Proposal: Challenging Times
Timed out, 2-4 with 1 DEF. Failed by JonathanDark.
Adminned at 01 Dec 2023 14:12:35 UTC
Add a new rule named “Challenges” with the following text:
Every Heir has Resources, which is a list of zero or more of the following named Resources, defaulting to all Resources named below. Each Resource may be represented in gamestate tracking by the first letter of that Resource’s name:
* Wealth
* Alliances
* Popularity
* ReligionAn Heir may Challenge any Claim gained by any other Heir by starting a Challenge Event, which is defined as follows:
* The Creation Condition for a Challenge Event is that there is no other Challenge Event that is Open and that the Challenge Event post has a post body that contains the name of the Heir being challenged and the name of one of that Heir’s Claims in which that Heir is the only one who has that Claim. Only one Heir and one Claim may be contained within the post body. The Heir who authored this Challenge Event post is known as the Challenger. The Heir whose name is mentioned in the blog post body is known as the Challenged.
* The Response Format for a Challenge Event is a comment from either the Challenger or the Challenged containing the name of a single Resource that the author of the comment has in their Resources and that has not been mentioned in any other comment by the author for this instance of the Challenge Event.
* The Ending Condition is that either at least 48 hours have passed since this instance of the Challenge Event was posted or both of the Challenged and Challenger have a valid Response for every Resource they have in their Resources.
* The Ending Action is to perform the Resolve Challenges action.The Resolve Challenges action is an atomic action with the following steps:
* For each valid Response from the Challenger, remove the Resource in that Response from the Challenger’s Resources and decrease the Strength of the Claim by 10 in the ruleset.
* For each valid Response from the Challenged, remove the Resource in that Response from the Challenged’s Resources and increase the Strength of the Claim by 10 in the ruleset.
* For each time this combination of Challenged and Claim have been involved in a previous Challenge Event, not including this one, increase the Strength of the Claim by 10 in the ruleset.
I wanted to offer a strategic option of spending Resources to weaken someone else’s Claim Strength or defend your own, so that Claims are a little more dynamic and it’s not a forgone conclusion that the Heir with the currently-strongest Claim will achieve victory. I think it’s a little more thematic to use Resources like “Alliances” and “Popularity” to convince the court that a Claim shouldn’t be as strong as it is, thus favoring other Claims by weakening the strongest one.
Please note the mechanic that makes it harder to pile on to a single Heir and Claim with multiple Challenge Events. It’s still possible, but would require some coordination and would wipe out a lot of Resources that then couldn’t be used later.
Also note that there’s not a mechanism for an Heir to increase the Strength of a Claim outside of a Challenge. I thought about adding a way to do so by spending more Resources, but I had a hard time coming up with something balanced. I’m hoping maybe we can agree to address this separately from this Proposal.
I’m thinking that this could be combined with Aspects and Flaws to to change the amount that is increased or decreased depending on the Resource that is used, but I didn’t want to add that just yet.
Too long, didn’t read. I’ll read it if it passes! Vovix, the reading I shunt unto thee
although only mildly.
SingularByte: he/him
This feels a tad simple to exploit. If two people have the same claim as each other, they can constantly challenge that same claim on each other and push its strength higher and higher. If they coordinate, they can even lock everyone else out from being able to make challenges.
Just to also double check, is the intent that each heir has different claim strengths for the same claim, or are you altering that claim for everyone? Since I believe it currently works as the latter.