Sunday, March 10, 2024

Proposal: Mise en Abyme

Popular, 4-1 with 2 DEFs and Observer voting FOR. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 11 Mar 2024 04:18:48 UTC

Activate the Building Block “No Cooperation.”

No Private Communication seems too heavy-handed for this theme, but even a two-player cabal with an “I get five points and you get five points” criteria-matching mechanic would quickly outrun anyone who’s not buddied up.


Clucky: he/him

10-03-2024 07:01:01 UTC


Josh: he/they

10-03-2024 10:12:26 UTC

imperial leaning FOR.

Kevan: City he/him

10-03-2024 10:57:39 UTC

The No Cooperation Building Block currently reads:

In this dynasty, Vassals are expected to avoid co-operating to achieve Victory, except through the use of co-operative mechanisms defined in the Dynastic rules.

I don’t know how this played out last dynasty, but the line that this is drawing doesn’t seem that clear to me. Is the possibility of setting mutually rewarding photo Criteria a form of co-operation to achieve victory (bad) or a co-operative mechanism that’s defined in the dynastic rules (good)?

“Expected to avoid” is also very mild for defining no consequences. If it’s meant to invoke the full-on Fair Play expectation that the group will vote down any DoV that relies on it, the rule should say that.


Snisbo: she/they

10-03-2024 17:04:41 UTC


JonathanDark: he/him

10-03-2024 21:23:25 UTC


Josh: he/they

10-03-2024 21:45:22 UTC

CoV for I don’t think Kevan’s objections are all without merit. But they would suggest to me that it’s worth having the burning platform of it being in the ruleset so that it gets fixed.


11-03-2024 00:18:55 UTC