Proposal: Jumping Straight into Marriage
Reached Quorum, 6-1 with 1 DEF. Enacted by JonathanDark.
Adminned at 04 Dec 2023 20:47:32 UTC
If the proposal Arranged Marriage passed, this proposal does nothing. Otherwise:
Remove the text “If an Heir is Married to a Prospect, no other Heir may have their Spouse set to the name of that Prospect.” from the rule Marriage, “The list of Prospects is as follows:” from that rule, and append to that rule:
Marriage is a weekly action that can only be performed by an Heir whose Spouse is None. Divorce is a weekly action that can only be performed when an Heir has a Spouse other than None.
Where a subrule of this rule begins with Prospect, the remainder of that rule’s title is the Vocation of that prospect, and the body of that rule contains the rest of that Prospect’s details.
Everywhere in the rule Marriage that the word Name appears, replace it with Vocation.
In the rule Faithful, replace its Condition with:
Since the most recent time you joined the dynasty or nominated a Successor (whichever is most recent), you must not have performed the Divorce action.
Kevan: he/him
Should also remove the existing “The list of Prospects is as follows:” from the rule, if Prospects are going to be defined as subrules.
Does it still make sense to talk of the “Name” of a Prospect when multiple Heirs can marry them, or should it become something broader like “Vocation” or “Disposition”?