Thursday, August 10, 2006

Proposal: Anomaly Economy

Timed out 4-3.—Kevan

Adminned at 12 Aug 2006 03:08:58 UTC

[ Changing the Influence-donating “Bribery” system into a way of playing around with the “Anomalous” keyword on Node Events. No heavy restrictions on this; you can use it to create and repair your own anomalies to scam a repair grant from the Council of Time, but it takes 24 hours to do the legwork, and any other player could fix the anomalies before you got the chance to. ]

Repeal the local rules “Bribery” and “Broader Bribery”.

Add a new subrule to “The Timeline”, called “Anomalous Events”:-

Node Events with the “Anomalous” keyword are intrinsically damaging to the time-space continuum if left unchecked. Such anomalies are often caused by timeline pollution from reckless Travellers - disabling the anomaly-inhibition mechanisms of a time travel device is a cheap and dangerous way to boost its power. Correcting these anomalies is rewarded by the Council of Time.

After creating or redescribing a Node and processing all side-effects, a Traveller gains 1 Influence for each Node which has become Anomalous (or has been created in an Anomalous state) as a result of these actions, and is awarded 1 Influence for each Node which was previously Anomalous and is now no longer so.

And move the “Perilous” paragraph to its own subrule, called “Perilous Events”, while we’re here.

Comments

Hix:

10-08-2006 07:53:58 UTC

Which “Perilous” paragraph?  The one that allows us to alter the Timeline wiki, or the redundant one?

Kevan: he/him

10-08-2006 08:01:48 UTC

Ah, the redundant one. Lazy wording, which I apologise for, but it’s fairly unambiguous - one paragraph is entirely about “Perilous” events, while the other just has a brief clause about non-Perilous ones.

Thelonious:

10-08-2006 08:13:56 UTC

for

ChronosPhaenon:

10-08-2006 12:46:10 UTC

for

TAE:

10-08-2006 14:29:41 UTC

against
First of call the confusion Hix and Kevan point out make me worried what would avtually occurr if this passed.  Second, this simply seems to encourage “twiddling” with the timeline.

Rodney:

10-08-2006 17:28:17 UTC

for

Hix:

10-08-2006 18:00:06 UTC

Well, I asked about Kevan’s intentions for that sentence so an enacting admin won’t be justified in “creatively” interpreting it.
against because I’m not looking forward to all the twiddling.

Bucky:

11-08-2006 02:12:27 UTC

imperial