Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Moderators: Crunkus, connect4

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby connect4 » 06 Mar 2014, 16:46

OK so by my current interpretation, if a player does not have a Thing at the start of their turn currently, then this supercedes all timelines, and the game essentially ends. So once 5 things are in play (or 315 hits), I basically don't want a Thing as the proposer so I win by 213. Is that right?

Alternatively, an easier way to phrase this to work that I just thought of: if a player is about to become proposer and does not have a Thing, that player becomes inactive. That kills any potential paradoxes: if you don't have a thing and you're up, you're inactive, and the next player goes.
User avatar
connect4
 
Posts: 3609
Joined: 15 Nov 2008, 23:56
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1042)
All-game rating: (1012)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Crunkus » 06 Mar 2014, 16:52

A really cool way to handle that would be instead of making them inactive call this type of situation a "bizzness" or something, have it move to next player down the line AND have a thing created and put into their possession. The properties could be positive or negative...and you'd probably need a thing who had the property of creating things in the event of a bizzness. You could even make the potato do that.

That way, if it goes around again, you still have someone with a Thing that will end up proposing.
(sigh)
Crunkus
 
Posts: 17650
Joined: 05 Feb 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
All-game rating: (944)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Zoomzip » 06 Mar 2014, 16:54

C4: That is part of the idea, yeah. We have this cool Thing Mechanism, so I wanted to create a reason for things to exist and for things to move. Plus, the path to victory is usually the points way, but I wanted to introduce a way to win via 213, if that is a path a player wanted to choose. I agree that there aren't enough things in the game right now, but that was part of the reason of pushing out when this rule became effective: To make it so people would want to create things, and that people had to think very carefully about voting against things.

Now, I also realize that if I lose both proposals, I'm looking at a -15 base. So that's fun. But, hey, I like the idea of building up the game play mechanics here. My appeal to players is that this proposal does that: You need a thing to get points via proposals, but you can also win by making sure you don't have a thing when it comes time to propose.

So yeah, no feelings hurt if people decide this isn't the way we want to go, but I would say that this proposal neatly builds on ideas introduced to add some spice to the game as it develops.
Kittens and rainbows. Forever. Wear your makeup like a man.

One of the moderators of the Mafia Form.
User avatar
Zoomzip
 
Posts: 6375
Joined: 11 Nov 2011, 05:29
Location: NoVa and The District
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (921)
All-game rating: (919)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Crunkus » 06 Mar 2014, 17:03

ZZ: I appreciate the idea of adding win conditions and the enhancement it would have on having people create Things, but I feel it's a bit aggressive for this stage of the game. It would make me a bit uncomfortable. Interesting. Once the ball gets rolling I can see something like this working quite well.
(sigh)
Crunkus
 
Posts: 17650
Joined: 05 Feb 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
All-game rating: (944)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Pagane » 06 Mar 2014, 17:56

The addition of the Potato Thing(which does nothing aside from existing) doesn't actually help this proposal. It's just filler. I like Crunkus' idea of changing the mechanic for skipping someone's turn, but at this point in the game we're not ready for that kind of mechanic.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.

Previously known as Santiago Matamoros.
User avatar
Pagane
 
Posts: 596
Joined: 04 Nov 2013, 01:59
Location: Wine Country, Virginia
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1079)
All-game rating: (1085)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Zoomzip » 06 Mar 2014, 18:03

@ Crunkus: Hey, I dig you man. My ambition frequently outruns my reach. But, I would also say, this proposal will create a certain degree of exigency and a requirement of creative thinking from all players, and that is always a good thing. However, to alleviate your concern, I am willing to adjust the effective timing of this proposal, to, say, after Proposal 320? By that time, everyone will have sufficient notice that this rule is coming into effect, and 13 turns of potential thing creation. (I would drop the thing creation numerical option, just make it a pure 320 timing).

@ Pagane: Ah, you're wrong, my fellow Spurs fan. The potato guarantees a potential way of making sure a player always has a thing, because if you give the potato to the next active player, then they are totally ready to go, and it is always in the interests of a player to make sure the next active player has a thing. The potato exists, and it has potential to do more, depending on whether people make rules about food, or starch, or value, or anything else really. Blind offers -- who know where they will lead?
Kittens and rainbows. Forever. Wear your makeup like a man.

One of the moderators of the Mafia Form.
User avatar
Zoomzip
 
Posts: 6375
Joined: 11 Nov 2011, 05:29
Location: NoVa and The District
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (921)
All-game rating: (919)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Pagane » 06 Mar 2014, 21:44

And yet, if a person can convince someone to give him the Potato 2 or 3 turns before his turn comes around, then he gives the Potato away and cannot receive it back in time. Boom, 213 kicks in and game over.

If your proposal, instead of saying that a player without a Thing can't propose, specifically stated a series of events that occur when play passes to a player without a Thing(involving their turn being skipped and any number of other events), then I'd be interested. But just throwing a Potato as a patch over the game-ending ability of this proposal doesn't exactly make it look like a useful proposal.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.

Previously known as Santiago Matamoros.
User avatar
Pagane
 
Posts: 596
Joined: 04 Nov 2013, 01:59
Location: Wine Country, Virginia
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1079)
All-game rating: (1085)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby connect4 » 07 Mar 2014, 00:16

Or alternatively, if a thief's glove or something comes into play, the potatoe might not be your only hope.

Right now, I'm more than fine with implementing the potatoe. Still deciding on main proposal.
User avatar
connect4
 
Posts: 3609
Joined: 15 Nov 2008, 23:56
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1042)
All-game rating: (1012)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby Ugluk » 07 Mar 2014, 03:57

Is the potato hot?

If we get down to two players, the potato cannot be passed back and forth, including by roster order (since the recipient is not 'eligible'). Game locked, next player wins.
Niakan is a tease.
User avatar
Ugluk
 
Posts: 3220
Joined: 19 May 2009, 23:55
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1048)
All-game rating: (1028)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: Nomic 5 Proposal 306 - Things and Enfranchisement

Postby super_dipsy » 07 Mar 2014, 18:07

I'm pretty sure we are in the Voting phase now. I assume we take the start of the proposal phase when Zoomzip made his first PROPOSAL post ( not the first post in the thread) but that was still more than 48 hours ago.

So in order to make sure I am not made inactive (again :( ) I better get my vote in. I think I am in the same boat as a number of others. I would have been happy with this sort of idea but perhaps further down the line. So at least as a placeholder my vote is

NAY

I also note you proposed a Potato Thing. I need to read it before I vote on that, and anyway I don't think I am penalized by not voting if I run out of time so I can afford to wait a bit. I just didn't want to get dinged for not making my official vote.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Premium Member
 
Posts: 12064
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 931
Timezone: GMT

PreviousNext

Return to Nomic 5 (finished)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest