BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

This is odd reasoning, given that I set up a similar machine myself, which Clucky destroyed using a similar scam, and you were happy to not revert that; this time you’re reverting a scam not on the basis that you think it didn’t work, but on the basis that you think the game would be unplayable otherwise.

I think the current gamestate is perfectly playable, and somewhat fairer to everyone than the gamestate in which a pool of three players has used Imperial Favours to gain a huge amount of control over the space right next to the entrance (thus meaning that it would likely need a pool of four or five players – i.e. almost everyone else in the dynasty – to give the rest of us any hope to fight back against the currently overt pool).

I would vote AGAINST, but there’s a correction that needs making first – Kevan has questioned the amount of influence gained by not only lemonfanta, but also Clucky, in the most recent Expeditions, and it’s probably best to not automatically uphold Clucky’s gained influence because of that.

Also, if you want to change the gamestate rather than fix an ambiguity, shouldn’t this be a proposal?

Another thing to fix: your rules correction is scammable. You should also ban a Vampire Lord with a Sigil in a room from being included onto a Glyph that already exists there.

Also, if you want to change the gamestate rather than fix an ambiguity, shouldn’t this be a proposal?

BN is not Agora.

Another thing to fix: your rules correction is scammable. You should also ban a Vampire Lord with a Sigil in a room from being included onto a Glyph that already exists there.

Thanks, edited.

somewhat fairer to everyone than the gamestate

So your argument is that someone played the game too well and must be punished for it? They didn’t cheat, they used the rules that we all voted into effect better than anyone else. It’s not ‘fair’ to bust down highly-performing players; your ‘remedy’ doesn’t even allow them to correct the decisions they made on the basis of flawed gamestate. It’s just a punishment for doing well, and while it may follow the letter of the rules it is highly anti-competitive.

I do note that you are currently caballed with chiiika.

I went all-in on trying to kingmake after Clucky destroyed any chance I had to win myself (via using a scam to destroy my Influence-generating engine). People voted to uphold Clucky’s interpretation of the rules at the time, even though it didn’t fit with the exact wording of what the rules said.

This is the exact same situation in reverse, except that I’m not even “using” a scam here: I just pointed out that the action was illegal all along. The scam was there naturally. It seems very unfair that people would use a scam to attack someone who wasn’t in the lead, effectively disqualifying them from a solo win, and then subsequently act against a naturally-occuring scam that happens to help a cabal of three (possibly four) players who have been in the lead for a long time (due to having a much stronger gamestate position than anyone else, even if they didn’t have quite as many BMCs), in order to ensure that nobody has any chance of catching up to them. Bear in mind that the huge 75-Influence windfall as of the last expedition wasn’t even achieved legally.

Correction: “that happens to help” → “in a way that happens to help”.

So if I understand, ais is trying to argue that glyphs don’t exist but we should only revert one set of actions off of non-existent glyphs but still somehow argue that all the other influence gains are still valid????

Influence gains not from glyphs are valid.

Influence gains from glyphs aren’t valid (because the glyphs don’t exist) – however, we upheld some of them by CFJ earlier in the dynasty. I’m not reverting the gains that were upheld by CFJ (even though they were invalid, they were upheld), but I’m reverting all gains since (this includes gains for Chiiika, and, depending on how Chiiika’s CFJ is resolved, might not include the gains for you/lemon/Jumble).

I mean, I got influence from a glyph last run that was not upheld by a CfJ. Others did too. I’m fairly sure there have been other CfJs that have upheld influence gains too.

No you didn’t. In Koda’s most recent run, your only Influence gain was the +1 from having a Sepulchre.

rereading

Clucky has mentioned that CFJs may not be legal unless they resolve an active disagreement.

As far as I can tell, there’s no disagreement about the rules being resolved here (“I don’t think that ais is wrong, per se, in interpreting the strict text of the rules”) – this is simply a suggestion to change the gamestate, rather than a suggestion to resolve an ambiguity. As such, it should have been a proposal rather than a CFJ, and may not be valid as a CFJ.

“or if a Vampire Lord feels that an aspect of the game needs urgent attention”.

You’re better at reading rules than this, ais

Right, I know it’s legal really (there’s also the Core scam that CFJs are legal if there’s an active disagreement, which there definitely is, even if the CFJ and disagreement are unrelated).

The rules fix isn’t urgent, though. We can do without being able to build Glyphs for a few hours.

“we’ve been playing as if glyphs have been in effect all dynasty, and they have been a source of influence for many players, but suddenly we’re going to stop playing that way”

is a thing that needs to be urgently addressed as it effects the results of the previous round and thus how people play the game

Yes, but changing the rules so that you can place a Glyph while having a Sigil isn’t urgent.

I think if you’re going to argue “lets continue to play the game under the interpretation of the rules that you cannot place gylphs in rooms where you have a sigil”, then you should also update the rules to clarify that such behavior is indeed allowed

I made a proposal to change that (it isn’t conceptually part of the CFJ).

In favor of “Dirt is Dirt,” which would be undone if this passes first.

@Brendan: doesn’t this need to pass before Dirt is Dirt in order for the two to play nicely with each other?

there is an exception carved out for that brendan:

” except for the specific quantity (25 Influence) awarded to lemonfanta as a result of her Enthrallment of Jumble in Richardo’s Fifteenth Expedition, which is neither upheld nor removed from the gamestate as a result of this CfJ.”

There isn’t an exception for your (Clucky’s) Influence, though (which would also be affected by Dirt is Dirt).

Dirt is dirt would also undo the entire 16th run sooo…

i think (i hope) that the difference between something like this and something like the lighting lit rooms shenanigans is that was an addative glitch being actively exploited as a part of a scam, whereas this is a subtractive glitch that does nothing but erase some peoples’ work and negate large swaths of gameplay