Withdrawn. — Quirck
Adminned at 02 Feb 2023 16:04:09 UTC
Enact a new Dynastic Rule named Dynasty Lockdown:
When the Dynastic Rules are described as being under or in an Endgame Lockdown, no Proposals can be made that add to, remove or change their contents.
Enact another Dynastic Rule named Homestretch:
This Dynasty is in a Dynasty Lockdown.
Retrying that idea from Kevan; let’s see making it in the Dynastic Ruleset to test is a good idea
Having this as two separate rules is also pointless; if the kicker term isn’t going to be reused then a simple “no Proposals can be made that add to, remove or change the contents of the Dynastic Rules” will suffice.
Inconsistent terms, unnecessary ruleset duplication, and still-needed ruleset changes (eg Means of Production).
sk; apparently not on a compy is a issue for me; will reintroduce now
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
Kevan: he/him
These two terms (Endgame Lockdown, Dynasty Lockdown) don’t match.
I assumed Endgame Lockdown would be dynamic, activating automatically when a player had crossed a pre-agreed threshold of having “nearly won” (eg. “if a player has three or more Cones, the game is in Endgame Lockdown”), beyond which catch-up proposals are unambiguously off the table.
But if the group feels that the dynastic has already reached that point, fair enough.