Tuesday, April 08, 2025

Proposal: Treasure

Fewer than a quorum not voting AGAINST. Failed 2-8 by Kevan.

Adminned at 09 Apr 2025 17:25:52 UTC

Add a new dynastic rule called “Treasure” and give it the following text

Each Agent has a Score, which is publicly tracked and defaults to 0.

Each spot has a non-negative integer amount of Treasure in it, which is privately tracked by the Concierge and defaults to 0

Each Burglar can carry up to three Treasure, and by default caries 0. The number of Treasures a Burglar is carrying is privately tracked by the Concierge.

When one or more Burglars Scout the same Spot at the same time, then the Concierge should secretly determine a random order for those Burglars and then in that order: if the scouted Spot has least one Treasure in it and the selected Burglar is not already carrying three Treasures, the number of Treasures in the room are reduced by 1 and the number of Treasures the Burglar is carrying are increased by 1

When a Guard Scouts a Spot, the Concierge should privately inform them how much Treasure is in that spot. This happens after any Burglars Scout the same spot.

When a Burglar Encounters a Guard, all Treasures they are carrying are moved to the room they encountered the Guard in, and the Guard(s) they encountered each receive score equal to the number of Treasures the Encountered Burglar was carrying

When the Agents disperse, if a Burglar’s Location is the Grounds, they cease to be carrying all Treasures they were carrying and gain that number of score

In “The Break In” after “Set each Agent’s Location to their Letter in their Route at the position equal to the Minute” add “. If their position remained unchanged as a result of this action, they are considered to have Scouted the spot. This happens before any Encounters”

Intentionally not including rules for how treasure gets populated just yet as to not over complicate things. But I like the idea of treasure persisting over multiple rounds, and cops maybe having incentive to go rogue and scout to get more information incase they are a robber next time.

Comments

Darknight: he/him

08-04-2025 22:58:38 UTC

for

JonathanDark: he/him

08-04-2025 23:25:23 UTC

for

Trapdoorspyder: he/him

08-04-2025 23:26:10 UTC

imperial Deferring on this due to the similarity with my own proposal

DoomedIdeas: he/him

08-04-2025 23:40:20 UTC

for

ais523:

09-04-2025 02:21:24 UTC

arrow I have balance concerns:

a) if a Burglar and a Guard cooperate they can give the Guard a very large amount of score, by having the Guard catch the Burglar repeatedly;
b) this generally seems to undermine the “teamwork” intention behind the dynasty by making the Burglars and Guards compete with each other for score rather than having a successful burglary, or successful burglary prevention, benefit the whole team.

In other words, although I think we need something like this and the flavour is fine, I think the scoring is too unbalancing and will basically turn the dynasty into a “which burglar/guard pool can grind most efficiently?” game.

JonathanDark: he/him

09-04-2025 04:30:12 UTC

I see no harm in passing this now since there’s currently no way to increase the Treasure in a Spot, but I agree that Guard/Burglar pooling should be addressed at some point before or when a mechanism for adding Treasure is introduced.

DoomedIdeas: he/him

09-04-2025 04:36:51 UTC

against CoV based on Ais’ concerns.

SingularByte: he/him

09-04-2025 05:37:19 UTC

against  In favour of Loot Grabbin’

Josh: he/they

09-04-2025 08:20:21 UTC

against Loot Grabbin’ has my preference

qenya: she/they

09-04-2025 09:27:47 UTC

against I, too, prefer TDS’ version.

Kevan: Concierge he/him

09-04-2025 10:25:06 UTC

against Loot Grabbin’ does seem the better way to go on this.

Darknight: he/him

09-04-2025 12:36:33 UTC

against