Sunday, March 09, 2025

Proposal: Proposing is Power

Unpopular, 1-4 with Custodian voting DEF. Failed by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 11 Mar 2025 17:29:50 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule, titled “Influence”:

When a proposal authored by a Seeker is enacted or failed and at any point had at least one FOR vote on it from a Seeker other than its author, its author gains 5 Influence.

If the Proposal “A Life’s Ambition” passed, replace the text of “Influence” with the following:

When a proposal authored by a Seeker is enacted or failed and at any point had at least one FOR vote on it from a Seeker other than its author, its author gains 5 Influence. If they have a Hobby of BlogNomic or a Job of Politician, they instead gain 10 Influence.

Why not have some incentive to propose?

Comments

Josh: he/they

09-03-2025 19:36:14 UTC

The issue with this is that there becomes a mild disincentive to voting FOR on proposals authored by a rival, especially one who is close to winning.

Habanero:

09-03-2025 19:39:11 UTC

This is by design (to provide some difficulty for the leading players). Maybe it’s a bad idea, who knows really, I certainly don’t since I’ve never played a dynasty with a mechanic similar to this

JonathanDark: he/him

09-03-2025 20:35:49 UTC

I feel like even a mild disincentive is not a great idea. Witness the previous dynasty where a mild reduction in a secondary resource encouraged weaponized voting. I’d rather prevent that from happening again, if for no other reason than to allow the free flow of ideas to continue rather than be restricted for strategic reasons.

Instead, maybe there could be a Story Post - Votable Matter as part of the mechanics where Influence could be gained. Think along the lines of a simple local government or Town Hall. Maybe Seekers propose Buildings or Government Functions or something like that?

Habanero:

09-03-2025 20:53:54 UTC

I think there is a difference between a punishment for not doing something (as we saw last dynasty) and a reward for doing something (which this is). Unless the opponent in question is close to winning, I don’t think we’ll see people voting against every proposal because they don’t want an opponent to get a small amount of Influence. I won’t be compromising on the idea here, but I’m alright if people don’t like it and vote it down

Habanero:

09-03-2025 21:01:30 UTC

Still, though, to assuage your concerns a bit I’ve weakened things so any Proposal will give you the Influence as long as someone else is voting FOR it. This limits the impact of a rogue mass-against-voter

JonathanDark: he/him

10-03-2025 03:32:40 UTC

It’s still a weak imperial from me

ais523: Custodian

10-03-2025 03:49:21 UTC

imperial

I do think the general idea here is a good one, but share the concerns about the details.

In some previous dynasties, we’ve dealt with the issue by rewarding the voters in addition to the proposer, and also the admin who enacts the proposal. Perhaps something like “the first quorum FOR voters get X Influence, and the proposer gets quorum times X Influence”.

Desertfrog:

10-03-2025 05:59:04 UTC

against

Josh: he/they

10-03-2025 07:35:57 UTC

against

Raven1207: he/they

10-03-2025 14:45:33 UTC

against

JonathanDark: he/him

11-03-2025 14:38:54 UTC

CoV against