Tuesday, June 25, 2019

Proposal: Friends in High Places

popular 7 to 1. Enacted by Derrick.

Adminned at 26 Jun 2019 19:22:45 UTC

Create a rule named “Court Politics”:

Each wizard has Courtly Favor, which is an integer tracked in the GNDT under “Favor”

Each wizard has zero or more court allies, tracked in a GNDT column named “Allies”. Each Court Ally has an identity (a string) and a cost (a number), and is written as [identity]([cost]). Only one wizard may have a court ally with any given identity at a time. A wizard may “associate” with a court ally by selecting an identity, spending an amount of favor greater than the cost of any court allies in the GNDT with that identity, removing any courtly allies in the GNDT with that identity, and adding to their court allies an ally with the chosen identity and a cost equal to the court favor spent.

The following are the possible identities of Court Allies:
*Northern General
*Southern General
*Most Eligible Courtier
*Royal Mistress

add 5 to the Courtly Favor of each Wizard

“But of course the Best Wizard will become the Court Wizard!. What other Criteria is there?”

Counselor Arnok shook his head. “We certainly wish for the best wizard. But what makes a wizard best? I, for one, would prefer a royal wizard who listens to sage advice…”



25-06-2019 21:39:15 UTC


Brendan: he/him

25-06-2019 21:47:48 UTC

I think association seems like it should probably be an atomic action. I find it a little hard to understand “Only one wizard may have a court ally with any given identity at a time.” Also, does this rule as written mean that one person could immediately claim five allies upon enactment of the rule? Or all allies?

derrick: he/him

25-06-2019 21:54:16 UTC

Yes, it should probably be written as an atomic action.

“Only one wizard may have a court ally with any given identity at a time” is a little awkward. It makes identities unique, and probably is redundant with the method provided for getting a new court ally.

Yes, someone could snap up all 8 court allies immediately. And then someone could steal 5 of those from the person with 0. And it won’t be terribly difficult to steal allies from them.


25-06-2019 22:03:50 UTC

What if we added two more Court Allies (to make one for each player) then randomly assigned one to each Wizard, so that everyone begins with one ally? But I do like where this is going.  for


25-06-2019 22:36:06 UTC

I think it has good balance as is, once we fix the atomic action business. Hard to say what the best strat is, especially because it doesn’t allow everyone to have a noble at once. Politics ought to be a little messy, no? I expect to see interesting attempts to “rebalance” things, down the line.

What’s the hack right now, taking the actions overly slowly, so as to wipe others’ later purchases? Also, can you even pay a sum “greater than” an initially non-existent value?


26-06-2019 00:05:47 UTC

Yeah, we should probably define a starting value.

I like this idea, though.  for

Kevan: City he/him

26-06-2019 08:22:33 UTC



26-06-2019 17:55:51 UTC


Brendan: he/him

26-06-2019 18:17:04 UTC

against for the time being.