Monday, August 08, 2016

Proposal: Bootylicious

Reached quorum 12 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 10 Aug 2016 13:35:49 UTC

Add a new rule called “Gold” and give it the following text

Each Hunter has a integer number of Pieces o’ Eight, “Pieces” for short, which tracked in the GNDT in a column called “Pieces o’ Eight”. New Hunters start with 8 Pieces. The Pirate starts with 88 pieces.

Unless otherwise specified, no Hunter may take an action that either causes their Pieces to become negative, or causes another Hunter’s pieces to become negative.

Add a subrule to this rule called “Ruin” with the following text

While a Hunter’s Pieces is negative, they are considered Ruined. Ruined Hunters may not perform any action outlined in the Dynastic Rules that isn’t marked as Inclusive or otherwise explicitly allows Ruined Hunters to perform it.

A Ruined Hunter may increase their Pieces by X, where X is the minimum of: the number of days since they last became ruined; the number of days since they last performed this action; and 3. If this would cause their Pieces to become greater than 0, they are instead set to 0.

Set each Hunter’s Pieces to 8
Set the Pirate’s Pieces to 88

Comments

Clucky:

08-08-2016 18:30:59 UTC

Note: I plan on casting an explicit author def vote, but leaving this open for other notes as well

Bucky:

08-08-2016 18:39:15 UTC

Note: Did the tradition of letting the Pirate post the first Dynastic Proposal vanish while I wasn’t looking?

Bucky:

08-08-2016 18:41:39 UTC

Note: new Hunters should start with 8 Pieces.  This should also explicitly initialize our Pieces.  And in addition to the Inclusive exception, there should also be an exception for where a rule calls out Ruined Hunters.

RaichuKFM:

08-08-2016 18:47:59 UTC

Note: The tradition didn’t vanish, but I mentioned having some trouble working out a start, so I’m fine with this. I’d vote FOR, with the edits Bucky suggested.

Negative numbers don’t really come up much, which I think is some minorly wasted potential.

Clucky:

08-08-2016 20:01:10 UTC

Note: think it should be good now. Also wasn’t trying to step on Raichu’s toes, he had just gone a few hours without posting something and hadn’t said “I got something in the works hold off”

Sci_Guy12:

08-08-2016 20:12:49 UTC

for

Clucky:

08-08-2016 20:20:14 UTC

imperial now that notes are resolved

Bucky:

08-08-2016 20:33:39 UTC

imperial

Brendan:

08-08-2016 20:54:59 UTC

for

Larrytheturtle:

08-08-2016 21:00:18 UTC

for

GenericPerson:

08-08-2016 21:43:56 UTC

for

Bucky:

08-08-2016 22:02:08 UTC

CoV for

Aname:

08-08-2016 23:08:15 UTC

for

qwertyu63:

08-09-2016 00:12:12 UTC

imperial

RaichuKFM:

08-09-2016 02:39:02 UTC

for

Aft3rwards:

08-10-2016 02:26:47 UTC

for

Matt:

08-10-2016 11:01:00 UTC

for

Kevan:

08-10-2016 11:25:52 UTC

for