Monday, December 17, 2012

Proposal: Dig dig dig!

Timed out 7 votes to 6. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 20 Dec 2012 02:30:37 UTC

If there is not a dynastic rule called “Secret Requirements”, this Proposal does nothing.

Add a new dynastic rule called “Artifacts” and give it the following text

Each Cult has a non-negative integer supply of Artifacts, which are privately tracked by the Auspex and 0 by default.

As a weekly Action, a Cult’s Leader may Search for Artifacts by Command, specifying a valid Location other than Unknown as the Target. Upon processing the Order, the Auspex should increase the Artifacts of that Cult by C*V where C is the half the number of Believers who were both members of the Cult and whose Location was the Target at the time the Order was sent, rounded down, and V is the Extradition Value of the Target. The Auspex should then send a Private Message to the Leader of the Cult informing them of how many Artifacts were earned. The Auspex should process Orders to Search for Artifacts in the order received.

The Extradition Value of a Location is the position of the Location in an ordered List of all Locations other than Unknown, kept privately by the Auspex. After processing an Order to Search for Artifacts, the Location searched moves to the Bottom of the list (and so has an Extradition Value of 1). If there is a Location other than Unknown which is not in the ordered List, the Auspex must place it in a random position in the List before processing any Orders to Search for Artifacts. He should not use the GNDT for this calculation, but instead another random device of his choosing.

so you can try and figure out what places have recentLy been raided by where other believers have gathered in mass. but Its all still very secretive and maybe you’ll wind up hittinG the same place the brotherhood of silly Hats hit last week and its bone dry. the more cultisTs you have searching, the more stuff you can find.

an obvious extensions is the idea of raiding another cultists hq for artifacts but that can come later…

posted by Clucky at 17 Dec 2012 20:04:36 UTC Comments (14)

Comments

Sphinx:

17-12-2012 21:00:29 UTC

against I do like the idea of having a value to measure a cults power, but I think this proposal is promoting the creation of big cults with many people, as they have more people to dig. I would rather have a few medium-sized cults than one big cult with 18 members.
So I do like the idea, but I think it needs some kind of regulation for cults too big to promote medium-sized cults forming.

southpointingchariot:

17-12-2012 21:05:00 UTC

against Incentivizes giant cults. Also, I don’t think we need more GNDT stats.

Igthorn:

17-12-2012 21:28:44 UTC

against

Argon14:

17-12-2012 21:54:00 UTC

imperial

RaichuKFM: she/her

17-12-2012 23:09:41 UTC

against Per Sphinx.

Clucky: he/him

17-12-2012 23:25:41 UTC

This doesn’t add a GNDT stat.

I’m all for also incentivizing smaller cults as well. Moving lots of cultists take effort and coordination. Plus, for all you know your underling in the Cult of Spoons is secretly the leader of the Guild of Forks and he’ll turn Spork and Search the location you’re sending all your guys to before you have a chance to do anything! A cult with 10 people searching an area with EV 2 gets as many points as a cult with four people searching an area with EV 5 and the cult with four people is a lot easier to move to one single location. So yeah, this probably does make it a little better to have larger cults but in nomic, that is a temporary advantage as stuff can be added later to give other benefits to smaller cults.

scshunt:

17-12-2012 23:58:46 UTC

against per Sphinx and because it says that the Extradition Value is its position in the list, but then later contradicts it by saying that the bottom (end) of the list has EV 1.

Clucky: he/him

18-12-2012 00:00:15 UTC

scshunt: that isn’t contradicting itself, that’s clarifying what “position in the list” means as there are probably four reasonable explanations for what the position in the list could be.

Larrytheturtle:

18-12-2012 00:32:23 UTC

against

quirck: he/him

18-12-2012 07:18:14 UTC

imperial

Kevan: he/him

18-12-2012 08:41:31 UTC

for

Josh: he/they

18-12-2012 09:12:32 UTC

for

Purplebeard:

18-12-2012 13:49:07 UTC

for

Cpt_Koen:

19-12-2012 03:15:03 UTC

for Though digging doesn’t sound very wise given that some evidence seem to support that the dead are about to rise from their tombs, or that the world is about to be shaken by a giant earthquake.

Also I agree with scshunt: if this passes, we will need to reword the “position in an ordered list” thing.