Friday, December 15, 2023

Proposal: Still some good ideas here

Timed out. Still passes 3-1—Clucky

Adminned at 17 Dec 2023 18:45:44 UTC

Add the following rows to the table of Tracts in the rule Estates:

Caretaker’s Hut | This estate gains 1 Prestige.
Markets | The Palatine of this estate may pay one of a given resource to earn one of a different resource.
Poorhouse | The Palatine of this estate gains 4 Reputation, and this estate loses 2 Prestige.
Gardens | The Palatine of this estate may reduce their stress by up to 4.
Private Kitchens | The Palatine of this estate increases the health of the Old King by 4, or decreases the health of the Old King by 4.


JonathanDark: he/him

15-12-2023 18:38:45 UTC

Why was the Market changed to only require paying 1 resource to get another? I think this makes Beneficial Aspects too cheap to switch to. I’d rather see that go back to SB’s original 2-for-1 idea.

Clucky: he/him

15-12-2023 20:29:48 UTC

If you just want one beneficial resource, you can just build the appropriate building. So Markets give you some more flexibility, but you’re already paying the one resource plus the opportunity cost of not just getting a resource, so in that way its a 2-1. Needing to spend two resources to me felt unusably expensive


16-12-2023 07:22:49 UTC


JonathanDark: he/him

17-12-2023 06:49:20 UTC

I think we’re safe on this now.


Kevan: he/him

17-12-2023 07:46:11 UTC

This was enacted early by JonathanDark (at 3-0 and adding the Imperial DEF to it): “If there are six or fewer Heirs, then the Old King’s vote of DEFERENTIAL on a proposal is only affected by this rule if all Heirs who are not the Old King have cast a vote on that proposal.” - and the Old King is not an Heir.

Kevan: he/him

17-12-2023 09:26:55 UTC

against on the general precautionary rule of thumb that if something’s been voted down twice for being a scam, its third appearance may not be that different.