I’m not too enthusiastic about starting to make low alertness be so good that people start to deliberately wait out 24h to set their own alertness to zero, thus making us all tied again, we all get fiberboard, etc.

Also, the “first person” has been a IRL attention race between me and PineTQ for the last couple of boxes. Not too enthusiastic either about having a mechanic which makes that race matter even more.

Huh, yeah. I just wanted two alternate builds, or an alternative way to go for those so far behind in alertness that there is no hope.

Maybe another rule is in order to split up alertness levels so nobody can occupy the same one? Maybe based on some random value?

We’re all tied in Health and I’m ahead in items even if I do have to nuke my own Alertness soooo

Is there still a need to split up tied Alertness, now that we’re splitting up tied Priority (from the Sharp Elbows proposal)?

Limiting to different Cractions is a nice idea, but should also extend to the first player (“first person to take an item can choose to take one extra craction” means they can take the same Craction twice).

No, because the first person to take an item takes the number of fractions that equal the number of people to take an item before them. which is zero. and then they get one extra so that they can get one craction.

first two players to take items get one and then it increases.

Oh shit that’s true.

And different than how I imagined it to be, I wanted to chill on 2 Cractions lol.

So,

(Plainly, this is “all those with low alertness get more Cractions” really. Bampam. Probably not as bad as mine though lol.)

[samzeman] Ah, I was reading “the number of people that have previously taken an item from the crate” as being “1” for the first player, on the basis that the Craction step happens after the item goes into the inventory, so they count their own action. But yes, “taking an item” could also be read as the entire Atomic Action (“Taking an item from a Crate is an atomic action that consists of the following”).

Not expecting this to pass of course but I couldn’t vote against :D

(lol misread the votes)

Note that “Choose whether or not to take one Craction that they are able to take.” is not a rule (because rules are defined in the ruleset as “Each individually numbered section of the ruleset is a rule, including sections that are sub-rules of other rules”; and the subsections themselves are numbered), as the proposal is trying to target.