Thursday, January 30, 2025

Proposal: [Core] [Appendix] Who will mind the Masterminds?

Add a subrule “Imperial Tracking” to the Appendix rule “Gamestate Tracking”, positioning it after “Orphan Variables”, with the following text:

The identity of the current dynasty’s Mastermind is tracked in the last sentence of the Core Rule “Dynasties”. Whenever a Participant becomes the Mastermind, that sentence changes to “The following Participant is the Mastermind: ” followed by that Participant’s name in quotes. Whenever a Metadynasty starts, that sentence changes to “There is no Mastermind this Dynasty.”.

All names after the colon in the last sentence of “Dynasties” are considered to be references to Participants, and are flavour text for all purposes other than referencing Participants. If the Mastermind changes their name by proposal, the sentence in question is updated to reflect the new name of the Mastermind.

The identity of the Mastermind is considered to be a gamestate variable that belongs to the game of BlogNomic as a whole, rather than belonging to the Mastermind personally.

Append the following sentence to the core rule “Dynasties”:

The following Participants are the Masterminds: “ais523”, “Josh”.

In the core rule “Idle Participants”, change

excluding the core and appendix Rules “Ruleset and Gamestate”, “ Participants ”, “Dynasties”, “Fair Play”, “Mentors”

to

excluding the core and appendix Rules “Ruleset and Gamestate”, “Participants”, “Dynasties”, “Fair Play”, “Imperial Tracking”, “Mentors”

In the core rule “Victory and Ascension”, after

When a DoV is Enacted, all other pending DoVs are Failed, the Participant who posted the DoV becomes Mastermind, and the game enters an Interregnum.

add

The player who Enacted it updates the rule “Dynasties” as specified in “Imperial Tracking”.

In the subrule “Other” in the Appendix rule “Keywords”, add the following definition in the correctly alphabetised location:

Dynastic Variable

A gamestate variable that exists only due to a dynastic rule and is not mentioned in a non-dynastic rule. (In particular, the identity of the Mastermind is not a dynastic variable.)

A fix for a very long-standing Core rules bug: the identity of the Mastermind is (in most dynasties) an orphan variable. (It isn’t in this dynasty because it’s defined in a dynastic rule, but most dynasties, it doesn’t work properly).

This proposal gives a means to track it (it’s in the core rule “Dynasties”, next to the dynasty number) and fixes a number of corner cases (e.g. it clarifies what happens if a Mastermind Reinitialises – previously this may have caused them to no longer be the Mastermind) as well as one potential major side effect of the Mastermind being orphaned (“the identity of the Mastermind” was arguably a dynastic variable because it changes with every dynasty, which would mean that dynastic actions that cared about who the Mastermind was would fail).

Comments

JonathanDark: he/him

30-01-2025 05:27:32 UTC

So most of the past dynasties were illegal because no one could legally perform actions as the Emperor (upheld by DoV of course).

Habanero:

30-01-2025 05:40:08 UTC

What if a Mastermind changes their name to include full stops? Doing so is legal under Names and would completely ruin the ‘last sentence’ stuff. I presume the flavour text bit is out of a desire to protect the rule from name-related scams, so you might want to make that a bit more solid. Similarly, if the Mastermind changes their name via CfJ, the sentence doesn’t update. In general it might be a good idea to just remove the clause around name changing (it’s easy enough to just change the sentence in the proposal that changes the name, after all, and very rare that the Mastermind wants to change their name).

Most of these corner cases seem a bit much to me. I’d like to avoid ruleset bloat wherever possible. Trying to preempt all the potential problems is very difficult, especially considering others may disagree with you on what is a real problem and what isn’t. I’d rather a minimal solution that’s refined over time as issues pop up than a very wordy monolithic one. A single sentence in Dynasties and a provision in Victory and Ascension to update that sentence is good enough for 95% of cases, and we can hash out the other 5% as issues come up. Will probably vote against this for that reason

ais523: Mastermind

30-01-2025 05:40:25 UTC

@JonathanDark: the bug doesn’t affect actions defined in core rules, so it’d only have effected dynasties which have dynastic actions that care about the Emperor’s identity. That’s quite a lot of them, but not all of them. (It also wouldn’t have affected dynasties prior to the Orphan Variables rule being added.)

Fortunately, the bug doesn’t break any of the proposal, CFJ or DoV systems, so there isn’t likely to have been much lasting damage from it (unless there was a dynasty where the pass/fail status of a proposal that changed the core rules depended on dynastic gamestate for some reason, which I guess is possible).

ais523: Mastermind

30-01-2025 05:46:04 UTC

@Habanero: A player actually can’t change their name by CFJ – there’s an explicit rule against it and no rule explicitly permitting CFJs to do that, so it doesn’t work. (This is possibly a core rules bug.)

I think the bug you suggested might not actually exist (a full stop that is part of a name doesn’t end a sentence), but I have added a fix for it just in case.

The corner cases are being handled in the Appendix, whose entire purpose is to handle corner cases – there isn’t any significant bloat of the core rules.

Habanero:

30-01-2025 05:54:18 UTC

Ah yes, I missed that it was in the appendix, I thought you were adding all that to Dynasties. No issue here

Habanero:

30-01-2025 14:33:13 UTC

for

Josh: Mastermind he/they

30-01-2025 15:05:49 UTC

for

You must be registered and logged in to post comments.