Proposal: Influence Issues
S-K.—Chronos
Adminned at 13 Jul 2006 12:24:02 UTC
The following rules are intended to clarify the events if a player joins the Paradox Reduction Company, but leaves with less than 10 influence. The alternative to these proposals is to fix the paradox reduction company rule, but I think this is more fun:
And add a new subrule to the “The Laws of timeâ€
Illegally Influential
A Traveller may not have influence below 0
If more than half the votes voting for this proposal do not contain the string “The rules aren’t broken” then enact the following change in 2.7, influence:
Each Traveller has an Influence, which is tracked in the GNDT as a nonnegative integer. New Travellers start with an Influence equal to the Influence of the already-existing Traveller with the Qth highest Influence, where Q is Quorum (before the New Traveller joined).
If a Traveller has Influence X and either e has no Companion or eir CTL is the same as eir TL, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from |X| years before eir TL to |X| years after eir TL. If a Traveller with a Companion has Influence X and eir CTL is not the same as eir TL, then that Traveller’s Range consists of all Game Dates from |X|/2 years before eir TL to |X|/2 years after eir TL and all Game Dates from |X|/2 years before eir CTL to |X|/2 years after eir CTL. All date ranges are inclusive of the end dates. All fractions are rounded towards the centre of the Range and fraction rounding occurs immediately on the years so that Ranges always stretch a whole number of years either side of the centre.
For example, if a Traveller has a TL of 1550/5/5, a CTL of 1440/3/2 and an Influence of 9 then eir range is 1546/5/5 to 1554/5/5 and 1436/3/2 to 1444/3/2.
(some people might be ok with the idea that -10 before means the same thing as 10 after, but I don’t want there to be confusion)
This means that players can have influence below 0 if a rule causes it, and that it can be beneficial, and that it is also a cybercrime. Evil Influence. Yes.
TAE:
I don’t think that influence should be a “moral” characteristic that can exist in positive and negative forms. This is not contradicted by the idea that public officials might have more influence than private individuals (thus the influence shift for joining the PRC). Members of the PRC may use thier influence for good or ill, but the moral content of thier actions is not globally improved by being members. Thats my take at least.