Thursday, September 30, 2021

Proposal: [Core] Remantling

Self-killed. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 02 Oct 2021 14:39:27 UTC

In “Victory and Ascension”, replace:

If the game is in an Interregnum then the new Drone must either Pass the Mantle, by making a post naming another Citizen - in which case the Drone ceases to be the Drone and the Citizen so named becomes the Drone - or start a new dynasty by completing the following Atomic Action:

  • Make an Ascension Address by posting an entry in the “Ascension Address” category. This should specify the Drone’s chosen theme for the new Dynasty, and it may optionally specify new dynasty-specific terms as outline in the rule “Synonyms”, and/or list a number of dynastic rules to keep (if none are specified then the entire Dynastic Ruleset is repealed).
  • Update the Ruleset to reflect any changed terms, and any dynastic rules which were not listed to be kept are repealed.

Once this Atomic Action has been completed the Interregnum ends and the new dynasty begins.

With:

If the game is in an Interregnum then the new Drone must perform either the Atomic Action known as Passing the Mantle or the Atomic Action known as Ascending.

Passing the Mantle is an Atomic Action comprised of the following steps:

  • Make a Story Post as a Voteable Matter naming a citizen, known as a Coronation.
  • When the voteable matter becomes popular, then the Drone ceases to be the Drone and the named Citizen becomes the Drone.

If the Citizen named in a Coronation was not the Drone in the previous dynasty, then the Coronation instantly becomes popular, regardless of the votes cast on it.

Ascending is an Atomic Action comprised of the following steps:

  • Make an Ascension Address by posting an entry in the “Ascension Address” category. This should specify the Drone’s chosen theme for the new Dynasty, and it may optionally specify new dynasty-specific terms as outline in the rule “Synonyms”, and/or list a number of dynastic rules to keep (if none are specified then the entire Dynastic Ruleset is repealed).
  • Update the Ruleset to reflect any changed terms, and any dynastic rules which were not listed to be kept are repealed.

Once this Atomic Action has been completed the Interregnum ends and the new dynasty begins.

I think this is my second proposal ever, and it’s been quite a while since my first, so bear with me.

Kevan has a point about the Ascension rule being a bit hard to understand, I just happen to think that leaving the option for back-to-back dynasties run by the same person is better than blocking it off entirely. This leaves it as a possibility, but it has to be approved first. Other than that, nothing should be any different, it’s just phrased in a different way. (Plus there was a typo in that rule that was bugging me…)

posted by Snisbo at 30 Sep 2021 17:12:00 UTC Comments (11)

Comments

Bucky:

30-09-2021 20:18:30 UTC

As drafted, this doesn’t provide a mechanism for resolving the Coronation. That means, among other things, that a Coronation from a previous dynasty’s mantle-pass attempt can become popular in a future dynasty, which dethrones the current Drone.

Kevan: he/him

30-09-2021 20:24:32 UTC

What are you asking players to vote on, during a Coronation? Is it just a free vote on how they personally feel about that Emperor having another dynasty at that point?

Snisbo: she/they

30-09-2021 20:33:13 UTC

@Bucky The changeover happens when the post becomes popular, and because a post can never become unpopular once it is popular, it’s a one time use mantle-pass. Additionally, since it instantly becomes popular if it’s being passed to someone who wasn’t just emperor, it shouldn’t hold the game up in most places.

@Kevan The vote is entirely irrelevant UNLESS the mantle is being passed to the previous emperor. In that case, the vote will determine whether they are allowed to be emperor again.

Snisbo: she/they

30-09-2021 20:35:31 UTC

I’m sure there’s a better way to phrase that, but I couldn’t think of it

Kevan: he/him

30-09-2021 20:35:46 UTC

Sure - but what question is the Coronation asking players at that point? Is it just “do you personally want the Emperor to have another dynasty right now”? Why would someone vote “no”?

Snisbo: she/they

30-09-2021 20:53:56 UTC

Yep, that’s exactly it. I’m thinking of the votes on it in the same way as votes on a proposal: Vote For if you want this to happen, Against if you don’t. I honestly can’t think of any reason someone would vote no, but the intention is just to be a play on your Dismantling proposal that doesn’t completely block out the option of passing it back.

I suppose they would vote no for the same reason they would vote yes on Dismantling: they don’t want the same person to be emperor twice in a row.

Kevan: he/him

30-09-2021 21:14:34 UTC

The Dismantling proposal is a vote on whether we should change the rule from “an Emperor can’t win their own dynasty solo, but can win it as a team if someone passes the mantle back to them” (which seems a bit arbitrary) to “an Emperor can never win their own dynasty”.

We could also change it to “the Emperor can always win their own dynasty”, and allow them solo victories.

Those proposals aren’t just asking how you’d feel about two or more consecutive dynasties in the game history with the same Emperor, they’re asking what you think about competing against the Emperor as an active opponent.

You can’t ever “completely block” something in a game of Nomic. If we wanted to occasionally let an Emperor have a chance of winning their own dynasty because it’d be a good narrative or a fair resolution of some chaos or something, it’s literally one line of dynastic rule text.

Bucky:

30-09-2021 22:30:20 UTC

> The changeover happens when the post becomes popular, and because a post can never become unpopular once it is popular, it’s a one time use mantle-pass.

What?

An enacted votable matter can’t be un-enacted, but a popular votable matter can become unpopular if players change their votes.

Clucky: he/him

01-10-2021 00:21:16 UTC

I dislike having the handoff require votes. It feels to me that it could only possibly result in hurt feelings to let people go “no you can’t hand off to that person”

Snisbo: she/they

01-10-2021 01:02:06 UTC

@Bucky I wasn’t positive of the exact terminology, and the phrasing of the Popular/Unpopular rules gave me the impression that popular was synonymous with enacted. But I see now that it’s definitely not the case, so for that reason, s/k against

@Clucky The handoff only requires votes if it’s being passed to the previous emperor. Otherwise it “instantly becomes popular, regardless of the votes cast on it.” (I’m aware I messed up the phrasing, hence the s/k.)

All this does is add a voting requirement to passing the mantle back to the previous emperor, something that Dismantling was trying to outlaw entirely. I agree with the concerns about abusing the ability to do that, but I don’t want to get rid of the possibility, because if people agree to do it (hence the vote), it could be fun to play around with it.

Kevan: he/him

01-10-2021 09:10:42 UTC

Players can always agree to pass the mantle back to the Emperor by enacting a dynastic rule of “mantle can be passed to the Emperor”. Doing that in advance, during the dynasty, makes a lot more sense than waiting until after a DoV has enacted and then asking players if they want to allow it (where as Clucky says, it would be a bit rude not to, given that it was legal to do it).