Sunday, December 03, 2023

Proposal: Dead men have no claims

Timed out / withdrawn. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 05 Dec 2023 17:08:45 UTC

If the proposal “Shoving Aside” was enacted, this proposal has no effect.

Add a new subrule under the rule “Succession”, titled “Assassination”, with the following content:

As an Act of Subterfude, a Heir may, as an weekly action, Assassinate, which is an atomic action with the following steps:
*Choose a Heir who is not the Heir performing this action and is not Vigilant.
*Nominate a Successor for the targeted Heir, following the steps described under the rule “Successors”.

Each Heir is either Relaxed or Vigilant, defaulting to Relaxed. This state is publicly tracked. As a daily action, a Heir may change their state from Relaxed to Vigilant or vise versa and increase their Stress by one. A Heir’s Stress is a publicly tracked number defaulting to zero. As a Daily Communal Action, an Heir may Update Stress. When an Heir Updates Stress, they increase the Stress of each Vigilant Heir by 1 unless that Heir became Vigilant that day, and decrease the Stress of each Relaxed Heir by 1 unless that Heir became Relaxed that day.

In the end of the rule “Transition of Power” add:

For the purposes of this rule, a Heir’s Claim’s strength is considered to be the value written for that Claim’s strength in the ruleset minus the Heir’s Stress.

A deterministic alternative for assassination

Comments

SingularByte: he/him

03-12-2023 20:29:09 UTC

Is there any kind of cost to this? As far as I can tell, there’s basically no reason *not* to assassinate every week that it becomes available.

JonathanDark: he/him

03-12-2023 22:19:20 UTC

I liked the previous idea of having a chance of getting caught and losing Reputation.

Josh: Observer he/they

03-12-2023 22:42:00 UTC

I’ll vote for this if there’s a fix in the pipeline

Desertfrog:

04-12-2023 06:07:03 UTC

There was supposed to be a reputation punishment but looks like I forgot it

SingularByte: he/him

04-12-2023 07:30:16 UTC

against  but I have no objections on principle to assassination. It just needs a harsh penalty to attempting it (though potentially one that can be avoided under some circumstances).

Kevan: he/him

04-12-2023 10:39:57 UTC

against Needs a cost.

JonathanDark: he/him

04-12-2023 14:07:09 UTC

against

Normally I would be fine on waiting on a fix, but the problem here is that as soon as this would be enacted, there would be a flurry of Assassinations while they were free and while hardly anyone had a chance to set themselves to be Vigilant.

You still have a free slot, so a copy-paste and adding a cost should fix it up just fine.

Desertfrog:

04-12-2023 15:49:39 UTC

withdrawn against Improved version coming soon (i.e. tomorrow)

4st:

04-12-2023 17:09:52 UTC

imperial