Friday, March 19, 2021

Call for Judgment: No Tag-Alongs

Passes 6-0. Enacted by Brendan.

Adminned at 19 Mar 2021 18:31:26 UTC

In the rule “Rule Updates”, change

the title of a subrule of the Tournament Rules of Giolitti

to

the title of the Tournament Rules of Giolitti rule or any of its subrules

Add after the first paragraph of “Impending Rules”:

Each Game has a Stakes, which is an integer that defaults to 1 when a Game begins.

Change the paragraph in the same rule beginning “When each Player of a Game has made seven Plays in that Game” to:

If they were not the last player in the game to do so, either player in a Game may post a Sfida, which a comment that says it is a Sfida. Before either player may make their next Play or post another Sfida, the opponent of the player posting Sfida must respond with a comment specifying whether they accept or reject the Sfida. If they accept, the stakes of the Game are increased by 1, up to a maximum of 3. If they reject, the Game is Closed, and the player posting the Sfida is the Game’s Campione.

When each Player of a Game has made seven Plays in that Game, that Game is Closed, and the Campione of the Game is the player with the highest score.

The Dealer may, and should at their earliest convenience, make a comment on a Closed game that identifies any Players of the game that named a card in a Play, that they did not begin that Game with. This comment, known as the Fine, ends the Game. If the Fine identified no players, the Game is Clean. If the Fine identified players, any player so identified becomes not a Campione of the Game, and any player not so identified becomes Campione of the Game.

Each Player has a number of pegs, which is publicly tracked and which defaults to zero; when a game ends, its Campione gains a number of pegs equal to the game’s stakes. For the purposes of the Magistrelli system, this is treated as gaining one peg multiple times.

I don’t want my proposals erased ._.

Comments

Kevan: he/him

19-03-2021 15:26:42 UTC

I don’t think we should clutter Core with this: most dynasties don’t define any tags in their Dynastic rules.

(“We accidentally amended a rule we didn’t want to, because the Tags rule is extremely relaxed about stopping anything” is its own separate problem.)

Lulu: she/her

19-03-2021 15:32:56 UTC

How else would you fix this, then?

Kevan: he/him

19-03-2021 15:36:47 UTC

Put an equivalent clause in a dynastic rule: something like “The ‘will still be able to make that specific modification’ clause of the Tags rule does not apply to Tournament tags.” into Rule Updates.

Kevan: he/him

19-03-2021 15:39:02 UTC

Actually, would be better to expand the existing “If a proposal without the “[Tournament]” tag refers to the title of a subrule of the Tournament Rules of Giolitti, that reference is instead assumed to be to the equivalent subrule of Impending Rules.” clause to replace “the title of a subrule of the Tournament Rules of Giolitti” with “the title of the Tournament Rules of Giolitti rule or any of its subrules”, so that if someone accidentally tries to amend the Tournament Rules directly, we amend the Impending Rules instead (rather than throwing out that part of the proposal entirely).

Lulu: she/her

19-03-2021 15:53:27 UTC

Fixed.

Lulu: she/her

19-03-2021 16:05:50 UTC

Added in the Stakes proposal, too.

Kevan: he/him

19-03-2021 16:25:51 UTC

for

Zack: he/him

19-03-2021 17:36:51 UTC

for

pokes:

19-03-2021 17:38:35 UTC

for

Raven1207: he/they

19-03-2021 17:47:01 UTC

for

Brendan: he/him

19-03-2021 18:21:29 UTC

for