I don’t believe that this would have any effect as Prioritisation specifies that appendix rules take priority over dynastic rules.

Even when they override the rule by name? Some core/appendix rules say “this rule cannot be overriden by dynastic rules”, but the meaning of an Imperial deferential is IIRC one of the things that can be, and this looks a lot like an override to me.

this was well in the eight hour limit for me to just edit it >.>

@Jumble How would you have fixed it? Would you have changed Prioritisation, or Official Posts? Because the only ways to make this proposal work that I can see involves editing the appendix, and I’m not going to vote for any of that, either, when a perfectly serviceable workaround exists.

I mean, let’s be honest here, this whole proposal is unnecessary; if bothers people then I’ll just shift to writing “I’m not voting on this” using words, problem solved.

You don’t need to use the dynastic ruleset to coral me.

This actually looks a bit like a bug in the Appendix; I don’t think it’s intentional that the Appendix can’t be overridden by dynastic rules even when they say they override it, but the “Prioritisation” rule leaves that unclear. Imagine a dynastic rule called “Dynastic Prioritisation” saying “for this dynasty, the prioritisation rules are, as an exception to those in the appendix…” and giving itself priority over the appendix. Who wins?

If the switched-off Imperial Deferentials isn’t fit for purpose, we should replace it with something that is.

Please stop it’s already SKed <.<