Monday, May 28, 2012

Proposal: The Hard Rules

Passes 9-0 with quorum FOR. -Bucky

Flagged as enacted by Josh, by which point it had become 10-0.

Adminned at 30 May 2012 04:14:04 UTC

Add the following as a new rule to the ruleset, entitled The Hard Rules:

The following are the Hard Rules for the Sixth Dynasty of Josh (or “Dynasty 100”). They may not be amended by any means other than a proposal and may not be superseded by any other rule. In the event of a conflict or paradox in the ruleset, the Hard Rules always take precedence.

Whenever a dynasty is referred to by number, the number related back to the chronological order as set out on the first page of the BlogNomic Wiki. This list is considered to be gamestate for the purposes of this dynasty.

===Dynastic Travel===
At any given time, each Time Monk occupies a specific dynasty from BlogNomic’s history, which is tracked in the GNDT under “Dynasty” and logged as that Dynasty’s number. This defaults to 100. A Time Monk is subject to the Dynastic Rules of the final ruleset of the Dynasty that they occupy, as well as the Core Rules, Glossary and Hard Rules of Dynasty 100. In the case of earlier Dynasties, where Core Rules and Dynastic Rules may not be mapped, the Time Buddha may make a post to the Blog detailing which rules in that Dynasty’s are considered Dynastic and while rules are considered Core.

===Gamestate Mapping===
The GNDT will have a number of fields, labelled 1-10, (this number may be increased by the Time Buddha if necessary) which correspond to the GNDT fields or trackable values of each Dynasty in the order that those GNDT fields are mentioned in the ruleset. GNDT values are considered to be cross-communicable between Dynasties. Whenever a Time Monk changes Dynasty, their GNDT values are not reset by default, although the Time Monk may elect to change any individual value to its default for the new Dynasty that they are entering.

Whenever the ruleset of the Dynasty that a Time Monk is occupying permits them to change the value of another Time Monk’s GNDT field then they may do so using the same mapping, provided that the change makes sense (for example, if Time Monk A is permitted to change Time Monk B’s “Credits” [mapped to GNDT Field 1] by 5, then they may do so provided that Time Monk B’s GNDT Field 1 is numeric.)

Each Time Monk also has a GNDT field entitled “Inventory”, which is used for any Dynasty that contains an item-ownership mechanic.

Each Time Monk has a field in the GNDT entitled Victories.

Whenever a Time Monk has achieved Victory in a past Dynasty, they may Declare Victory for that Dynasty by following the procedure set out in the Core Rule entitled Victory and Ascension, detailing explicitly which Dynasty they have achieved Victory in and how that Victory was achieved. A Declaration of Victory made on this basis does not cause a hiatus to begin and does not imply or confer a state of victory in Dynasty 100. If that Declaration of Victory passes then that Time Monk may iterate their Victory statistic in the GNDT by 1. They must then put an asterisk beside that Dynasty in the Dynastic History list on the front page of the Wiki; subsequently, that Dynasty may not be the Occupied Dynasty of any Time Monk, and any Time Monk for whom it is the current Occupied Dynasty must have their Dynasty set to 100.

For the avoidance of doubt, victory in Dynasty 100 may not be achieved by means of any provision of any rule in the ruleset of any other Dynasty.


I am under no illusion as to how complex this is but I think it can be made to work, doubtless with lots of bodging together…



28-05-2012 12:38:59 UTC

for  for  for
I love this. However I don’t think I read anything preventing anyone to just go and edit the list in the first page of the Blognomic Wiki.

Josh: Observer he/they

28-05-2012 13:00:50 UTC

The first para says that the list is gamestate, which makes it immune to tampering.

Josh: Observer he/they

28-05-2012 13:02:09 UTC

Second para, sorry!


28-05-2012 14:32:03 UTC

for Although poor Darknight isn’t going to get much help with his “confused by the ruleset” problem.


28-05-2012 16:07:21 UTC


Clucky: he/him

28-05-2012 16:15:21 UTC


Love love love love love the idea. Way better than what I would’ve done had I won. But this needs to be done right.

Issue 1: NPCs. If I travel to say, the monkey dynasty then do the NPCs exist for me but no one else? Or do they not exist at all? By my understanding, NPCs exist for me but no one else which would get super confusing.

Issue 2: Emperor actions. Is “The Net” from the previous dynasty SPC or you? This is especially relevant for “The emperor is not considered a player for any dynastic rules” proposals—send SPC to 99 and you could argue he isn’t a player for rules from 100 either.

Issue 3: Victory counting. Need to fail pending DOVs in one dynasty passes. Need to also fail DOVs if you leave the dynasty (maybe, or prevent leaving if you have a pending DOV). First point really should be fixed before dynasty switching is enabled given everyone will just rush to your 4th dynasty and win that way.

Issue 4: Wiki pages. Not all game state tracking is done on the GNDT? Are all wiki pages still in play and just don’t map?

Game state Mapping: Really should use “Whenever a Time Monk changes Dynasty, their GNDT values are not reset by default, although the Time Monk may elect to change any individual value to its default for the new Dynasty that they are entering and **any illegal values are also set to their defaults for the new Dynasty they are entering.**”

But it really is a great theme. Gonna love seeing the rush as players try to get to your 4th dynasty and a couple of the other insta win dynastys or finding holes where stat A is really easy to get in dynasty X buy hard to get in dynasty Y. Best part is, at best they can break one dynasty and get a win there. No need to worry about them ending the real dynasty too soon. But I still think these issues should get addressed to this dynasty can be done right.

Clucky: he/him

28-05-2012 16:17:03 UTC

Also: I suggest that we use a wiki page to track each dynasty and their GNDT stats and do the 1-10 mapping that way. Otherwise its way too easy for someone to miss ‘bananas’ are mentioned in the ruleset and throw their mappings off. Plus each time you switch dynasties you need to comb the ruleset for stats.

Josh: Observer he/they

28-05-2012 16:17:16 UTC

Clucky - you are right, nd I would self-kill, but at the present there is no means to actually travel between dynasty, meaning that these problems are isolated. It would be easier to pass and fix, I think; we’re never going to get this 100% iron-clad in a single proposal.

quirck: he/him

28-05-2012 16:30:07 UTC

for Great theme ^_^

I support Clucky’s idea and suggest to try to map GNDT fields so that their types match, in order to have less resets due to illegal values while travelling in time


28-05-2012 17:17:34 UTC

One additional issue that needs to be addressed before time travel is enabled is that the rulesets of many early dynasties are not on the wiki.

Clucky: he/him

28-05-2012 17:25:25 UTC

fair enough for

Darknight: he/him

28-05-2012 21:12:16 UTC

for @Yonah: the issue was that the last ruleset was kinda a hard read for me, this one is easier for me to understand lol.


28-05-2012 21:55:32 UTC

Bug: The Time Buddha can’t increase the value (1-10) due to the first part of the rule, which stipulates it can only be changed by proposal. for


29-05-2012 02:18:56 UTC

Rule 1.7 Victory and Ascension states “This rule cannot be overruled by Dynastic Rules as it relates to Declarations of Victory, but can be overruled in other matters.”

Then the Hard Rukes reads “In the event of a conflict or paradox in the ruleset, the Hard Rules always take precedence.”

Since ===Victory=== is clearly trying to overrule rule 1.7, I’m not sure enacting this proposal is legal. And if it is, then it will be impossible to decide which rule takes precedence.


29-05-2012 02:24:25 UTC

Patchable simply by making it clear that that these minor declarations of victory are not Declarations of Victory in the strict sense.

Kevan: he/him

29-05-2012 08:35:56 UTC

for I wouldn’t be surprised if it imploded within a week, but this is admirably ambitious stuff.


29-05-2012 12:16:33 UTC



30-05-2012 01:44:22 UTC

idle AGAINST for safety reasons; this should be modifiable by CfJ as well to avoid a potential total lockup.

Josh: Observer he/they

30-05-2012 05:57:10 UTC

This seems to have been enacted without being enacted.


30-05-2012 09:24:18 UTC

for This will be glorious (although I don’t see this dynasty surviving very long).