Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Proposal: Eureka! Gambler

Reached quorum 6 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Sep 2011 10:48:49 UTC

Add the following effect to the list in Rule 2.6:

Deck of Cards If a Survivor possesses the Deck of Cards, they may, as a weekly action, play a game of cards with a single other Survivor who possesses at least one Item. He shall roll DICE6, subtracting one if one of the two Survivors is Insane and two if both are, and consult the following table for the effect:

  • 0 or -1: Someone suggests that they play Mao. Both Survivors lose one sanity.
  • 1: The game devolves into accusations of cheating. The Survivor with the Deck of Cards loses one sanity and the Deck of Cards is Thrown Overboard.
  • 2: The Survivor with the Deck of Cards loses the Deck; they must give it to the other.
  • 3: The Survivor with the Deck of Cards loses an Item; they must select one other Item in their possession and give it to the other.
  • 4: The Survivor with the Deck of Cards wins an Item; they must select one Item in the other’s possession and take it from them. If they already have three, they may Thrown another Item they possess Overboard instead of the Item they take.
  • 5: The Survivor with the Deck of Cards wins a Clue; they may select one Item in the other’s Clues and add it to their Own. If they do, they lose one Sanity.
  • 6: The game is so calming that both Survivors regain one Sanity

Comments

bateleur:

09-14-2011 06:48:32 UTC

for Although this Nomic’s getting a little heavy on the randomness, this is too cool to decline.

(And ROFL at the zero result!)

Darknight:

09-14-2011 07:13:40 UTC

for

Prince Anduril:

09-14-2011 13:27:14 UTC

imperial Though 5 is good. What happens if the loser has a clue in their clue list, but no longer owns the item? There should probably be an amendment to this effect.

Kevan:

09-14-2011 13:42:25 UTC

for

[Anduril] It’s a “may” effect, so they can just ignore it.

Prince Anduril:

09-14-2011 13:50:18 UTC

I’m really quite sorry to have done it, because this is a great proposal, but it looks like this proposal may die with Doctor29 tomorrow. It was just the simplest way of permanently getting rid of a clue.

Prince Anduril:

09-14-2011 14:07:26 UTC

Scratch that. I tried to declare clues when I wasn’t rational. So it looks like this is still a viable proposal.

Kevan:

09-14-2011 14:12:56 UTC

And it kooks like Coppro wasn’t rational when he found a clue on the Silver Cup, so I’ve gone ahead and reverted the effects of that.

Prince Anduril:

09-14-2011 14:54:15 UTC

And further apologies, as the mess I just made in illegally declaring a clue means I just gave Doctor29 the Cards for no reason, and therefore, it is likely to disappear with his death tomorrow.

Blacky:

09-14-2011 17:43:56 UTC

for

bateleur:

09-14-2011 17:48:13 UTC

@Kevan - Your attempt to revert the Silver Cup error doesn’t seem to have restored my 2 Sanity. Is there some reason why not?

Kevan:

09-14-2011 17:55:15 UTC

Good point, all of its inspectors should get 2 Sanity back. I’ll do that now.

scshunt:

09-14-2011 21:03:09 UTC

Sorry about that; misread rational as sane.