Friday, May 07, 2010

Dynasty Discussion

If you have any ideas for dynasty mechanics, feel free to discuss them here.



05-07-2010 18:06:58 UTC

Fleshing out something that I mentioned in IRC:

Let there be a concept called (for now) a “Definable Concept”.  A “Definable Concept” is a word or phrase that, if used in the ruleset, would ordinarily be assigned a definition in the ruleset—that is, it’s a word or phrase that, taken in isoluation, doesn’t have an obvious meaning in the ruleset.  For example, if the Ruleset contains rules that say: “Running by the pool is prohibited, and no player may do so”, and “A player may not talk about Fight Club”, then “running”, “the pool” (or alternately, “running by the pool” as a unitary concept), and “talking” and “Fight Club” might all be Definable Concepts.  A “Definable Concept” is, by definition, not itself defined by the proposal that introduces it—rather, it’s a hook for some subsequent proposal to supply a definition.

A proposal that adds text to the ruleset that contains one or more then-undefined “Definable Concepts” would have to specify the Definable Concepts that it contains (for example, “{Running} by the {pool} is prohibited…”.  Alternately, the Emperor might be authorized to determine what parts, if any, of a proposed bit of rule text constitute Definable Concepts.

Okay, with that being said, here’s the meat of my concept.  After an initial period, nobody would be allowed by proposal to introduce a Definable Concept unless that same proposal also defines at least one existing, undefined Definable Concept.

The initial period would provide an opportunity for people to make ruleset proposals that contain undefined Definable Concepts, and the idea is that the second phase would consist of introducting additional proposals that, ultimately, connect the Defined Proposals in a meaningful way.

So the ruleset could start with rules like:

Milking cows is a daily action.
Only the Duke of Edinburgh may crush stone.
If you’re happy and you know it, you may clap your hands.
Never be rude to an Arab.
Eleanor Rigby picks up the rice in a church where a wedding has been.

And subsequent proposals might establish things such as who is an Arab and what it means to “be rude”, or when Eleanor Rigby picks up rice, and who may cause her to do so, and what happens when she picks up all of the rice, &c.

Ienpw III:

05-07-2010 20:31:06 UTC

By the way, I’m talking more about mechanics than a theme, as this is to be a mostly themeless dynasty.

Ienpw III:

05-07-2010 20:31:44 UTC

Oh, I already said that in the body. And I know that spike’s suggestion isn’t a theme.

Darknight: HE/HIM

05-07-2010 21:49:36 UTC

*feels brain sputter out after reading spikes post

Ienpw III:

05-08-2010 01:09:47 UTC

I like spike’s idea.


05-08-2010 03:56:55 UTC

for  at spike. And, though I have no mechanic ideas, I think Arthurian legend is a sufficiently vague theme (if not, then I think I’ll use it in my next dynasty).


05-08-2010 05:16:52 UTC

How does one make the “up” icon for expressing approval without using for ?  Anyway, I also approve of Spikebrennan’s idea in general.

Ienpw III:

05-08-2010 05:18:13 UTC

:arrow: in caps.

Ienpw III:

05-08-2010 05:18:58 UTC

:arrow: in caps. So I suppose we’re using spike’s idea as a starter, and we’ll see where it goes from there!