Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Proposal: Working for the man

Died a wicked death it seems.- Darknight

Adminned at 18 Nov 2008 11:49:02 UTC

If either of the proposal “Everybody’s working for the weekend” fails, this does nothing.

Add the following text to occupations:

Each wiki entry for an occupation must include a Relationship modifier for the occupation if it is non-zero. The magnitude of the Relationship modifier for an occuptation must be no greater than two

Add the following text to 2.2 Locations

The magnitude of a location’s Relationship modifier may be no greater than 5

In the sub-rule 2.2.1 Relationships change:

Each location possesses an integer which can be negative called a Relationship Modifier. As a daily action any character may add the Relationship Modifier of their current location to their relationship value


Each occupation and location possesses an integer which can be negative called the Relationship Modifier. As a daily action each character may add all applicable Relationship Modifiers to their Relationship value independently.

The relative sizes of the modifiers reflect that an occupation can only be selected once, but Location can be changed at whim.





18-11-2008 02:39:43 UTC


arthexis: he/him

18-11-2008 02:40:13 UTC

Not a Proposal


18-11-2008 03:30:16 UTC

veto cause I can and cause it doesn’t matter anyway


18-11-2008 03:55:22 UTC

A lot to chew in one pseudoproposal
Give the existing mechanics a chance to be tested

Oni Tainlyn:

18-11-2008 05:43:22 UTC

I would break this up into separate proposals. If one piece of the puzzle is rotten it can take the rest of the pieces down with it. Oh, and veto


18-11-2008 10:56:02 UTC

i edited it, while i thought i was making a new post. surely someone’s occupation will affect their relationship though. For instance, a policeman is more likely to try and save him whereas a mafia member will try to kill him. i don’t know.


18-11-2008 10:56:55 UTC

i didn’t even realise i posted it in the first place. I pressed quick save rather than update because i was going to return and edit it later.


18-11-2008 10:58:12 UTC

And while it looks like there are three seperate proposals, the second two are only slight alterations in wording so that the first fits in.


18-11-2008 11:13:55 UTC

Also, I didn’t edit it after it was made into a proper proposal and I commented on it.


18-11-2008 14:35:06 UTC

You still changed it into a proposal after comments had been made, so it is still illegal.