Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Wait… who remembers this?

Looking through old rulesets, noticed that after around 85 the dynasty number and rule number got misalinged

Went digging in the archives and found this:


As far as I can understand, what happened was Kevan used a loophole to win a dynasty but then forgot to repel the old dynastic rules in his AA. This let Roujo use the exact same loophole to win the dynasty right away. This means technically, the The Seventh Dynasty of Kevan was 82, the Eight Dynasty of Kevan was 83 (both of which were the The Cold War Spy Dynasty), and this is now dynasty 101.

We can still get around this, either by ignoing the short seventh dynasty of kevan, and using the dynasty list of the wiki (and as long as the UTD properly links everything it should be good, though we might want to super clarify that if the UTD doesn’t say a dynasty happened, it doesn’t happen). But I feel like technically this isn’t actually dynasty 100…



29-05-2012 19:52:39 UTC

I insisted that Kevan’s seventh should have been counted at the time, but people didn’t agree with me, on the basis that it made Kevan look like he’d won more than he actually had, or something. (As if you don’t have to allow for mantle-passing anyway.)

Josh: he/they

29-05-2012 20:02:51 UTC

I think it was broadly agreed that the two dynasties should be rolled together.

Darknight: he/him

29-05-2012 20:17:46 UTC

I’m with Josh. Everyone agreed to roll them together as one to avoid numbering issues.


29-05-2012 23:47:11 UTC

I remember reading this. Is that why the ruleset now says the AA should state which dynastic rules are *not* repeled?


30-05-2012 01:46:56 UTC

Two points:
1)Only dynasties listed on the main page of the wiki have numbers (which are by definition the numbers on the wiki page)
2)Only dynasties that have numbers can be occupied

So any hypothetical extra dynasties or metadynasties are not relevant.