Your little one might like to bite on it

Moderators: Crunkus_old, connect4
Pagane wrote:Midichlorians are defined as a unit of currency. Currency can be transferred in-thread. Can you give away midichlorians when you're already in the negative scale, lowering your negative midi-count even further? So if Crunkus is the Dark Lord with -30, and I'm at -20, can I give him 10 midichlorians, raising him to -20 and lowering me to -30?I.A wrote:In Nomic 5, there is a unit of currency known as midi-chlorians.
And can I ally myself with a Jedi, giving him positive midis to both increase my Sith value and to raise his Jedi value?
Pagane wrote:This also applies to Victory Points as well- it seems like Sith will eventually gain benefits from having negative Victory Points.
Pagane wrote:Currently, the language of the currency seems directed at positive-only currency. Defining Midichlorians as a currency that can hold negative value opens this can of worms.
Pagane wrote:PPE: before posting, I looked up this clause:307.5.F wrote:For each unit of currency, the sum of all transfers made during a turn must be less than or equal to the number of units of that currency the player had at the start of the turn. This clause is narfable.
This requires transfers to only made by players with enough POSITIVE units of currency to cover the transfers. Disregard this question. Keep the Currency transfers in mind, however.
Pagane wrote:One cool point though: because of the ability to transfer positive currency, it's relatively easy for a Jedi of any rank to switch to the Dark Side, while Sith have a much harder time returning to the Light. Oh, how the mighty can corrupt themselves. Almost poetic, actually.
Pagane wrote:-----III.C.v.a.9 wrote:A FORCE PUSH by a Jedi Master has the effect of changing the possessor of the Target Thing to the active player whose scheduled turn to become the active player is the PULL VALUE ahead of the target player in the scheduled turn order.
That should read PUSH VALUE rather than PULL VALUE.
Pagane wrote:Lightsabers:
Are the Bad Ass Sounds required to be played when a player transfers or uses his lightsaber? If not, I would be less than opposed to seeing it made so.
Pagane wrote:Confrontations are left undefined. I look forward to figuring out how lightsaber duels work. I think they should include both skill with a lightsaber and mastery of the force, since they are two distinct fundamentals to Jedi/Sith combat. I also think that there should be midichlorian penalties for a Jedi who Confronts another Jedi.
Pagane wrote:The properties of the lightsabers constructed by the Sith should be changed to state that they will remain in the possession of the SITH who created them, not the JEDI. Either that, or just say PLAYER for both Jedi and Sith lightsabers.
Pagane wrote:And what is the point of only allowing Jedi to give their lightsabers to other Jedi, but allowing Sith to give their lightsabers to anyone?
Pagane wrote:IV.D.vi.a.1 wrote:This ability can only be successfully used by a Sith if that Sith has not yet used a Darth Ability during the current turn.
If a Darth uses Force Domination, Force Fear or Force Lightning, he cannot use another Darth ability earlier in the turn. Can he still use Construct Lightsaber AFTER he has used one of these during the same turn?
No. Darth is an easier title to achieve, and has a broad range of potent powers, but they can only use on Darth Ability a turn. The Jedi construct lightsaber has a lot of upsides compared to the sith version, although a sith will no doubt build the first personalized lightsaber.Pagane wrote:IV.D.vi.a.9 wrote:The skin on the right side of Darth Pagane's face begins to slough off slowly:
So I can be a Sith Lord AND Two-Face. I approve.Yeah, I wanted to have something in there that registered with the idea of bodily corruption of the Sith. I encourage players to detail their bodily degredations for flavour.
-----Pagane wrote:Anakyn Skywalker's Second Lightsaber can be used to block Dark Lord abilities. To do so, do you Confront the Dark Lord? If not, how do you trigger the trolling-the-Dark-Lord bit?
Yeah, you have to target the Dark Lord with that particular lightsaber. The only way to do that is with the confront mechanic. Right now there is a means to target a player with the confront property, it makes it clear that it initiates a confrontation, but the significance of the confrontation is nada at this point. To the Dark Lord of the Sith abilities the only thing that matters is whether or not that lightsaber targeted the dark lord of the sith...we can confront with this legislation through light-sabers...but the confrontation itself hasn't been developed yet beyond an indirect effect detailed under some Dark Lord of the Sith abilities that ASSL works to provide a counterpoint for.
-----Pagane wrote:There aren't any Narfable Clauses. I'd be much happier if this were changed.
PPE: I see you already fixed that, Crunkus.
Yes indeed I did. Do you approve of the narfing choices?
-----Pagane wrote:In Conclusion: I really look forward to seeing how this dynamic plays out!
I'm glad! That was definitely what I was going for.Pagane wrote:My absolute favorite bit is the Dark Seduction, giving brand new players a grand entrance, a large boost in points, and a fast track to becoming a Darth.
I discussed this with Ugluk a bit privately, and he mentioned we should really have a corrupting influence mechanic in there. I thought it was an amazing idea, and it combined with my love of giving new players incentive to join the game and active players incentive to go out and recruit.Pagane wrote:I also really enjoy the different dynamics for Jedi and Sith: the Jedi are more balanced, and their control of AYE votes and possession of Things is incredibly powerful, while the Sith are more offensively based, and their powers grow enormously once a Dark Lord has risen.
Crunkus wrote:Good points.
I could add a clause that any transfer of midi-chlorians from player to player must be approved by the person receiving the midi-chlorians. I could build a mechanism for that. That way the transfers would at least need to be consensual. Alliances but not offensive give-away attacks using midi-chlorian transfers. How does that sound?
I could also limit the amount of midi-chlorian transfers per turn. Any interest in that?
connect4 wrote:Crunkus wrote:Good points.
I could add a clause that any transfer of midi-chlorians from player to player must be approved by the person receiving the midi-chlorians. I could build a mechanism for that. That way the transfers would at least need to be consensual. Alliances but not offensive give-away attacks using midi-chlorian transfers. How does that sound?
I could also limit the amount of midi-chlorian transfers per turn. Any interest in that?
Limit per turn is already built in in 307 (2 per turn but narfable).
I don't know if you need to build in a transfer mechanism. According to the current rules, only Jedi can give their midi-chlorians away. Think of it as fighting the Dark Side when they try to do so, if they transfer it to a Sith. If you want the power of a Sith, you'd better be prepared to fight all sorts of Jedi. Since transfers require positive currency, the Sith can't use it.
Another unofficial weapon in the battle against evil.
Crunkus wrote:In lots of areas I tried to instill into the mechanics of things incentives and structure that encourages cooperation among Jedi and competition and greater freedom among the Sith. That was part of that. What do you think?
Crunkus wrote: Yeah, I wanted to have something in there that registered with the idea of bodily corruption of the Sith. I encourage players to detail their bodily degredations for flavour.
Crunkus wrote:Do you approve of the narfing choices?
Pagane wrote:Dark Seduction:
Nowhere does it say that Nomic posts cannot be edited. Can a Dark Lord convince a new player who DIDN'T fulfill the Dark Seduction criteria in his initial post to go back and edit his first post to get the Dark Seduction benefits?
I'd recommend either explicitly banning this or allowing incoming players to post their submission to the Dark Lord in any post before the voting is closed on the proposal in which they enter the game.
V. The Force and Fizzing
- No Fizzing.
- If a post was edited that contained a size, colour, html code, or in its own line sensitive game concept activation/initiation type content (hereafter to be referred to as command content) that is referenced in this rule, or by any Thing or property of a Thing defined in this rule, or by and Thing created as a result of a clause in this rule, then any command content in that post is to be ignored. Players in Nomic 5 voting AYE to this proposal or making use of any game concept that is derived in part from this rule are honour-bound in a way as outside Nomic as it is possible to be stipulated within the bounds of Nomic to not purposely abuse this mechanic to advantage in order to have inconvenient command content nullified. In short, the act of post-submit revision to manipulate this rule's and this rule's derivative command content is rendered illegal and otherwise unsavory by this clause. Accidental post-submit revision without such intent will have the same ignoring of command content effect unless the turn is complete. Future rules may simply give their rule a clause which states simply: No fizzing, and it will be understood as a game concept to refer to this same prohibition.
Pagane wrote:I'm tempted to try to become the Dark Lord just so I can scour the forums for Nomic recruits with promises of power and glory.
a post ... that contain{s} a size, colour, html code, or in its own line sensitive game concept activation/initiation type content (hereafter to be referred to as command content) that is referenced in this rule
Pagane wrote:I think the crucial bit is the fact that CC is defined first.a post ... that contain{s} a size, colour, html code, or in its own line sensitive game concept activation/initiation type content (hereafter to be referred to as command content) that is referenced in this rule
You're saying "the command content referenced in this rule," which seems to say that command content doesn't HAVE to reference this rule, which would mean ANY post with size/color/html code or own-line-game-concept etc contains command content.
That would also mean that that command content(proposal votes), not having originated(that might be a better word than 'referenced') in this rule, wouldn't be subject to the 'no fizzing' clause.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest