Thursday, June 19, 2025

Proposal: Mary Sue

Add the following to the end of the rule Backronym:

Whenever an Acronym contains the letter that is the first letter of their own name, a Wordsmith must use their own name for at least one instance of that letter in any Backronym they make in response to it; in that circumstance only, the Wordsmith’s name is considered to be a valid word to include in a Backronym title for the purposes of this rule..

Comments

Darknight: he/him

19-06-2025 19:16:29 UTC

I feel like one should get a few bonus points off of having to use their name in a spot no matter what while others have free choices

Darknight: he/him

19-06-2025 19:54:59 UTC

for

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

19-06-2025 20:16:59 UTC

for

DoomedIdeas: he/him

19-06-2025 21:56:52 UTC

for I agree with Darknight.

DoomedIdeas: he/him

19-06-2025 22:48:50 UTC

against Actually, CoV. This shouldn’t be required- some players’ initials will come up more often due to being more common in words, leaving an uneven balance in gameplay through no personal fault. D will be rolled much more often than J is, and this proposal gives Darknight and I no reward for the increased difficulty. I think this should be optional, with a potential reward if followed, but by no means should it be mandatory.

JonathanDark: Puzzler he/him

19-06-2025 23:21:22 UTC

imperial

Darknight: he/him

19-06-2025 23:58:05 UTC

against cov per doom. On average the length rolls will be 5 but a 3 would be almost impossible. The same would apply to raven as well upon closer view and handicapping roughly half the player count in the end shouldn’t be a thing.

Raven1207: he/they

20-06-2025 00:30:21 UTC

imperial

Raven1207: he/they

20-06-2025 00:44:33 UTC

CoV against

Clucky: he/him

20-06-2025 05:53:31 UTC

arrow I like the “the Wordsmith’s name is considered to be a valid word to include in a Backronym title for the purposes of this rule” but—but agree that forcing it feels a bit harsh.

Josh: he/they

20-06-2025 06:45:19 UTC

@Doomed Why not pass and fix rather than voting down? If you want an extra reward, propose once. (I suspect that this will be easier to incorporate than you imagine but I’m not precious about it.)

DoomedIdeas: he/him

20-06-2025 09:09:16 UTC

I don’t just want an “extra reward”- I want this to not be mandatory, which to me warrants voting this proposal down instead of using a pass and fix approach. I’ll switch to arrow following Clucky’s example, however.

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

20-06-2025 16:57:18 UTC

arrow CoV

You must be logged in as a player to post comments.