Thursday, October 08, 2009

Proposal: Achievement Complete!

S/K, Arthexis -2 Score—arth

Adminned at 08 Oct 2009 15:33:31 UTC

Create a new rule called “Achievements”:

There exist a wiki document called “Player Records” which contains an history account of all Completed Achievements, and serves no other purpose. It may not be modified in any manner other than defined in the Dynastic Rules, or through a Call of Judgement.

The sub-rule to this rule called “Catalogue”, which contains a list of non-rules text. Each item on that list is known as an Achievement and contain a name and a condition which can be either True or False for a Player. Whenever an Achievement becomes true for a Player, that a Achievement is said to have been Completed (by that Player) and cannot be Completed again by that Player. Achievements are never retroactive: they can’t be completed due to circumstances that occurred prior to the Achievement being added to the “Catalogue” sub-rule.

Whenever an Achievement is completed, the Player who completed it shall add a line at the beginning of the “Player Records” containing his or her name, the name of the Completed Achievement and the current date (as it appears on the Blognomic front page).

Create a new sub-rule “Catalogue” to rule “Achievements”:

* The Player has created a Proposal that passed with no votes AGAINST.
* The Player has created a Proposal that passed and used all the letters in the English alphabet.
* The Player has voted on 20 Proposals or more.
* The Player has created at least three Proposals that passed.

If people actually want a merit system of some kind, I propose this take on it. Please note that while this creates a wiki document, it is merely for reference (simply by being more accessible than a stickied post or gndt comment)



10-08-2009 04:21:30 UTC

against I hate bookkeeping, sorry.  I also hate stupid achievements in games.

Ienpw III:

10-08-2009 04:27:42 UTC

against Nah. Milestones are easy. This (andd my other protosal) are too much like Qwaz I


10-08-2009 04:55:43 UTC

against .  I’d much prefer a simpler system where Achievements simply gave you a certain number of points.


10-08-2009 04:57:12 UTC

@yuri: Err, being like it was the whole point genius. Furthermore, I believe you’re confusing easy for dead boring.


10-08-2009 04:58:55 UTC

@Bucky: Well, I thougt that too, but how are you gonna prevent people from completing the same one over and over… well, you have to keep record of ‘em.

@Exc: Yeah, bookkeeping bad. Let’s get rid of the evil GNDT.


10-08-2009 05:02:02 UTC

@arth: That’s.. not crazy.  Hm.  Wonder if we could do a dynasty with no tracked information.


10-08-2009 05:16:07 UTC



10-08-2009 05:45:50 UTC



10-08-2009 06:26:46 UTC

@Exc: We technically could, but I don’t know if we could carry it through intact.


10-08-2009 10:30:15 UTC



10-08-2009 11:44:43 UTC



10-08-2009 12:06:45 UTC



10-08-2009 13:10:44 UTC

against Too similar to a rule that failed in a previous dynasty.


10-08-2009 13:11:21 UTC

(although, as a countering data point, a similar rule has worked over at Agora in the past.)


10-08-2009 14:04:19 UTC



10-08-2009 14:55:12 UTC



10-08-2009 17:25:19 UTC



10-08-2009 17:52:45 UTC

against Notice it doesn’t say anything about this dynasty.  Most players have probably completed all four of those achievements already.

I love the idea of achievements, but not ones that would be so time-consuming to keep track of.  I also think just rewarding points would be a bit dull.


10-08-2009 21:39:22 UTC

against S/K I didn’t like the concept myself, it’s just that I thought it might be popular.