Sunday, September 26, 2021

Proposal: Snakes and Ladders

Timed out 4 votes to 5. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 28 Sep 2021 16:26:25 UTC

If Proposal: Cottail Carriage was enacted, revert its effects.

Add the following subrule, called “Transit Control”, to the rule “Floors”:

Proposals require the “[Transit]” tag in order to make changes to the gamestate which would cause any Citizen’s Floor to change. Clauses that would do so in Proposals which do not have the “[Transit]” tag do nothing, unless the Proposal’s poster is in this Zone at the time of enactment.

Once per Proposal, on Proposals with the “[Transit]” tag, each Citizen may Declare Pursuit. To Declare Pursuit, a Citizen (the Pursuer) names a single specific Pursuit Action in an Effective Vote Comment (the Comment of Pursuit) which contains a vote of FOR (and no other votes). If at any point the Comment of Pursuit ceases to be an EVC, the Pursuit Action contained therein is nullified, and that Citizen cannot Declare Pursuit again on the same Proposal.

Immediately after enacting any Proposal with the “[Transit]” tag, an admin must perform the following atomic action for each Comment of Pursuit in the comments of that Proposal, in chronological order of their posting:
* If the Comment of Pursuit is not an EVC, the Pursuer does not have enough Keycards for the Pursuit Action within, or the Pursuit Action within would increase the number of floors between the Pursuer and the Proposal’s poster, abort this atomic action and skip the Comment of Pursuit.
* Reduce the Keycards of the Pursuer according to the Keycard Cost of the Pursuit Action within the Comment of Pursuit.
* Enact the effect of that Pursuit Action.

The Pursuit Actions which can be listed when Declaring Pursuit are listed immediately below; in each entry, the Pursuit Action’s name is listed, then its Keycard Cost in parentheses, then its effect. In the effects of Pursuit Actions, “the Proposal” refers to the Proposal on which the Comment of Pursuit was made, and “the Poster” refers to the poster of that Proposal.
* Stalk (2 Keycards): The Pursuer moves to the Floor halfway between their current Floor and the current Floor of the Poster (rounding down).
* Ascend (1 Keycard): The Pursuer moves upwards DICE8 plus DICE8 Floors.
* Descend (1 Keycard): The Pursuer moves downwards DICE12 plus DICE12 Floors.
* Chase (0 Keycards): If the Pursuer was on the same Floor as the Poster before the Proposal’s enactment, the Pursuer moves to the Poster’s current Floor.

how’s this: u can freeload on other players’ movement proposals, but A) u have to vote FOR it to do so, B) u can only move *towards* the proposer, C) u need to spend a resource, and D) there’s no changing your action once u’ve committed. im hoping this has a nice balance of act-early vs act-late incentives, since it resolves in order of posting!!

also, intentionally leaving the acquisition of keycards unwritten for now, ‘cause i couldnt think of a non-controversial method & i don’t wanna add turbulence to this proposal!


Josh: Observer he/they

26-09-2021 16:35:20 UTC

Has anything established how players get keycards yet?

lemon: she/her

26-09-2021 16:39:30 UTC

nope, that’s intentionally omitted here!! i had an idea for keycard-gaining which i might propose separately, but altogether it had too many moving parts to sail smoothly :0

Snisbo: she/they

26-09-2021 17:13:05 UTC

I’ve got an idea for keycard gaining I may post if lemon’s falls through :D

lemon: she/her

26-09-2021 18:37:03 UTC

@starbright: competition & collaboration r welcomed, u dont have to wait for my idea to flunk before u post urs!!

Snisbo: she/they

27-09-2021 04:24:54 UTC

@lemon Or maybe I’m just seeing if there’s any parts of yours I want to use in mine…

Josh: Observer he/they

27-09-2021 08:35:52 UTC


Josh: Observer he/they

27-09-2021 08:36:07 UTC

Ner ner, I posted my keycard proposal first

Kevan: he/him

27-09-2021 09:45:52 UTC


Brendan: he/him

27-09-2021 14:40:21 UTC

against I like my proposal.

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

27-09-2021 14:53:50 UTC


Josh: Observer he/they

27-09-2021 17:07:32 UTC

Cov against I’m agnostic on the merits of this proposal vs Brendan’s, but until there’s a good reason to move around I’d rather it was less constrained rather than more; we can add more difficulty later if needs be.

I also as a matter of principle don’t like proposals that include mandatory tags, as having a move fail because you didn’t include a tag feels bad and unnecessary.

Zack: he/him

27-09-2021 19:08:14 UTC

against Per josh


27-09-2021 23:46:07 UTC



28-09-2021 14:56:42 UTC


Snisbo: she/they

28-09-2021 16:12:08 UTC