Call for Judgment: Extravaganza
Timed out and enacted, 5-0. Josh
Adminned at 06 Apr 2020 11:49:36 UTC
In the rule Items, it says “If a Military Item would be Extravagant, it is instead Instructive. If a Favour of the King Item would be Valuable, it is instead Extravagant.” In the rule Auctions, it says “Any Item that received no Bids is a Repulsive Item. For each Repulsive Item, double the values of all Impacts, and then add Valuable to the list of Impacts.” What does this mean for Repulsive Favour of the King items?
I think that the clause in Items applies only when an Item is created. To make that clear, I propose that the above quote in Auctions be changed to say “Any Item that received no Bids is a Repulsive Item. For each Repulsive Item, double the values of all Impacts, and then add Valuable to the list of Impacts, even if the Item is of the Favour of the King type.”
This enshrines the status quo; if it fails then the item A tiny, bejewelled, impeccably well-crafted codpiece will have its impacts changed, along with a few dependent actions made by Clucky that would not be possible were it Extravagant instead of Valuable.
in any case.
naught:
I hadn’t realized when giving my opinion in the Slack channel that the Valuable Impact came from the Item being Repulsive. (I need to more earnestly read the current incarnation of the Ruleset.) In light of this, I think it makes perfect sense RAI that it should be Valuable, not Extravagant (though RAW may or may not disagree).
I’m voting FOR once the edit window has closed; just waiting to see if there are any bugs that need to be fixed before then.