Monday, July 01, 2019

Proposal: How much is that doggy in the window?

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 1-5 by Kevan.

Adminned at 03 Jul 2019 10:02:57 UTC

Create a new rule: Courtly Requests

As a weekly communal action, a Wizard or the King may create a random Request. A Request has a Requester, of which the valid options are the list of possible identities of Court Allies, and a Requested Creature, of which the valid options are the set of all creatures with two qualities and a creature type chosen from the [[list of animals]]. The Request shall be announced in a blog post, and the Request shall be recorded in the [[list of requests]].

As an atomic action, a Wizard may Fulfill a Request, by completing the following steps in order.
1. Remove the Requested Creature from their stable
2. Gain Courtly Favor equal to 5 + the trust of any Court Ally whose identity is the Requester, or 5 if no Court Ally exists with that identity.
3. Associating with the Requester as normal.
4. Removing the Request from the [[list of requests]]

“You see, it’s about my son,” the Councillor continued. “He drew this picture of a winged… rhinoceros? And normally I wouldn’t trouble you, but with his birthday coming up and everything…”

Court personalities make requests for beasts, and fulfilling them is an alternate way to make some courtly favor. (Also, I don’t completely understand atomic actions so this might be not how they work.)



01-07-2019 18:48:18 UTC

Uh, so it’s first able comer gets it, once per week? Also, it is unclear which of the 3 or 4 selections must be made randomly. A random creature type would be hardest to match, I think, as you’d have to clear a stable first to create one.


01-07-2019 19:28:08 UTC

If we don’t like first-come-first-served, we could have a queue like we did in the previous dynasty, so that everyone has their turn?  imperial

derrick: he/him

01-07-2019 20:42:46 UTC

The random creature type is a killer for this one: only about 4% of the types can be filled using the current rule set.

The size of the bonus is a little worrisome as well. +5 is fine, and the trust of the requester is fine, but both feels a touch excessive.

I do like the basic idea.



02-07-2019 14:22:38 UTC

I like it too. [Kaia] maybe re-work it and propose it again?

Brendan: he/him

02-07-2019 18:03:04 UTC



03-07-2019 07:34:59 UTC

What about rolling a random Wizard with at least 1 creature, then a random creature type from among the creatures in their stable? Hopefully time-separated rolls are not too hard to figure out, but they seem a bit easier than maintaining a registry of types in use?

Kevan: City he/him

03-07-2019 10:02:21 UTC