Saturday, July 01, 2017

Proposal: [Core] [Dynastic] Oligarchy

Reaches quorum against, 1-6. Failed by pokes.

Adminned at 02 Jul 2017 16:02:36 UTC

Amend rule 1.3 “Dynasties” by replacing:

BlogNomic is divided into a number of Dynasties. Each Dynasty may be headed by a single Explorer, known as the Expedition Leader. If there is no Expedition Leader, the Dynasty is a Metadynasty.

with:

BlogNomic is divided into a number of Dynasties. Each Dynasty may be headed by one or more Explorers, known as the Expedition Leaders. If there is no Expedition Leader, the Dynasty is a Metadynasty.

Transpose rules 2.11 “Victory” and 2.12 “Artefacts”, so that “Victory” is numbered 2.12 and “Artefacts” 2.11.

Remove the text:

If a Cultist has a number of Artefacts equal to a quorum of Cultists, and is at the Mountain Camp, and is not at Gunpoint, then that Cultist has achieved victory.

If three Artefacts have been destroyed, then the Explorer to have destroyed the most Artefacts (breaking ties in favour of the Explorer to have destroyed an Artefact most recently) has achieved victory.

from rule “Artefacts”, and append it to rule “Victory”.

Append to rule “Victory” the text:

When a Declaration of Victory is enacted, if the Explorer who made the DoV is a Cultist, then all Cultists become Expedition Leaders in the new Dynasty.

I see no problem with having multiple Expedition Leaders. Though in most Dynasties, Expedition Leaders have acted as if they were referees, this is not required by the Core Rules and they can still play, participate, maybe even achieve Victory.

Comments

Cpt_Koen:

07-01-2017 12:25:48 UTC

Also, moving all victory conditions to the rule ‘Victory’, rather than having them scattered in several rules. And moving rule ‘Victory’ to after rule ‘Artefacts’, because having or destroying Artefacts is part of the victory conditions.

Cuddlebeam:

07-01-2017 12:43:02 UTC

Lol, very much yes. for

(Has multi-Emperor EVER been done?)

Kevan:

07-01-2017 13:19:13 UTC

Multiple Emperors would be worth a try some time, but I don’t like the idea of selecting them largely at random, here, without anyone knowing how many of them there are going to be, or who they are.

against

card:

07-01-2017 16:12:14 UTC

against Well Sphinx knows who’s who. I don’t like the idea of having random Emperors. Also some points like vetoing would need to be clarified.

pokes:

07-01-2017 18:35:13 UTC

I love joint victories (obviously! I’ve proposed it twice in four dynasties) but don’t like the dynastic changes this is attached to. We’d also need to hammer out other details, e.g. who chooses the theme?

Cuddlebeam:

07-01-2017 18:53:02 UTC

If Orkboi is cool with the ideas being tossed around here too, I think it would be cool if you three had a joint victory + having you three as Emperors for a novel kind of Dynasty.

Cuddlebeam:

07-01-2017 18:54:39 UTC

(I unfortunately don’t have proposal slots lol, but I’d propose it if I could.)

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus:

07-02-2017 00:38:55 UTC

against

pokes:

07-02-2017 01:03:41 UTC

against

Cuddlebeam:

07-02-2017 01:20:11 UTC

Queueboosting against

Sphinx:

07-02-2017 07:45:42 UTC

against multiple Expedition Leaders sounds like a fine idea.