From the Ascension Address: “Ground rules (please avoid these so I can avoid vetoes): *Randomness*, actions that don’t sync with the 72 hour direction cycle, anything involving Marco Materazzi.”

Though some will state their disagreement, I totally support the idea of getting and ending condition together, and I’d like to be more than “someone has a lot” or “time has passed” - but I’m afraid I’m not a fan of randomness in this type of situation. I think using an institution to trigger something somehow could be cool though!

What if, if you win the HQ, you can try and guess who will win each institution, and if you’re right, the game ends. Not sure how to theme that, and perhaps you’d have to guess some specific elements to make it difficult enough, but that could be cool/hard to predict exactly.

  :DOWNARROW:

Downarrow? what would that mean? southpointingchariot: the idea is it isn’t meant to be random, it is strategic. you would gain councilmen and power but then you would have to hold onto them until you get the 1. However, I do somewhat see what you mean.

@Doctor29, While I see how its less random than it could be, I don’t want the fate of the game to be based on a dice roll. But I think we’re moving in the right direction.

Alright, I think i’d like to keep this up, but I would love to see your alternative! I agree, I do think that less random would be better.

“the game” must not end.

What would it be then? The dynasty I suppose?

It doesn’t make much sense to say “the dynasty ends” and then carrying on playing the dynasty until someone makes a declaration of victory. It just needs to be a random meaningless keyword.

I prefer Kevan’s idea

If “the game ends”, that means all of BlogNomic ends.