The fix is clunkily worded, and doesn’t fix the sight issue that GNDT values persist even when not supported by gamestate; and Clucky got caught out fair and square. Not sure that restoring him by fiat is good precedent.

What is clunky outside of that one parenthetical phrase that? As to the GNDT problem, that is an issue that I don’t know how to fix easily that I’m sidestepping for the purpose of expediency. The fiat point is a fair one, though; I do think that putting it up to a vote is a fair way to go about it.

Maybe it’s worth expanding on “default” values for variables in the glossary somewhere (which we already use a bit when setting them up), so that it elegantly covers new players, unidling players and players who temporarily cease to be players.

I feel that in another game I would say to restore Clucky’s values to be fair but in nomic oversights and miswordings are kinda the point.

even if we interpret the rules as “my power starts at zero when I become despot”, not voting for this fixes nothing. All it lets happen is that someone else disposes me and we run into the exact same problem.

kevans idea also seems good though

Perhaps other players noticed that the first player to become Despot would lose all of their resources and could be easily deposed.

but how do you propose to actually fix this then? (assuming its actually a problem. I still argue I get my old values back when I become despot)