An Unpopular proposal can still be enacted, so this yields an admin’s choice situation with regard to an extra Trick proposal.

How do you figure that can an Unpopular proposal be enacted?

The oldest Pending Proposal may be Enacted by any Admin (by updating the Ruleset and/or Gamestate to include the specified effects of that Proposal, and then setting that Proposal’s status to Enacted) if <u>all of the following are true</u>:

  It is Popular.
  It has been open for voting for at least 12 hours.
  It has not been Vetoed or Self-Killed.

The oldest Pending Proposal may be Failed by any Admin, if <u>any of the following are true:</u>

  It is Unpopular.
  It has been Vetoed or Self-Killed.

If a proposal is both Popular and Unpopular, and it’s old enough and the oldest pending proposal, why can’t I enact it?

Got it, thanks.

I don’t think “no more than six Tricks in the ruleset” would actually trigger, though, when the Impending Rules are flavour text.

The “no more than six tricks” feels inelegant and like it might stifle future rules.

I think it would be much more interesting if say, we had eight possible tricks but only five of them were selected for each game.

That way people need to switch up their strategies every game, but you still don’t need to worry about the complexities of 20 different tricks while playing a given game.

But that can be fixed later… biggest problem is that this lets the second player almost always get two points on their first play. We really need a “no scoring until three cards are played”
rule.

also maybe the first player can get two free points too? Bucky’s proposal makes it so that the second player’s pocket is the last three cards they played in their last game. So could definitely score there. And then I guess if your pocket is empty… for every card in your pocket my 14 heft card has a lower heft than that card… so I think I get the points?

@Clucky As it stands, in an otherwise neutral environment, the second player will score L’Aria wherever you put the line. I’m not sure why L’Aria is the issue you’ve decided to vote against this on - L’Aria is an existing issue that deserves its own fix, and that’s not the purpose of this proposal - but surely getting rhe implication and initial framework into the ruleset that Tricks are not going to be persistent is a step in the right direction?

for the trick limit, not for verme

L’Aria is not the problem here. Its the new trick you’re introducing (Il Verme) which has the same problems as L’Aria except even worse, because there are no limits on pocket sizes.