to the end of the list in the rule “Gewgaws”, as follows:

Pine Totem
After spells are cast, any previous changes to Wizards’ Personality Traits this Duel are applied a second time.

Proposal: Prismatic Puddle

Passes 6-0—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Nov 2023 01:18:06 UTC

Remove the Ice Prism from the list in the rule “Gewgaws”.

There’s only one random spell left in the ruleset (Gather).

Proposal: Financial Independence

Fails 5-1—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Nov 2023 01:17:34 UTC

In the rule “Spells”, create a new subrule named “Invest” with the following body:

Inputs: A non-negative integer that does not the exceed the Stars of the Wizard selecting to cast this Spell

Cost: The integer specified in the Inputs for this specific casting of this Spell

Effect: At the end of the televised period of the Duel whose Duel Number is 3 higher than the Duel this specific casting of the Spell was made in, the Wizard casting this spell gains 1.5 times the amount of Stars specified in the Inputs.

Traits: Selfish

might add some amount of strategy, dunno

Wednesday, November 15, 2023

Proposal: More Achievements!

Timed Out. Passes 5-1—Clucky

Adminned at 18 Nov 2023 01:05:43 UTC

Add the following to “Wizards”

Each Wizard has a number of High Marks, which by default is zero

In “Commencing a duel” after the step “Reduce the Freshness of every Wizard by 1” add the step

If a single wizard has more stars than every other wizard, increase that Wizard’s High Marks by 1

Add a new Achievement called “Honor Student” with Criteria “Have at least three High Marks at the end of the current duel’s televised period”
Add a new Achievement called “Superstar” with Criteria “Have a net gain of at least eight stars during the current duel’s televised period”
Add a new Achievement called “Fabulous” with Criteria “Earn stars from the casting of two different Glam spells during the current duel’s televised period (stars earned from charm do not count for this achievement)”
Add a new Achievement called “Thanks, Me!” with Criteria “Successfully target yourself with a Gift spell that you cast during the current duel’s televised period (Note that Synergy does not change the target of the spell, so would not trigger this achievement)”

 

Story Post: Wizard Duel 15

The Wizard Ring is:

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

Synergy is banned

The Contemplation Orb is the Gewgaw for the duel

The Duel is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_15#Meditate

Tuesday, November 14, 2023

Proposal: Cost Benefit Analysis

Timed out 3-0 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 17 Nov 2023 00:01:39 UTC

In “Spells” 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 when they cast the spell, unless they have fewer stars than the cost, in which case they are considered to have cast Fizzle instead. Adjustments may be made to the cost of a spell, such as through a spell specifying a variable cost depending on the input, or Gewgaw or Special Styles. These adjustments effect the cost that a Wizard pays during this step, but do not effect the cost of the spell as listed in its definition. If a spell has no cost, its cost is considered to be 0 but may be still be adjusted. The cost of casting Fizzle is always 0 and may not be adjusted.

In the Benefit of “Forked” replace “you may add 1 Star to the cost of the Spell” with “you may add 1 Star to your cost of casting the Spell this duel”

Remove “A Wizard’s Personality Trait is Dominant if it exceeds all their other Personality Traits.” from “Personality Traits” (if it exists)

Add the following to “Personality Traits”

A Wizard Imbalance is equal to their highest personality trait minus their second highest personality trait. Whenever a Wizard casts a spell, if the spell has a trait which is that Wizard’s highest personality trait, the cost for that Wizard to cast the spell for the current duel is increased by their Imbalance.

Remove “, minus one (to a minimum of zero) if any of the Spell’s Traits is their dominant Personality Trait” from the ruleset (if it exists)

If the sentence “A Wizard’s Personality Trait is Extreme if it is at least three higher than all of their other Personality Traits.” appears in “Personality Traits” replace it with

“A Wizard’s Personality Trait is Extreme if it is at least five higher than all of their other Personality Traits.”

Call for Judgment: Proper Upholding

Popular, 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2023 16:08:41 UTC

Uphold the awarding of the Perfect Harmony achievement to the Wizards named lendunistus and Vovix which occurred as part of duel 13

If https://blognomic.com/archive/tv_highlights is pending and popular, enact it.

JonathanDark unfortunately while trying to clean up some wording edited his CFJ to allow for a giant loophole to exist and now its over 4 hours old

Call for Judgment: Recognizing Achievements

Unpopular, 0-6. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2023 16:06:38 UTC

Treat the Achievements of the Wizards named lendunistus and Vovix as if they were legally awarded.

Tuesday, November 14, 2023

Call for Judgment: Off Camera Doesn’t Count

Unpopular, 2-5. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2023 16:06:05 UTC

Remove all Wizards’ Stargazer, Blackout and Perfect Harmony achievements. They can only be achieved at the end of a duel, but per the rule “Achievements”, the criteria 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, a range that does not include the end of the duel. Clucky has been awarding these achievements anyway, which is clearly incorrect.

Proposal: TV Highlights

Exceeded Quorum, 6-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2023 15:59:24 UTC

In the rule “Achievements”, change “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.” to

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 before the creation of the reply to the duel post specifying which spells were cast. This portion of a Duel is its televised period.

In the description of every Achievement but “Denied!”, change “the current duel” to “the current duel’s televised period”.

Proposal: Big Battel Teim

Unpopular, 2-5. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2023 15:58:24 UTC

Add a new spell called “Battel”. Give it an input of “A number between 1 and 5 inclusive”. Give it an effect of “Reduce the stars by the Wizard casting this spell by the input they provided. Then increase the Kaiju Damage for the currently Duel by the amount their stars were reduced by (Kaiju Damage is by default 0 and is reset at the start of each duel)”

Add a new achievement called “Kaiju Slayer” with a Criteria “Cast the Kaiju spell during a Duel in which at least 10 Kaiju Damage was dealt collectively by all Wizards”

Proposal: Burnout

Timed out, 4-2 with 2 DEFs and Battle Master voting AGAINST. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2023 15:56:32 UTC

In “Personality Traits”, replace “A Wizard’s Personality Trait is Dominant if it exceeds all their other Personality Traits.” with:-

A Wizard’s Personality Trait is Extreme if it is at least three higher than all of their other Personality Traits.

Then add a second bullet point after the first in “Commencing a Duel”:-

* For each Wizard who has selected a spell with a Trait that matches their own Extreme Trait, that Wizard is overloaded - their chosen spell is changed to Fizzle.

Remove “, minus one (to a minimum of zero) if any of the Spell’s Traits is their dominant Personality Trait”.

Ramping up the penalty for excessive specialisation from “minor charm reduction” to “you really have to cast some other spells”.

Sunday, November 12, 2023

Proposal: Meditation

Reached quorum 5 votes to 1. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 13 Nov 2023 17:13:29 UTC

In “Personality Traits”, change “each Personality Trait is a number” to “each Personality Trait is a non-negative number”.

Add the following spell to “Spells”:

{{Flair top|Antique box}}
=== Meditate ===

Cost: 5

Inputs: The name of a personality trait

Effect: The specified personality trait of the wizard casting the spell is reduced by 1.

{{Flair bottom}}

Story Post: Wizard Duel 14

Wizard Ring:

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

Snipe is once again banned

There is no Gewgaw for this duel

Spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_14

Proposal: Like Sands Through the Hourglass

Withdrawn. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 13 Nov 2023 15:23:58 UTC

In the rule “Engaging in a Duel” add the following text:

There is a publicly-tracked number named Hourglass which defaults to the number of non-Idle Wizards. Whenever the Battle Master receives a spell selection for a Duel or a request to clear a spell selection for a Duel, the Battle Master should update the Hourglass with the number of Wizards who do not have a spell selected for the Duel that is currently Open.

If it has been at least 24 hours since the last Duel was Resolved, the Battle Master should post a reminder message in the #current-dynasty Discord channel containing the current Hourglass value and optionally the names of Wizards who have not yet submitted a spell selection for the Duel that is currently Open. The Battle Master should repeat this process every 24 hours and may choose to do so more often after the first 24 hours since the last Duel was Resolved.

In the rule “Commencing a Duel” add this bullet point just before the very last bullet point:

* Set the Hourglass to the number of non-Idle wizards.

Saturday, November 11, 2023

Proposal: The Sniper’s Dream

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 12 Nov 2023 19:07:43 UTC

In the “Snipe” spell in the ruleset, replace “increase the Stars of the Wizard casting this Snipe Spell by 2” with:-

increase the Stars of the Wizard casting this Snipe Spell by 3

Successfully outguessing another player should maybe get more credit - gaining 2 Stars is less than a lucky Gather.

Friday, November 10, 2023

Story Post: Wizard Duel 13

The Wizard Ring is:

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

SNIPE is banned

Spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_13

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

Thursday, November 09, 2023

Call for Judgment: Effective Critiera

Quorum Reached. Enacted by Clucky

Adminned at 10 Nov 2023 19:29:02 UTC

Uphold the enactment of “Unlocked!” to have set the Criteria of each Achievement in every case where the wording of the proposal mentioned “effect”

As Bucky pointed out https://blognomic.com/archive/criteria_are_not_effects#comments currently you could argue that none of our achievements actually have criteria. Thus if I were to start a new round, you could maybe even argue that you fulfill all the criteria of every achievement as there is none. Think its better safe than sorry to get this patched before starting a new round.

Proposal: A Wizard is Never Late

Timed out, 2-1 with 3 DEFs. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 12 Nov 2023 06:30:33 UTC

In “Engaging in a Duel”, remove the paragraph:-

If a duel has been open for 72 hours, any Wizard participating in that duel who has not selected a spell for that duel is considered to have selected to cast Fizzle for that duel.

This recent change feels like it’s shifted the game from a constant pressure “the whole group is waiting for you to submit your orders” to a much more relaxed “it’s okay to keep everyone waiting for 71 hours”.

I think it was working okay before. I’m not convinced that the spectres of “but what if somebody stops playing” and “but what if a player tactically refuses to submit orders” are really there, they’ll both dissolve under a little social pressure and the awareness that a proposal or CfJ could be made to clear the blockage.

Wednesday, November 08, 2023

Proposal: Criteria are not Effects

Timed out 2 votes to 2. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 11 Nov 2023 08:15:14 UTC

In the rule “Achievements”, change

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

to

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 step where Wizards’ Freshnesses are (or would be) reduced during that same Duel

Set the Criteria of the Stargazer achievement to “Have at least two stars more than any other Wizard after all the steps for applying Gewgaws’ effects.”
Set the Criteria of the Blackout achievement to “Have zero stars after all the steps for applying Gewgaws’ effects. “
Set the Criteria of the Perfect Harmony achievement to “Have each personality trait be at least two, and have all of your personality traits be equal, once all the duel’s spells are cast.”
Set the Criteria of the Denied! achievement to “Successfully snipe a spell in a duel where no one but the snipe’s target selected to cast that spell.”
Set the Criteria of the Safe and Sound achievement to “Prevent the loss of at least five stars in the same duel by casting Magical Armor”

If any Achievements have defined Effects, remove those Effects.

Unlocked! used the boilerplate

Add an achievement called “Stargazer” with the effect…

In context, it probably meant criteria rather than effect.
While fixing this oversight, I’m also making a few of the achievements less specific and cleaning up some irreconcilable timing issues where “at the end of the current duel” meant after the achievement check.

Tuesday, November 07, 2023

Proposal: Charging My Lazers

Timed out, 3-4 with 1 DEF and Battle Master voting FOR. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 10 Nov 2023 01:13:00 UTC

Add “a charge” to the list of effects a spell can have

Add the following to “Spells”

A spell may have a charge. When selecting a spell to cast, if that spell has a charge than the Wizard selecting that spell may indicate they wish to cast the charged version of the spell during that duel. If they do, when casting the spell for that wizard for the that duel the charge effects for that spell are also applied. If the charge of a spell is prefixed with a number in parenthesis, this is an additional cost of the charge. If they charged the spell, the Wizard casting this spell must spend the additional cost of the charge in stars for the charge to have any further effect. If they do not have enough stars to pay the additional cost the charge effect is not applied but the effect of the spell is still applied as normal. A charge may also specify changes that may be made to an input. If the additional cost of a charge cannot be paid and the input is invalid for a normal casting of a spell, the Wizard attempting to cast the spell is considered to have cast Fizzle instead.

Give Snipe a charge of “(1). If and only if the named Wizard has selected to cast the named Spell in this duel, gain an additional 3 stars”

Give Misdirection a charge of “(1). You may target any position in the Wizard Ring with your input.”

Give Burn a charge of “(2). The wizard in the targeted position loses 2 additional stars. Their neighbors lose 1 additional star”

Give Doom Cloud a charge of “(2). All other Wizards participating in the duel lose 2 additional stars”

Give Fizzle a charge of “(1). The Wizard casting Fizzle is extremely disappointed”

Give Gather a charge of “(2). Gain DICE4 stars”

Give Gift a charge of “(3). The wizard in the targeted position gains 3 more stars”

Give Greed a charge of “(2). If another Wizard selected the Greed spell this Duel but no other Wizard which selected it this duel charged it, gain 7 stars”

Give Spotlight a charge of “(2). If this Wizard is Unique, they gain another 5 stars.”

Give Unify a charge of “(1). All Trendy Wizards gain 1 more star.”

Proposal: A Fork in the Road

Timed out 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Nov 2023 15:51:25 UTC

In the rule “Style”, directly after “Knobbed,” add “Forked,”.

In the subrule “Special Styles”, add the following to the list of Special Styles:

Forked
Benefit: If you select a Spell for a Duel that has a numerical position in the Wizard Ring as part of its Inputs, you may add 1 Star to the cost of the Spell to specify an additional numerical position in the Wizard Ring, provided that it is not the same position as the original selected position and the additional position still abides by the rules for that Spell, by informing the Battle Master of this choice. If you do so, for that Duel, the spell’s effects apply to the Wizards in both of the selected numerical positions of the Wizard Ring. This does not count as two castings of the Spell.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 12

Wizard Ring:

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

GREED is banned

Spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_12

Contemplation Orb makes a friendly return as a Gewgaw, as does the Bonsai Volcano

Monday, November 06, 2023

Proposal: Immutability [Appendix]

Timed out, 1-3. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 09 Nov 2023 00:23:01 UTC

In the rule “Keywords”, remove the following from the definition of “Gamestate”:

All wiki pages that the Dynastic Rules explicitly mention (except for dynastic histories and discussion pages) and any images or Templates contained within (or indirectly invoked by Templates contained within) those Wiki Pages are assumed to be Gamestate.

Add a new keyword after “Hiatus” called “Immutable” as follows:

If something is immutable, it may not be edited or changed by any Wizard or the Battle Master except where permitted by the ruleset. All wiki pages that the Dynastic Rules explicitly mention (except for dynastic histories and discussion pages) and any images or Templates contained within (or indirectly invoked by Templates contained within) those wiki pages are Immutable.

Add the following to the end of the rule “Representations of the Gamestate”:

If a wiki page is named in the ruleset as the designated location for tracking some particular gamestate, any Wizard or the Battle Master may edit that wiki page even if it would otherwise be immutable so long as the edited version of the page remains an accurate representation of the gamestate.

Per our brief discussion on Discord, only information can be gamestate, and wiki pages are merely used to represent that information. Then the phrase “the wiki page xyz is gamestate” doesn’t really mean anything despite people using it to mean that the page shouldn’t be edited. This adds an actual class of thing that actually shouldn’t be edited under any circumstances, with an exception for representations of gamestate.

Sunday, November 05, 2023

Proposal: Tome Maintenance

Timed out, 1-3 with 2 DEFs and Battle Master voting AGAINST. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 07 Nov 2023 22:21:53 UTC

In “Duels”, replace the paragraph beginning with “The Spell List” with

The Spell List for a duel is the set of all spells as they appeared in the ruleset at the time the duel was scheduled. The spell list for any particular duel is gamestate and should be tracked on the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List X” (where X is the duel number).

If “Unlocked!” passed, replace the last sentence of that paragraph with:

The Achievement List for a duel is the set of all achievements as they appeared in the ruleset at the time the duel was scheduled. The spell list and achievement list for any particular duel are gamestate and should be tracked on the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List X” (where X is the duel number).

Replace the last 4 bullet points of the atomic action to Schedule a Duel with

*  Randomly select a spell which is not mentioned in the effect of any Gewgaws affecting this duel. That spell is banned from this duel and shall be excluded from the spell list for this duel.
* Make a story post to the blog titled “Wizard Duel X” (where X is the duel number) which includes:
** the Wizard Ring for this duel
** a link to the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List X” where X is the duel number.
** the name of any spells banned from this duel
** the name of any Gewgaws selected for this duel

If the ruleset contains the phrase “For each Achievement listed on the spell list page for the duel” replace it with with “For each Achievement on the Achievement List for the duel”.

This should decouple the spell list from the wiki page where it’s represented so it’s easier to refer to the spell list as a collection of spells without having to refer to the specific wiki page. Also, the spell list being a “link to a wiki page” never really made sense to me.

Proposal: Unlocked!

Timed out 5-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 07 Nov 2023 19:04:26 UTC

In “duels” replace “The Spell List is a link to a wiki page which contains the spells available to cast in that duel” with

The Spell List is a link to a wiki page which contains the spells available to cast in that duel, as well as a separate section which contains the achievements that a wizard can possibly unlock during that duel

In “Creating a duel” replace “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”

with

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, with a separate section that contains the current list of achievements and their criteria

In “Commencing a duel” replace “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.”

with

For each Achievement listed on the spell list page for the duel, add it to the list of Achievements for each Wizard who met the criteria for that Achievement (according to the spell list for the current duel) during this Duel if that Wizard does not have that Achievement in their list already.”

Add an achievement called “Stargazer” with the effect “Have at least five stars more than any other Wizard at the end of the current duel”

Add an achievement called “Blackout” with the effect “Have zero stars at the end of the current duel”

Add an achievement called “Perfect Harmony” with the effect “Have each personality trait be at least two, and have all of your personality traits be equal at the end of the current duel”

Add an achievement called “Denied!” with the effect “Successfully snipe a greed spell in a duel where no one else selected to cast greed during the current duel”

Add an achievement called “Safe and Sound” with the effect “Prevent the loss of at least five stars by casting Magical Armor during the current duel”

Adding achievements and making them like spells so that they only apply to future duels

Proposal: We Can’t Slack Off Again

Withdrawn. -Bucky

Adminned at 07 Nov 2023 14:54:23 UTC

Create a new dynastic rule named “Last Resort” with the following body:

If the date is on or after the 20th of November, 2023, the Wizard with the most Stars has achieved victory (unless more than one Wizard has the most Stars).

If a Wizard has 0 Stars, they are not considered to be Ashamed; an Ashamed Wizard is not considered to be a Wizard for the purposes of the rule “Creating a Duel”. If all but one Wizard is Ashamed, that Wizard has achieved victory.

two basic win conditions, since I feel like we’re heading towards a Habanero-I-style limbo right now
I considered a Storm mechanic (a la Kevan XXXI) or some kind of duel tournament but neither really feels right

Proposal: The Hard Stuff

Timed out. Fails 3-5 (two DEF votes break in favor of the Battle Master)—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Nov 2023 07:00:41 UTC

In the rule “Style”, directly after “Knobbed,” add “Obsidian,”.

In the subrule “Special Styles”, add the following to the list of Special Styles:

Obsidian
Benefit: When you cast a spell as part of a Duel, that spell has a Cost of 1 additional Star to power the magic of this Staff. If an effect that would be applied to you is from a spell originally cast by a Wizard without an Obsidian staff, that spell has no effect on you, otherwise the effect is applied to you, but it automatically costs the Wizard who originally cast that spell 1 additional Star (for a given casting of a spell, this is only 1 additional Star for the entire Duel regardless of how many affected Wizards have an Obsidian staff).

Proposal: The Back Room of the Clothier

Timed out. Passes 4-1—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Nov 2023 06:59:39 UTC

In the rule “Style”, directly after “Hooded,” add “Gilded,” and directly after “Wispy,” add “Evil Gotee,”.

In the rule “Style” and the subrule “Special Styles”, replace “Kevlar” with “Dragonhide”. In the gamestate page “Duel Sheet” replace every instance of “Kevlar” with “Dragonhide”.

In the subrule “Special Styles”, add the following to the list of Special Styles:

Gilded
Benefit: Whenever you receive Stars due to the Charm of a Spell, if the Charm of that Spell is at least 3, you receive 1 extra Star.

Evil Gotee
Benefit: Whenever you cast a Spell with an Effect whose text states explicitly that it causes one or more Wizards to lose Stars, the Wizard with the lowest position in the Wizard Ring among those affected Wizards loses 1 extra Star, unless they have already been affected by another Wizard’s Evil Gotee in this Duel.

In the rule “Spells”, rename the subrule “Harden” to “Upgrade” and replace the contents of that subrule with the following text.

Cost: Depends on the Style chosen from the Inputs; Hat (Cost: 3), Robes (Cost: 5), Staff (Cost: 5), Beard (Cost: 5)
Inputs: One of the Style types of Hat, Robes, Staff, or Beard
Effect: The Style of the Wizard casting this Spell is changed to the Special Style corresponding to the type chosen in the Inputs.
Traits: Reclusive

In the gamestate page “Duel Sheet” replace every instance of “Harden” with “Upgrade”.

If “Wizard Duel 11” is Open and the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List 11” exists, on that wiki page replace every instance of “Kevlar” with “Dragonhide”.

If “Wizard Duel 12” is Open and the wiki page “Wizard Duel Spell List 12” exists, on that wiki page rename the spell “Harden” to “Upgrade” and replace the contents of that spell to match the contents of the subrule “Upgrade”.

If “Wizard Duel 12” is Open, the Battle Master should change the selected spell of any wizard who has selected “Harden” to “Upgrade” and set the Input to “Robes”.

I left out the Staff because that’s likely to be the most controversial. It’s in a separate proposal.

I simply replaced Kevlar with Dragonhide for Duel 11 if it’s still Open if this is Enacted. The rest won’t go into effect until Duel 12.

Sunday, November 05, 2023

Call for Judgment: Burnout

Popular, 8-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 06 Nov 2023 16:00:17 UTC

Uphold the selection of which spell was removed from the spell list for all previous duels

I realized I had been reading “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.” as “Randomly choose a spell that is not mentioned in the effect of any Gewgaws from the wiki page from the previous step, and remove it from the spell list on that page.” and thus had not been rolling Burn as an option. This feels like a minor enough change that we can rubber stamp a “play on” but better to still rubber stamp it.

Story Post: Wizard Duel 11

The ring is:

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

The Gewgaw is the Ice Prism

The GATHER spell is banned

Spell list is here: https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_11

Four new spells for wizard to be able to cast!

Proposal: Synergisitic

Timed out, 4-2 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 06 Nov 2023 23:31:46 UTC

Change the effects of Synergy to be

The next time a Spell is cast this Duel which directly targets the position this Wizard is in, also apply the Effects of that spell to the position of Wizard who cast it

If the current open Duel is 11 or later, also make the same changes changes the effect Synergy in the current duel’s spell list

Ideally synergy should just recast the spell at the person who cast it on you. but currently doesn’t do that.

Friday, November 03, 2023

Proposal: Triangle of Magic

Timed out. Passes 3-2—Clucky

Adminned at 05 Nov 2023 18:20:15 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

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 subrule to “Style” called “Dominance” with the following text

Certain Styles may Dominant other Styles

Hooked Dominates Crooked and None. Crooked Dominates Knobbed and None. Knobbed Dominates Hooked and None.

Starry Dominates Cloaked and Plain. Cloaked Dominates Ragged and Plain. Ragged Dominates Starry and Plain.

Pointy Dominates Phrygian and None. Phrygian Dominates Hooded and None. Hooded Dominates Pointy and None.

Flowing Dominates Clipped and None. Clipped Dominates Wispy and None. Wispy Dominates Flowing and None.

Add a new spell called “Glam” with inputs of “A Type of Style (Hat, Robes, Staff or Beard), and a numerical position in the Wizard Ring”, Trait of Belligerent, and the following effect

If the Wizard in the targeted position of this spell is Fresh, nothing happens.

Otherwise, compare the Style of the input type held by the Wizard casting this spell and the Wizard in the target position for this spell. If one of the casting Wizard or target Wizard’s Style of that Type dominates the other Wizard’s Style of that Type, give the Wizard with the dominant style 2 stars and take 2 stars from the Wizard with the non-dominant Style

Remove the spell Expose

Proposal: Specialty Shop

Timed out 1-5. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 05 Nov 2023 07:18:07 UTC

If “Special Wizards And Tactics Team” was not enacted, this Proposal has no effect.

In the rule “Style”, directly after “Hooded,” add “Gilded,” directly after “Knobbed,” add “Obsidian,” and directly after “Wispy,” add “Evil Gotee,”.

In the subrule “Special Styles”, replace “Kevlar” with “Dragonhide” and add the following text to the list of Special Styles:

Gilded
Benefit: Whenever you receive Stars due to the Charm of a Spell, if the Charm of that Spell is at least 3, you receive 1 extra Star.

Obsidian
Benefit: During a Duel, you automatically lose 1 Star to power the magic of this Staff. If the first spell effect that is applied to you comes from a Wizard without an Obsidian staff, that spell has no effect. If it comes from a Wizard with an Obsidian staff, the spell has the normal effect, but it automatically costs the Wizard who cast it 3 extra Stars (this is only 3 extra Stars for the entire Duel regardless of how many affected Wizards have an Obsidian staff).

Evil Gotee
Benefit: Whenever you cast a Spell with an Effect whose text states explicitly that it causes one or more Wizards to lose Stars, the Wizard with the lowest position in the Wizard Ring among those affected Wizards loses 1 extra Star.

In the rule “Spells”, rename the subrule “Harden” to “Upgrade” and replace the contents of that subrule with the following text:

Cost: 5
Inputs: One of the Style types of Hat, Robes, Staff, or Beard
Effect: The Style of the Wizard casting this Spell is changed to the Special Style corresponding to the type chosen in the Inputs.
Traits: Reclusive

Proposal: Fashion Makeover

Quorum Reached. Enacted by Clucky

Adminned at 05 Nov 2023 03:38:02 UTC

In the rule “Spells” add a subrule named “Disarm” with the following text:

Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring
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 Wizard Ring they instead target the position one more than it (wrapping back around to the first position if needed).
Speed: 2
Traits: Belligerent

and a subrule named “Trim” with the following text:

Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring
Effect: The Wizard in the targeted position’s Beard becomes None and pays 1 Star to the Wizard casting this spell. If the Wizard in the targeted position does not have at least 1 Star, their Beard is still set to none but no payment is made.
Speed: 2
Traits: Belligerent

and a subrule named “Defrock” with the following text:

Inputs: A numerical position in the Wizard Ring
Effect: The Wizard in the targeted position’s Robes becomes Plain. For the remainder of this Duel, they don’t lose stars from the effects of Burn spells.
Speed: 2
Traits: Belligerent

Add “Traits: Belligerent” to the subrule “Gust”.

Basically copied Clucky’s proposal without the Freshness, since no one complained about the spells he was introducing.

Thursday, November 02, 2023

Story Post: Wizard Duel 10

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

Gewgaw is once again the Contemplation Orb

GIFT is banned

Spell list is at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Wizard_Duel_Spell_List_10

Proposal: Like Clockwork

Timed out, 4-1 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 04 Nov 2023 19:10:31 UTC

In the Inputs to Snipe, both in the ruleset and if there is a current duel than in the spell list for the current duel, replace “other than Snipe” with “other than Snipe or Fizzle”

Add the following to “Engaging in a Duel”

If a duel has been open for 72 hours, any Wizard participating in that duel who has not selected a spell for that duel is considered to have selected to cast Fizzle for that duel.

In “Commencing a Duel” replace “Increase the Charm of any Spell which was listed in the Spell List ” with “Increase the Charm of any Spell other than Fizzle which was listed in the Spell List “

Set the Charm of Fizzle to 0

Adding a timeout to prevent the game from completely stalling. While also making Fizzle unsnipeable because a) it does nothing when you snipe it and b) it stops people from trying to camp the end of a duel and switch to snipe someone’s fizzle at the last minute if they figure that person hasn’t made their move yet. And then also making it so that there is no reason at all you’d ever want to intentionally cast Fizzle

Wednesday, November 01, 2023

Proposal: Special Wizards And Tactics Team

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

Adminned at 03 Nov 2023 15:11:08 UTC

In the rule “Style”, directly after “Ragged,” add “Kevlar,”.

In the rule “Style”, create a new subrule named “Special Styles” with the following body:

If a Style is listed in the following list, it is a Special Style. Each Special Style has a Benefit, which applies only to Wizards that have that Style. The list of Special Styles is as follows:
Kevlar
Benefit:
Whenever you are to lose Stars due to the Effect of a Spell, you instead lose one less Star.

In the rule “Spells”, create a subrule named “Harden” with the following body:

Cost: 5
Effect: The Robes of the Wizard casting this Spell are changed to Kevlar.
Traits: Reclusive

In the rule “Style”, directly after “and what they wish their new value for that Style to become”, add “(unless that Style is a Special Style)”.

giving styles effects
might be too late for this but I’d like to hear your opinions

Proposal: Get It Sorted

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

Adminned at 03 Nov 2023 01:36:28 UTC

In the rule “Spells” add the following text:

At any time, any Wizard or the Battle Master may sort the subrules of this rule by the Speed contained in each subrule, from highest to lowest, with tied Speeds being sorted alphabetically by subrule name.

Adding Kevan’s sorting suggestion into the ruleset itself so that we can keep Spells sorted going forward.