Friday, June 05, 2020

Proposal: Double Trouble

Timed out. Forgot to count votes but has several against votes and no for votes other than the authors so its unpopular—Clucky

Adminned at 07 Jun 2020 16:49:57 UTC

Create a new segment with:

* Name: Hexagram
* Payout:
* Global Effect: The Wheel’s due date is set to 37 hours prior to the time that it was before this spin occurred. Each Gambler gains number of Points equal to the Size of their Wager.

This reimplements Double has a global effect and adds an element of randomness. This should always result in at least two subsequent Spins but could also result in more. This also resolves any concerns about sub-actions and makes the workload on the spinner less because the same person doesn’t necessarily have to do the re-spins. If others would prefer something identical to Double Trouble, I’ve also thought of language for that, but this seems like a clever use of mechanics. Additionally, I rolled for a random name, but it didn’t fit, and since we already have a non-random name on the wheel, I decided to just use Marco Sulla’s original name.

Comments

Kevan: he/him

05-06-2020 11:25:53 UTC

Does this actually do anything beyond forcing all players to pay for their Wagers, if the Global Effect is “roll again” and the Payout doesn’t pay anything out?

And I’d personally prefer the Segments to all have randomly generated names, for the sake of this dynasty’s aesthetic. (Is it only Annoyingness that wasn’t, right now?)

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: he/they

05-06-2020 11:52:07 UTC

Annoyingness is the only thing not on the list.

No, but I will modify it, so that everyone doesn’t have to pay for their wagers.

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: he/they

05-06-2020 11:53:12 UTC

I’ve also changed the name to make it random.

Kevan: he/him

05-06-2020 12:32:54 UTC

A much better name, but your modification means that this Segment now does even less: it’s as if the spin was never made.

(The only game effect I can see is that its Global Effect might get picked up by the Random Segment.)

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: he/they

05-06-2020 12:57:34 UTC

Well, it’s not as if a spin was never made because it sets the clock back, as a result, at least two more spins will be allowed immediately.

Kevan: he/him

05-06-2020 13:08:47 UTC

Oh, got it, I mistakenly thought the clock was set relative to the time of the Spin, each time, not relative to its previous value. Hmm.

derrick: he/him

05-06-2020 13:13:42 UTC

imperial

Lulu: she/her

05-06-2020 15:27:32 UTC

imperial

Clucky: he/him

05-06-2020 15:48:25 UTC

“The Wheel’s due date is set to 37 hours prior to the time that it was before this spin occurred”

I like the idea but I’m a little worried that someone could say, set it to *any* time that it was before the spin occurred. And thus set it to several days ago and generate several new spins rather than just the intended 37 hour reset. Do we need a “directly” in there to ensure no such shenanigans?

Publius Scribonius Scholasticus: he/they

05-06-2020 15:57:34 UTC

I don’t think that’s a reasonable interpretation, but I see no harm in adding it later.

Tantusar: he/they

05-06-2020 16:00:18 UTC

This could allow (read: require) as many as three additional and immediate Spins, and that’s assuming a Spin is actually made when it becomes Past Due. And with the chance that it could chain and go pseudo-infinite, it’s a hard pass from me.  against

derrick: he/him

05-06-2020 16:03:05 UTC

I don’t think the directly is needed, and anyone who tried that scam would almost certainly loose the CFJ.

The infinite spin concern is valid: we need a way to break the loop.  against cov. sorry.

Kevan: he/him

05-06-2020 16:04:16 UTC

Not sure I see how you could read “37 hours prior” as “at least 37 hours”, or anything other than “exactly 37 hours and zero minutes prior”, really.

It does become a bit weird for (per the atomic rule) having to set the clock to 37 hours before the time that you finished the atomic action, before you’ve finished it. But I guess you can retroactively correct it if needed.

against, anyway. I’m impressed with the mechanics of the solution here, but I’m not especially excited by the idea in practice, particularly if we roll a couple of Doubles in a row.

Darknight: he/him

05-06-2020 16:33:55 UTC

against

Clucky: he/him

05-06-2020 16:59:08 UTC

> Not sure I see how you could read “37 hours prior” as “at least 37 hours”, or anything other than “exactly 37 hours and zero minutes prior”, really.

Its not that. The problem is that right now, the wheel due date is at 5th June 2020, 21:00:00 UTC

Lets say a week from now, the wheel is spun and lands on this. Someone could argue “5th June 2020, 21:00:00 UTC” is a time the wheel was at before the spin occurred. And thus set the due date to be 4th June 2020, 8:00:00 UTC”, 37 hours before that date.

But the infinite spin this is enough of a problem that even if we fixed this to “the time that it was immediately before this spin occurred” it still wouldn’t work so against

Axemabaro:

06-06-2020 19:35:07 UTC

against

Josh: he/they

07-06-2020 09:51:37 UTC

against