Vetoed by the Mastermind
Failed by Hix
Adminned at 12 Mar 2007 15:29:10 UTC
Add a new dynastic rule “Behavior of Double Agents”:
For the purposes of determining victory, a double agent’s affiliation is considered to be eir true affiliation. For all other purposes, a double agent is considered to have the affiliation opposite of eir true affiliation, unless the rule being applied has a special provision for double agents.
Well, I figured that changing affiliations would be covered by future proposals. That’s one of the reasons I put in that other rules can override this one if they want to.
What? There are 4 affiliations. When we make rules, we should take that into consideration in the approporate way. Why have this arbitrary restriction from the start?
Hix: What restriction? I believe that, in many cases, this is how double agents will end up acting anyway. If they shouldn’t for a given rule, then by all means include an exception.
This allows us to write rules that are more concise in the common case, without adding complexity to other situations.
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
I like it, it looks pretty good to me.
per hix
Amnistar: he/him
I like it, though it should have a condition that says a double agent can, at any time, switch from double agent to an agent of their true affiliation, or something along those lines.