Saturday, December 26, 2009

Proposal: The Affairs of Wizards

Times out 5-10. -Ornithopter

Adminned at 28 Dec 2009 11:33:38 UTC

Add a new rule entitled ‘Curses’ with the following text:

As a daily action, any Adventurer may reduce their power by 2 in order to place a Curse on another Adventurer. This is tracked in a column of the GNDT entitled ‘Cursed’, with the values ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. An Adventurer who is under a Curse may not take any actions that require power; they also may not take any action that requires a charged Talisman. An Adventurer who is under a Curse may not be placed under a Curse while they are Cursed, or for 24 hours after the Curse is broken. An Adventurer who is under a Curse may break the Curse at any time, if at least one week has passed since they were placed under the Curse.

Create GNDT column ‘Cursed’. Set all Adventurers’ values to ‘No’.
Add a new rule entitled ‘Talismans’ with the following text:

An Adventurer may have a Talisman, which may be charged or discharged. This status is tracked in a GNDT column entitled ‘Talisman’, whose values may be ‘Charged’, ‘Discharged’ or ‘None’. As a daily action, an Adventurer may reduce their power by 10 in order to give themselves a charged Talisman. This action may not be taken if the Adventurer has a Talisman already, either charged or discharged. If an Adventurer has a charged Talisman, then as a daily action, they may first set their Talisman to discharged and then take any one of the following actions:

  • Place a Curse on an Adventurer without penalty to Power
  • Set their Location to any valid Location
  • Increase their Power by 2
  • Break a Curse on any other Adventurer

An Adventurer who has a charged Talisman cannot be placed under a Curse. An Adventurer with a discharged Talisman may charge their Talisman at any time, if at least five days have passed since their Talisman became discharged. This action is considered to have occurred retroactively at the moment that the time limit expired. An Adventurer with a discharged Talisman may, as a daily action, decrease their Power by 4 and charge their Talisman.

Create GNDT column ‘Talisman’. Set all Adventurers’ values to ‘None’.
If there exists a subrule ‘Teleportation’, repeal it. If at least half the EVCs on this Proposal contain the text ‘Do not repeal’, then disregard the preceding sentence when this Proposal is enacted.

I’ve changed the Talismans from recharging on Sundays to recharging five days after being discharged, to prevent people from using their Talisman late on Saturday nights and having a charged talisman nearly all the time. I’ve also repealed the Teleportation rule already proposed; I think teleportation should only be available via one method, because trivial teleportation more or less makes Location pointless, if ever we do anything with it. The idea here is that getting a Talisman is difficult, and charging it early is also difficult, but it allows powerful spells. The list of powers available through the Talisman is meant to be expanded as more mechanics are created.



12-26-2009 20:36:47 UTC

against With curses, it would be extremely easy to stop someone from being able to use power for long periods of time. Even with the 24 hour period where they can’t be cursed, they can still be under a curse 7/8 of the time.


12-26-2009 21:52:26 UTC


I concur. I think that we’d spend too much time “waiting around”.


12-26-2009 23:46:34 UTC

The idea is that you can’t be placed under a Curse if you have a charged talisman, and by the time your current Curse wears off your talisman is recharged again. You can choose between the spells available with a Talisman and safety from curses.


12-27-2009 00:32:28 UTC

I think that’ll be offset by charged talismans protecting you from curses.

Ienpw III:

12-27-2009 00:58:40 UTC

against I like the idea, but the dynasty is complicated enough as it is.


12-27-2009 01:07:37 UTC

Yes, it’s complicated in what it provides, but we don’t DO anything with those provisions yet. There are no game actions you can take that actually matter. This doesn’t make the dynasty more complicated where it currently is; it takes current frameworks and does something useful with them.


12-27-2009 02:41:29 UTC



12-27-2009 08:08:40 UTC



12-27-2009 09:27:40 UTC



12-27-2009 09:41:17 UTC



12-27-2009 10:09:14 UTC

Darknight, is that an explicit abstain?


12-27-2009 10:11:34 UTC

i voted before i saw waks CfJ. But I still don’t know so i’m abstaining for now


12-27-2009 10:58:47 UTC



12-27-2009 13:48:31 UTC



12-27-2009 20:00:53 UTC



12-27-2009 21:30:38 UTC



12-27-2009 23:21:15 UTC

against COV


12-28-2009 03:42:13 UTC

Now 5-8 against. BNbot doesn’t yet know that DK is Djinni.


12-28-2009 09:18:02 UTC



12-28-2009 09:22:33 UTC

imperial It does now.