Tuesday, August 06, 2024

Proposal: Shipyard

Reached quorum, 4-0. Enacted by JonathanDark.

Adminned at 07 Aug 2024 16:24:49 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Upgrades” with the following text

Each Fishing Contestant may have a number of Upgrades. The name of each Upgrade which a Fishing Contestant has is publicly tracked.

Each Upgrade has a Name, an Effect, and possibly a Cost. The effect of an upgrade applies only to Fishing Contestants who have that upgrade. Each upgrade is listed as a sub rule to this rule, with the name of the Upgrade being the name of the sub rule and the cost (if it exists) and effect listed as the contents of the subrule.

If a Fishing Contestant’s location is the Shore then as a Fishing Action they may select an upgrade that has a cost which they do not already have and then spend the cost of that upgrade in Doubloons to acquire it.

Add an upgrade called “Motor” with “Cost 13. Effect: When performing the speed calculations in ‘Fishing Contestant’, add 1”

Add an upgrade called “Catapult” with “Cost 5. Effect: When performing Fish Identification, you may submit two additional strings even if you are not in the Judge’s hut”

Add an upgrade called “Range Extender” with “Cost 8. Effect: You may perform Obelisk action when you are in a cell orthogonally adjacent to Basalt Obelisks”

Comments

JonathanDark: he/him

07-08-2024 05:35:58 UTC

for

SingularByte: he/him

07-08-2024 06:23:17 UTC

for  but I could see possible issues around the range extender and how it interacts with the requirements.

For example, it lets you perform the action while adjacent, but it doesn’t actually remove the requirement to also be in the same cell.

I could also see an argument in the opposite direction where it lets you perform the action regardless of whether you meet either requirement since it explicitly lets you perform it while adjacent, i.e. you could skip the madness/doubloon cost.

None of these would be especially strong arguments, but they’re not outside the realm of possibility.

Lukas:

07-08-2024 11:17:44 UTC

for Though in “The name of each Upgrade which a Fishing Contestant has is publicly tracked”, the use of “which” rather than “that” implies something different to me.

Lukas:

07-08-2024 11:24:05 UTC

Or rather, I think it should be saying something like “For each Fishing Contestant, the Upgrades that that Fishing Contestant has is publicly tracked.”

Darknight: he/him

07-08-2024 15:07:39 UTC

imperial