Monday, January 25, 2021

Proposal: Bear With Me

Vetoed—Clucky

Adminned at 27 Jan 2021 02:12:00 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Bears”

A Signatory or Signatories of this rule may be referred to as “Bear” or “Bears” respectively

Each Bear has a non-negative integer amount of Honey, which by default is 5.

Each Bear has a integer amount of Health, which by default is 10.

A Bear may Harvest Honey by announcing they are Harvesting Honey and rolling a DICE3, whose result is X, and a DICE3, whose result is Y. They then lose X-1 Health, and gain Y+1 Honey.

If a Bear’s health ever reaches 0 or below, they are considered to be Eliminated - they immediately cease to be a signatory of this rule and their name is added to the list of Eliminated Emperors at the end of this rule.

If an Emperor’s name is included in the list of Eliminated Emperors of this rule, they cannot become a signatory of this rule. Note that this applies to all emperors, not just ones who are signatories of this rule.

Eliminated Emperors:

If the proposal “Treaty Info Consolidated” does not pass, add “Honey and Health are both tracked in the “Bears” section of the ““Treaty Appendices” wiki page in-between the third and 4th paragraph of the above rule.

Should maybe look to make the “eliminated” concept apply to more rules than just Bears, but easier to get it passed this way

posted by Clucky at 25 Jan 2021 20:12:00 UTC Comments (11)

Comments

Bucky:

25-01-2021 20:33:44 UTC

You can’t have both a list of Signatories and a list of Eliminated Emperors in the same spot (the end of the rule)

Bucky:

25-01-2021 20:34:12 UTC

Well, you can if they always have the same content, which does not seem to be the intent here.

Raven1207: he/they

25-01-2021 20:35:11 UTC

against

pokes:

25-01-2021 20:38:01 UTC

for get that honey

Clucky: he/him

25-01-2021 20:45:02 UTC

@Bucky you can have two lists at the end of the rule. Technically, the eliminated list is still part of the rule while the signatories aren’t part of the rule, right?

Bucky:

25-01-2021 20:50:57 UTC

My interpretation of “tracked as a list of Emperor names at the end of the rule” is that it is part of the rule. But it uses the exact same wording that “the list of Eliminated Emperors at the end of this rule” does.

Clucky: he/him

25-01-2021 21:00:39 UTC

I think as long as both lists appear at the end of the rule its fine. (Could’ve tried to fix it but y’ know, Raven gonna Raven)

Bucky:

25-01-2021 21:13:58 UTC

I maintain that, if this passes, the list of Eliminated Emperors is the same as the list of Signatories.

Actually, I’m going to veto this for attempting to break one of the dynastic invariants - if Eliminated, Player will not be a Signatory.

Clucky: he/him

25-01-2021 21:25:52 UTC

You’ll have still “played” the dynasty like everyone else. You just happened to get eliminated. That seems to be in the spirit of the rules, definitely better than giving you special anti-elimination powers.

Bucky:

25-01-2021 21:30:21 UTC

You could maintain the effect by defining Bears as only non-Eliminated signatories. The Eliminated remain members, but can’t participate in the subgame.

Furthermore, I think the “cannot become a signatory of this rule” clause would be as ineffective as any attempt to restrict the actions of a non-signatory.

Clucky: he/him

25-01-2021 21:41:06 UTC

End result is the same, no? “This player doesn’t count as a signatory of the rule”. Seemed cleaner to me to just make it so they aren’t a signatory, rather than making is so they are a signatory in name only. But guess if you want it the other way can always write it that way.