BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

Why is Undermining more powerful than Aggrandizing?

I’m amenable to changing the numbers, but as I saw it writing it, if Undermining were -1, then there’s no reason to do it because Aggrandizing yourself once is almost equivalent to Undermining (number of players - 1) times.

I’m a bit worried that currently Unsavoriness doesn’t do anything. Which might make it harder to add bad effects to later, because people with high Unsavoriness would feel differently about what the negative effects should be than people with low Unsavoriness

(Edited the unsavoriness increase from 1 to 10DICE2, to enable other higher or lower cost schemes that are not fully distinguishable to observers.)

10DICE2 is awfully swingy.

Is it? The majority of the time, the result is 14, 15, or 16.

I changed it to just 15. There’s a fundamental tension there where more swinginess is necessary to make later types of schemes indistinguishable, but is also… swingy.

OK, one more edit. I think I have a better solution: a minimum Unsavoriness cost that can be exceeded if you want to disguise a request as something else.

  I very nearly voted for this on the basis of the title alone, but I think with no consequences for Unsavoriness, it’s too grindy right now.

It’s true that there’s no downside literally right now but I imagine we would institute one soon if unsavorinesses were increasing.

but that’s going to be a bampam and does anyone really want to do that

I do like the fuzziness of the currency - the thing where you can arbitrarily increase your accretion of unsavouriness to hide what you’re doing - but agree that this probably needs to come in as a complete mechanic, or at least a consequential one, or run the risk of being never plugged in.

To clear the queue, and in favour of the version described by DDeD.