Saturday, January 20, 2018

Proposal: Alertness vs Sneakiness

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 1-4 by Kevan.

Adminned at 21 Jan 2018 22:36:25 UTC

Amend “and it describes a Crate” to:

and it describes a Crate - which can be stated to be a Government Crate or a Black Market Crate

Amend “There is no other Resident who has a higher Alertness than the Recipient, and who has not yet taken an item from that Crate.” to:

There is no other Resident who has a higher Alertness (or Sneakiness instead, in the case of a Black Market Crate) than the Recipient, and who has not yet taken an item from that Crate.

Add to “Stats”:

Each Resident has a level of Sneakiness, being an integer value tracked in the GNDT and defaulting to zero.

Once ever, and if only Empty or no Crates exist, a Resident can raise their Sneakiness and Alertness by amounts which total up to 20. For example, gain 8 Sneakiness and 12 Alertness.

Attempting to make Alertness less good and to reduce this IRL racing thing by giving us initial stats to break ties and mix it up a little.

Comments

Kevan:

01-20-2018 14:26:53 UTC

Would appreciate a fixed rule on how the Government chooses which Crate to deliver each time, rather than having to live up to people’s mixed expectations. (Am I going to deliver them alternately, or randomly, or try to be “fair”, or try to be annoying?)

The metaphor of Sneakiness seems a bit unclear. Being Alert means you’re first to a regular crate when it’s delivered. Being Sneaky means… the Black Market crate is guarded, but the guards will let everyone pick from it eventually?

Kevan:

01-20-2018 14:44:09 UTC

Also, picking the numbers is a good idea, but the “once ever” brings back race conditions - there’s some incentive to hold back until the moment a good crate turns up. Could maybe just restrict the action to times when no crates are open.

Cuddlebeam:

01-20-2018 14:48:13 UTC

I agree there should be some way for that. Maybe have Crates and their contents be rolled with dice? Nothing stops you from just informally choosing to do that right now. We’re still really early in the dynasty though so I don’t mind some quirks until its more polished.

In my mind, Sneaky meant that you have more low-life contacts and such to get access at all to them in the first place. Tbh I thought of this more from mechanics-to-thematic than the other way around.

Good point. Fixing that.

Cuddlebeam:

01-20-2018 14:49:14 UTC

Done

Kevan:

01-20-2018 14:56:38 UTC

Crates are currently “randomly-chosen items”, and the appendix requires all “randomly” selected things to go through the GNDT. I’d rather have all Government decisions work in a clearly explained way, so that everyone (even a new player who’d read none of the game history) knew what game we were playing.

Underworld contacts sounds fine, and “get access at all to them in the first place” worth expanding at some point to literally mean that. It just needs to be a clear metaphor so that we don’t confuse ourselves by proposing binoculars and soft shoes to get better low-life contacts.

Kevan:

01-20-2018 14:59:01 UTC

“If a Crate isn’t available” is unclear, as the ruleset doesn’t use this word anywhere. It seems quite arguable than an Empty Crate would still be “available”.

Cuddlebeam:

01-20-2018 16:33:06 UTC

Oh well, that’s good lol. I didn’t realize it was already random, sorry.

And editted that part.

The metaphor part of it all is still janky though (I’m just a bit dry of ideas of what to put there), but I hope that the mechanics are at least sound and useful.

card:

01-20-2018 17:37:35 UTC

this proposal doesn’t need it, since we have so few items right now, but Black Market Crates should probably have items which don’t appear in Government Crates and vice versa
for

Kevan:

01-20-2018 18:55:53 UTC

So with no amendment to the assignation process, I guess I’ll say now that I’ll resolve crate types purely randomly if this enacts, so that players can bear that in mind when dividing up their stats.

(I’ll also try not to misread my dice, given that it wouldn’t be illegal for me to drop the “wrong” crate.)

Kevan:

01-21-2018 12:32:42 UTC

Leaning towards against here, on the grounds that nobody (not even the proposer) knows quite what the Sneakiness stat is meant to be measuring. I like the idea of alternate Crate-like events which resolve differently, but don’t think it’s worth burning an extra stat for.

PineTreeQ:

01-21-2018 19:51:43 UTC

against

card:

01-21-2018 20:00:33 UTC

Maybe it would be better to wait until we have a greater variety of items?  against

Axemabaro:

01-21-2018 20:49:22 UTC

against