Friday, June 29, 2018

Proposal: Honor System

Self-killed. Failed by Brendan.

Adminned at 01 Jul 2018 04:54:44 UTC

Add a new subrule to “Cards” called “Trading” as follows:

Should two Wizards, A and B, agree via private communication that Wizard A will trade one card in their hand for one card in Wizard B’s hand, and both in such communication confirm this trade with the phrase “so mote it be,” then either such Wizard may perform this trade (with both cards moving between hands simultaneously) and update the GNDT to reflect it.

Should any Wizard perform a trade to which the other Wizard did not agree, and fail to produce private communication documenting the agreement in response to a Story Post challenging the trade, then any use of the cards so traded is illegal; the Historian may undo the trade and return those cards to the original Wizards’ hands; and the Historian may remove all cards from the hand of the Wizard who made the illegal trade.


derrick: he/him

29-06-2018 17:18:07 UTC

Is there a way to show a PM to the world in a manner that cannot be faked? Yes, to lie about it could wreck the game and result in bad feelings, but this does not feel foolproof at all.

Brendan: he/him

29-06-2018 17:22:56 UTC

It’s not intended to be foolproof; that’s why I called it “honor system.” It’s just defining a legal action to take. There are many opportunities to cheat at this game if you’re playing in bad faith, but cheating has not historically been a problem.


29-06-2018 19:35:52 UTC

imperial I feel like a honor system for trading cards would likely emerge even without a rule making it explicit.

Lulu: she/her

30-06-2018 02:42:36 UTC



30-06-2018 04:39:29 UTC

against  not too sure about the private communication only, wouldn’t it be better to have public trade blogposts so that everyone can verify whether someone has agreed to a trade? the hands are open for everyone to see after all

Brendan: he/him

30-06-2018 05:08:34 UTC

[card] I’ve seen a lot of public trade blog post mechanics in past dynasties, and they always end up a) clogging the feed and b) being ripe for timebox conflicts (duration of an active trading post, forgotten active posts, conflict among the state of trade posts and the availability of items, etc). This is an attempt to bypass all that. As you correctly point out, the open status of hands seems like enough of a public record.

Kevan: City he/him

30-06-2018 10:27:44 UTC

against Being able to selectively invalidate actions by conspiring to pretend to have agreed on a card swap seems a bit too tricksy.

derrick: he/him

30-06-2018 10:56:01 UTC


Honor is dead.

(Odium killed him)


30-06-2018 15:22:35 UTC

You could still propose to have a version where public blogposts aren’t used for communication but validation and any trades expire after 24 hours or if the cards proposed for trade are not in the Wizard’s hand. If you wanted it to not clog up the blog there could just be a stickied blogpost and trades are validated in the comments.

Brendan: he/him

01-07-2018 04:54:28 UTC