One thing this doesn’t have, which may be on purpose, is the avoidance of an Outcome that duplicates an existing one, and the avoidance of an Outcome that causes effectively nothing to happen if the gain and loss are for the same value.

that’s mostly to shorten it, ‘cause this is text-heavy enough as-is — i’d support another proposal to add those things, but i’d also be fine with the bonus outcome being null (you spent a resource for it, so now you get a free pass). i guess it’s pretty rough if you spend a resource to get a duplicate of one of the extant outcomes though… yeah, on second thought i’ll edit that in. a null Alternate Outcome is fine IMO though :0

A null Alternate Outcome is fine by me in this case.

This will delay some Reactions, once either Innovation is on the table, if people are tempted to wait and see whether a better option comes along. Might be less distracting if the action somehow shaped the upcoming Dilemma instead.

On the other hand, it opens up even more opportunities for favour-trading and other interactions between Districts, per our earlier discussions on Allocate.

I think that’s the same hand, the hand of it mattering too much at which hour of the day you’re able to perform your Reaction.

Sucks to have reacted only to have another option show up.

It also sucks to React only to have a new Dilemma show up that might have changed your decision on which Outcome to take, e.g. a combination of Outcomes from two Dilemmas that could have been a net gain for you. I wouldn’t propose to force two Dilemmas to be posted at once just to nullify that issue, though, because the choice of how long to wait for the next Dilemma is interesting enough.

The case where there might be unfairness, in my opinion, is where you’re asleep or otherwise unable to React close to the deadline, so you choose to React, and then someone pulls the trigger before the deadline to give themselves and anyone else who’s still around a chance to React with the new Alternate Outcome.

I would support an amendment to Posing Another Outcome to require it to be done within the first 24 hours of a Dilemma being posted, to negate the above unfairness. With that in place, if you React too quickly knowing that a rival District could Pose Another Outcome, that’s an unforced decision on your part.

perhaps we could make it so that, in the wake of Another Outcome, players can sometimeschange their decision?

i feel like making it apply to the upcoming dilemma would be not so good; the entire niche for this mechanic is for when you can’t afford either of the current Outcomes, or really need a specific type of Outcome that hasn’t come up!

for either of these changes, i’d also want it to reduce the costs involved, since it would lose either some or most of its value :0

Being able to choose some aspect of the future Outcome would be another route to consider, to balance it.

I agree with Josh. a system like this could work but i’d either make it exclusive to the player who used it or find some other way to get rid of the timing aspect