Making favors special case means that if anyone turns it off, all favors expire.

I’m also confused by what stuff like “Any details the gained resource has apart from quantity are chosen by the Facility Head, who should be generous if possible.” mean—you can only use it to request numerical values so what else is there for the Facility Head to determine?

Does this destroy all of the existing favors in the instant while they are undefined?

the wikipage remains the same, i don’t see why it would cause favours to be removed when this is deactivated. i can edit in a clause for clarity tho.

and clucky, why does it have to me numerical? is it the word “point”? say a dynasty has rules for swords. the idea is that the player could request an instance of the Sword resource, but the facility head would be the one to determine the sword’s stats (dmg, reach, weight, etc), if that makes sense. maybe it should be “a single point or instance of any resource”

I meant in the instant between the repeal of the Dynastic Rule and the enactment of the Special Case Rule, because in that instant no rule would be defining Favors, though what happens when the Special Case Rule is inactive is also a good point.

how’s this for a set of three edits? 2 clauses to keep favours from getting wiped, one clause to clarify that a resource doesn’t need to be numerical

I don’t think this proposal destroys/wipes any favors? It doesn’t modify anything on the Favors wikipage, and that page remains gamestate.

^ i thought so too, but better safe than sorry i spose

a point is a numerical value. you can’t just use it to suddenly mean any resource at all.

also if the favors rule is inactive, its flavor text, and doesn’t do anything, and so favors become undefined. its a bit of a chicken and egg problem where the current state of special case rules do not allow them to persist values if they go inactive

well, now there’s a clause that ensures continuity of favours (immediately after the “favours are tracked on this page” clause) and the added terminology of “instance” for non-numerical resources :0

> I don’t think this proposal destroys/wipes any favors? It doesn’t modify anything on the Favors wikipage, and that page remains gamestate.

I don’t know that the earlier version would have, I was genuinely asking whether it did because I’m curious about how the rules handle this case.

someone could still edit the favors page, which is no longer gamestate, and then argue that the favors they gave themselves are now valid once it becomes gamestate

overall I feel like we should really wait and see just what kind of effect favors have on the dynasty before codifying them as a special case rule

also the “instance of resource” change is super unfair to people who don’t have favors. we should keep favors how they were originally designed, not make them even more powerful only after certain people got favors and certain people didn’t

“instance or resource” is how i intended it from the start, but that *is* fair. i’ll revert the “or resource” part and consider putting it in at some point in the future :0

*u get me

doesn’t seem like something we should really have in the future, as it requires arbitrary determinations by the emperor which is hard to keep fair, and is very hard to build a dynasty to guard against. Building dynasties to guard against resource swapping will already a big challenge

to putting this into Special Case instead of a pseudo-special “cannot repeal this rule” dynastic, which is all it seems to be changing now.

Doesn’t this still have the problem that “the Favours that were tracked the last time this rule was Active remain.” allows favours that were added to the page while it wasn’t gamestate to suddenly exist?

[Clucky] I think you’re right, yes. Maybe we should change it to reverting to whatever version it had the last time that the rule was active (which should be easy enough to find).

because the Favours page becomes flavor text while the rule is inactive

assuming we can fix the flavor-state issues!