Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jimmmmm]

As you're changing 307, you could specify all initial attributes of new players. The only other thing I can think of is that they receive N$1000. But I think it'd be good to include everything that happens when a new player joins in the one rule. You could repeal 318 then.

FYI, I don't think I'm going to do this since we might add more attributes later. I think it's better if each rule introducing an attribute explains what happens to a player who joins/leaves & rejoins.

Fair enough.

[Voltaire]

Draft 3.0

tl:dr wtf is Voltaire doing with his turn? I'm tidying up. Because I'm transmuting a rule, this package will require unanimous approval from all voters. But before than can happen, we have to suspend some rules. There are currently 7 votes in favor of suspension - 8 are needed.

What does this draft change since 2.0?

• fixed "This is Rule will be..." typo
• removed (mutable) from the official proposals, so no matter what way we go with listing these it won't be hardcoded into these rules
• created Game Construct rule and removed "can't do this unless in the rules" clause from rules that would be redundant
• deleted the "Note" part of 103
• combines the Color Rule (314) with the new player rule (307)

Draft of Rule Changes 3.0 (explanations are in red italics, changes for 2.0 are in blue, changes for 3.0 are in green)

341: If a rule amends or repeals an existing rule, the rule it amends or repeals will be removed from the ruleset at the same time that the new rule takes effect. The portion of the new rule which refers to the act of repealing or amending the existing rule, (such as, but not limited to, "Amend ### to the following:", "Amend rule ### to say the following.", "Amend rule ### to say:", etc.) will also be removed immediately after the new rule takes effect. !This includes all amendments and repeals that have previously passed, as well as phrases in existing rules that comment on the act of repealing or amending a specific previously-existing rule (such as, but not limited to, "Amend ### to the following:", "Amend rule ### to say the following.", "Amend rule ### to say:", etc.) The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
This rule is completely new. It cleans up the ruleset, makes it way more readable, and lets us only have one list in the OP.

342: Amend rule 307 to read: At any time, a person not playing may post in-thread that they want to join the game.  They must bold their request to be in.  In the same post, they must choose a color which will personally represent them in this game (referred to as "your color", "player's color", etc.). When this happens, after the current turn is over, they are inserted into the player order by being put in before the player whose turn was just finished.  They start with 0 points.

Colors are chosen by posting in thread a color in the format (Red Value, Green Value, Blue Value), where each Color Value is an integer between 0 and 255. So for example, (0, 0, 0) would be black, (255, 0, 0) would be red, (0, 255, 0) would be green, and so on.

White (255,255,255) may not be chosen as a personal color, nor may colors with all Color Values greater than 200. Players are encouraged to choose colors which are as unique and distinct as possible, and may not choose colors which are too similar to white or previously chosen colors. Whether the color is distinct enough may be settled by judgment if necessary. !This Rule will be numbered 307. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

*mail-mi and EFHW may choose a color at any time. They must choose a color prior to their next turn ending or they will lose N$100. The portion of this rule contained between the asterisks will be removed after both mail-mi and EFHW have chosen colors.*
The change here is that players now pick a color when they join. Removes the awkwardness of "after this is passed" and should make things clearer going forward. It explicitly makes mail-mi and EFHW pick colors (in what I think is a reasonable way) since they're stuck in the middle, but that part will repeal itself once it is done. Also note that it will remain Rule 307 because of fancy shenanigans I'm quite proud of (as will every other change below).

343: Amend rule 325 to read: The active player may make a motion to suspend any number of rules during their turn.  This must be done at the same time as the presentation of the draft proposal(s), and the rules to be suspended must be explicitly named.  Voting on the motion begins immediately, and players must post their votes in the thread, in the format [Yes|No] on Motion to Suspend. The motion passes if two-thirds of the players vote yes, and immediately fails if one-third of the players vote no.  If, after 60 hours, the motion has not passed or failed, players who have not voted are considered not eligible voters on this motion.

If the motion passes, all players (including Judges) must treat the game as though those rules are not in effect, during that turn only, for all purposes including decisions regarding whether a proposal is valid, or whether a move is legal.

If the motion fails, that player may not make another motion to suspend rules during this turn.  Any further drafts of that player's proposal must contain some portion of the original proposal.  If no portion of the original proposal can be retained without suspending the rules, all players are eligible to end the current player's turn; this clause overrides rule 332.

Both mutable and immutable rules may be suspended in this manner, but this rule cannot be suspended by itself. !This Rule will be numbered 325. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
I removed a reference to a non-existent rule (323) contained in this rule and fixed it to the right rule number (332). I considered removing the reference completely, but there's been talk of inverting the numbering structure in which case we will still want this phrasing (even though it's redundant right now). More importantly, I added language making everyone eligible to end the turn of a player who cannot retain some element of their draft proposal, which was previously missing.

344: Amend rule 332 to read: After a player ends a turn, players have 24 hours to invoke Judgement on the issue whether the player ending the turn was eligible to do so. If play continues after the action(s) being Judged occurred, and the Judgement overturns the action(s) taken, play resets to the gamestate immediately prior to the overturned action(s). Otherwise, play will continue from the current gamestate. !This Rule will be numbered 332. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
I changed "After a player ended a turn" to "After a player ends a turn", which I believe is more correct.

345: Amend rule 337 to read: When a player reaches 100 points, they win. When a player wins, they add one Legacy Point (LP) to their Legacy Point total and sets their points to 0. When a player joins the game, they have 0 LPs. !This Rule will be numbered 337. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
I cleaned up the phrasing.

346: Amend rule 340 to read: If the current player has a unit directly or diagonally adjacent to another player's unit, the active player may spend one IP to gain two points and the owner of the adjacent unit will gain one point. This process is known as "Proximity". Players may not use one of their own units more than once a turn to earn points via Proximity.  Units may not earn points through Proximity during the turn they are created.

To earn these points, a player must post in thread the following bolded command: Proximity between ## and %%, where ## is the name of the tile their unit is on and %% is the name of the tile the other player's unit is on. !This Rule will be numbered 340. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
Fixed the fact that the bold command wasn't actually in bold, and named the system as per Grujah's suggestion. I'm open to different names.

347: Transmute rule 103 from immutable to mutable.

348: Amend rule 103 to read: A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; or (2) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.

!This Rule will be numbered 103. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
Removing part 2 and renaming part 3 to part 2 as a result (see discussion between me and Jimmmmm)

349: Transmute rule 103 from mutable to immutable.
I think this is a better way to do it (adding the third rule to get it back to immutable status)

350: Game constructs may not be changed unless explicitly permitted in the rules. A game construct is any piece, point, component, flavor, or related item present in the game. Examples include, but are not limited to, points, Legacy Points, Nomic dollars, units, color, etc.
Yes, this is a bit vague (in a good way I think), but I think we're all responsible and can handle it. Disputes can be resolved by Judgement, which is a feature not a bug. I think 99% of the time we'll all completely agree on what is a construct. If this ever refers to a component that no longer exists, well...I think the rule needs examples, so oh well.

351: Amend Rule 317 to read: The official currency of f.ds Nomic shall be the Nomic Dollar. The abbreviation for Nomic Dollars shall be N$.

Each player shall have a personal quantity of Nomic Dollars, which shall be listed in the opening post. !This Rule will be numbered 317. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
deleted "only in the rules" clause

352: Amend Rule 335 to read: At the beginning of his or her turn, each player gains four Initiative Points (abbreviated IPs). These IPs may be spent during his or her turn to affect the gamestate in various ways. Spending an IP causes a player's quantity of IPs to be reduced by one, and a player may not spend IPs if it would bring his or her quantity of IPs to less than zero. A player's quantity of IPs may not be changed unless it is explicitly allowed by a rule. The player does not need to spend all of his or her IPs, or any of them if he or she so chooses. If a player attempts to spend IPs in a way which is judged to be against the rules, that player's attempted actions will not succeed, but he will not lose the IPs he attempted to spend in this way.

At the end of each player's turn, his or her quantity of IPs is set to zero, such that IPs may not be saved for future turns.

If he or she has no Units on the World Map, a player may spend one IP to create a Unit of his or her allegiance on any World Map tile that does not already contain a Unit.

To create a Unit in this way, post in thread the following bolded command: Create ##, where ## is the name of the tile where the Unit will be created.

A player may spend one IP to move a Unit of his or her allegiance to a tile which is directly adjacent or diagonally adjacent to its current position. Multiple IPs may be spent in this way each turn, and a Unit may occupy the same tile multiple times in one turn. A player may not attempt to move a Unit to an invalid tile, or to a tile which already contains a Unit.

To move a Unit in this way, post in thread the following bolded command: Move ## to %%, where ## is the name of the tile where the Unit is positioned, and %% is the name of the tile to which the Unit is moving. !This Rule will be numbered 335. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!
deleted "only in the rules" clause

353: Repeal rule 314.
The color rule moves to 307.

The biggest piece of feedback I need is on the Game Construct rule. Once that's sorted, or nobody speaks up, I'm proposing this so I don't hog up the game any longer (assuming I have the 1 more vote needed to suspend the rules).

[florrat]

Good luck in getting all votes. You're doing some very nice administrative work.

Comments:
-I like the idea to remove unnecessary clutter from the rules, the "Amend/Repeal"-clauses. Don't you also want to remove "Transmute"-causes? As it currently is rules 347 and 349 will stay in the rules list, which is kinda ugly.
-Just an idea (but probably it's not a good idea to make your turn even bigger): amend rule 108 to say that amendments/transmutations of rules retain the number of the previous rule.

Yes on Motion to Suspend.

[Voltaire]

Good catch on the transmuting stuff, florrat. I'll fix that.

Motion to suspend the rules passed, so I'll work on polishing the final draft.

Also, I do like your idea to change 108 so that amendments & transmutations retain rule numbers. I won't do it now, though.

[Voltaire]

Alright, it's time. The only changes since the last version are fixing it so transmutations also delete themselves (to match amendments and repeals), and I added wording to the 103 rules so that they keep the 103 number (an oversight on my part previously). I tweaked the wording to the Game Construct rule (added "A change is the addition, deletion, or alteration of a game construct." because "change" was not previously defined).

Note that I don't need the vote of every person playing for this to pass, but I do need everyone who votes to vote "yes" (because I'm transmuting). If you don't like the Game Construct rule (the only part I can honestly see being controversial), then I encourage you to vote "yes" anyway and lobby for an improvement later on.

Final Rule Proposals

341: If a rule amends, repeals, or transmutes an existing rule, the rule it amends, repeals, or transmutes will be removed from the rules at the same time that the new rule takes effect. The portion of the new rule which refers to the act of amending, repealing, or transmuting the existing rule, (such as, but not limited to, "Amend ### to the following:", "Repeal rule ###", "Transmute rule", etc.) will also be removed immediately after the new rule takes effect. !This includes all amendments, repeals, and transmutations that have previously passed, as well as phrases in existing rules that comment on the act of repealing, amending, transmuting a specific previously-existing rule (such as, but not limited to, "Amend ### to the following:", "Repeal rule ###", "Transmute rule ###", etc.) The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

342: Amend rule 307 to read: At any time, a person not playing may post in-thread that they want to join the game.  They must bold their request to be in.  In the same post, they must choose a color which will personally represent them in this game (referred to as "your color", "player's color", etc.). When this happens, after the current turn is over, they are inserted into the player order by being put in before the player whose turn was just finished.  They start with 0 points.

Colors are chosen by posting in thread a color in the format (Red Value, Green Value, Blue Value), where each Color Value is an integer between 0 and 255. So for example, (0, 0, 0) would be black, (255, 0, 0) would be red, (0, 255, 0) would be green, and so on.

White (255,255,255) may not be chosen as a personal color, nor may colors with all Color Values greater than 200. Players are encouraged to choose colors which are as unique and distinct as possible, and may not choose colors which are too similar to white or previously chosen colors. Whether the color is distinct enough may be settled by judgment if necessary. !This Rule will be numbered 307. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

*mail-mi and EFHW may choose a color at any time. They must choose a color prior to their next turn ending or they will lose N$100. The portion of this rule contained between the asterisks will be removed after both mail-mi and EFHW have chosen colors.*

343: Amend rule 325 to read: The active player may make a motion to suspend any number of rules during their turn.  This must be done at the same time as the presentation of the draft proposal(s), and the rules to be suspended must be explicitly named.  Voting on the motion begins immediately, and players must post their votes in the thread, in the format [Yes|No] on Motion to Suspend. The motion passes if two-thirds of the players vote yes, and immediately fails if one-third of the players vote no.  If, after 60 hours, the motion has not passed or failed, players who have not voted are considered not eligible voters on this motion.

If the motion passes, all players (including Judges) must treat the game as though those rules are not in effect, during that turn only, for all purposes including decisions regarding whether a proposal is valid, or whether a move is legal.

If the motion fails, that player may not make another motion to suspend rules during this turn.  Any further drafts of that player's proposal must contain some portion of the original proposal.  If no portion of the original proposal can be retained without suspending the rules, all players are eligible to end the current player's turn; this clause overrides rule 332.

Both mutable and immutable rules may be suspended in this manner, but this rule cannot be suspended by itself. !This Rule will be numbered 325. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

344: Amend rule 332 to read: After a player ends a turn, players have 24 hours to invoke Judgement on the issue whether the player ending the turn was eligible to do so. If play continues after the action(s) being Judged occurred, and the Judgement overturns the action(s) taken, play resets to the gamestate immediately prior to the overturned action(s). Otherwise, play will continue from the current gamestate. !This Rule will be numbered 332. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

345: Amend rule 337 to read: When a player reaches 100 points, they win. When a player wins, they add one Legacy Point (LP) to their Legacy Point total and sets their points to 0. When a player joins the game, they have 0 LPs. !This Rule will be numbered 337. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

346: Amend rule 340 to read: If the current player has a unit directly or diagonally adjacent to another player's unit, the active player may spend one IP to gain two points and the owner of the adjacent unit will gain one point. This process is known as "Proximity". Players may not use one of their own units more than once a turn to earn points via Proximity.  Units may not earn points through Proximity during the turn they are created.

To earn these points, a player must post in thread the following bolded command: Proximity between ## and %%, where ## is the name of the tile their unit is on and %% is the name of the tile the other player's unit is on. !This Rule will be numbered 340. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

347: Transmute rule 103 from immutable to mutable. !This Rule will be numbered 103. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

348: Amend rule 103 to read: A rule-change is any of the following: (1) the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule; or (2) the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule or vice versa.

!This Rule will be numbered 103. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

349: Transmute rule 103 from mutable to immutable. !This Rule will be numbered 103. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

350: Game constructs may not be changed unless explicitly permitted in the rules. A game construct is any piece, point, component, flavor, or related item present in the game. Examples include, but are not limited to, points, Legacy Points, Nomic dollars, units, color, etc. A change is the addition, deletion, or alteration of a game construct.

351: Amend Rule 317 to read: The official currency of f.ds Nomic shall be the Nomic Dollar. The abbreviation for Nomic Dollars shall be N$.

Each player shall have a personal quantity of Nomic Dollars, which shall be listed in the opening post. !This Rule will be numbered 317. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

352: Amend Rule 335 to read: At the beginning of his or her turn, each player gains four Initiative Points (abbreviated IPs). These IPs may be spent during his or her turn to affect the gamestate in various ways. Spending an IP causes a player's quantity of IPs to be reduced by one, and a player may not spend IPs if it would bring his or her quantity of IPs to less than zero. A player's quantity of IPs may not be changed unless it is explicitly allowed by a rule. The player does not need to spend all of his or her IPs, or any of them if he or she so chooses. If a player attempts to spend IPs in a way which is judged to be against the rules, that player's attempted actions will not succeed, but he will not lose the IPs he attempted to spend in this way.

At the end of each player's turn, his or her quantity of IPs is set to zero, such that IPs may not be saved for future turns.

If he or she has no Units on the World Map, a player may spend one IP to create a Unit of his or her allegiance on any World Map tile that does not already contain a Unit.

To create a Unit in this way, post in thread the following bolded command: Create ##, where ## is the name of the tile where the Unit will be created.

A player may spend one IP to move a Unit of his or her allegiance to a tile which is directly adjacent or diagonally adjacent to its current position. Multiple IPs may be spent in this way each turn, and a Unit may occupy the same tile multiple times in one turn. A player may not attempt to move a Unit to an invalid tile, or to a tile which already contains a Unit.

To move a Unit in this way, post in thread the following bolded command: Move ## to %%, where ## is the name of the tile where the Unit is positioned, and %% is the name of the tile to which the Unit is moving. !This Rule will be numbered 335. The portion of this rule contained between the exclamation points will be removed after this rule has gone into effect.!

353: Repeal rule 314.

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[Jack Rudd]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[WalrusMcFishSr]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[liopoil]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[Jimmmmm]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[sudgy]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[florrat]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[EFHW]

Vote: Yes on rules 341-353

[scott_pilgrim]

Vote: Yes on Rules 341-353

[Voltaire]

Rule passes 9-0! I declare it to be heron's turn.

I am charged N$10 for my unit.

It's gonna take me a bit to update the OP with these changes, just a heads up.

[heron]

I probably ought to make some way to earn money then.
I was thinking that maybe money could be earned if your unit is far away from other units, to balance the fact that points are earned by having your unit next to other units.
Any thoughts?

[Voltaire]

OK, OP should be up-to-date. Let me know if you spot any errors. I saved a copy before I made any changes just in case.

[Jimmmmm]

Hmm okay. I don't like having 3 sections in the OP. I don't see a reason to have a distinction between rules that were there initially and rules we've brought in. Doesn't really matter I guess.

[Voltaire]

Hmm okay. I don't like having 3 sections in the OP. I don't see a reason to have a distinction between rules that were there initially and rules we've brought in. Doesn't really matter I guess.

That's...been there since we started the game. I'd consider them part of the initial rules personally (that's debatable).

[Jimmmmm]

Hmm okay. I don't like having 3 sections in the OP. I don't see a reason to have a distinction between rules that were there initially and rules we've brought in. Doesn't really matter I guess.

That's...been there since we started the game. I'd consider them part of the initial rules personally (that's debatable).

Yeah I know, I guess I was under the impression you were changing it for this vote. All currently immutable rules are from the initial set, right, with the sort of exception of 103. If we were to bring in a new rule and make it immutable, I guess it would be under Rule Changes and Amendments right, but with (immutable) after the number? I think it would be better to have all immutable rules together and all mutable rules together.

[Voltaire]

Yeah I know, I guess I was under the impression you were changing it for this vote. All currently immutable rules are from the initial set, right, with the sort of exception of 103. If we were to bring in a new rule and make it immutable, I guess it would be under Rule Changes and Amendments right, but with (immutable) after the number? I think it would be better to have all immutable rules together and all mutable rules together.

We could do two things:

1. Put it last in the immutable section (messes up the rules being physically presented in chronological order)
2. Put it last in the Changes section (messes up all immutable rules being physically together)

So we've got to chose "bad" one thing no matter what.

[Jimmmmm]

My preference is a list of immutable rules in chronological order, followed by a list of mutable rules in chronological order.

[Voltaire]

My preference is a list of immutable rules in chronological order, followed by a list of mutable rules in chronological order.

Well, that's what we have right now. If people feel strongly about it, they should make the categories (un)official if it's going to matter.

[florrat]

This might be a stupid remark, but why was the voting over? We needed a unanimous majority because we did a transmution? So the voting should only end when either all players have votes Yes, when some player voted No or when 60 have passed...

I think we should be still in the voting state of Voltaire (but I see no need to change the OP back until someone actually votes no).

Okay, the current rules aren't very clear about this. Rule 334 says that the voting should end, but rule 334 assumes only a simple majority is required, and that is overrule by rule 109 (although not very explicitly). So one could argue we now have a majority of everyone who voted so far, but I think it would be better to let the voting continue until either 60 hours have passed, everyone votes Yes, or someone votes No

[Voltaire]

Not a stupid remark, being pedantic about the rules is sort of the point!

109 only refers to "eligible voters". 334 says "Once over half of the players have voted yes, the proposal is passed." That resolves the vote, so everyone else becomes ineligible. So it attained a unanimous vote and meets 109.

It's not super-clear and it took me a bit to figure it out, and it's not really "working as designed" yet, but I think that's what has happened.

[florrat]

I'm not sure whether I agree. Let's continue (and increase) the pedantry.

(1) The intention of the rules (especially rule 109) is that everyone should have a chance to vote "No". So when only considering intentions, and not the specific text, I think the voting should continue.

(2) But this wouldn't be Nomic when only considering intentions. What do the rules actually say? Rule 109 says that the vote should be unanimous among the eligible voters. What is an eligible voter? Well, the current ruleset doesn't define it (as I've noted earlier (bottom of the post)). So what does rule 109 actually say? The only two reasonable options to me see (a) nothing, or (b) consider it as if everyone is an eligible voter. I'm inclined to say "(b)", because we're voting all the time, and we're all allowed to vote, so when invoking the definition on eligible, it seems reasonable to call us all eligible voters.
But you may say "Aha! Rule 334 does say explicitly that the  players who didn't vote are not eligible voters. So we do (did?) have a unanimous vote among eligible voters." But rule 334 says this only when 60 hours have been passed. It doesn't say so in this case. So some (presumably) eligible voters have not voted yet, hence I think we're still in the voting state.

(3) I certainly want this vote to pass. But if someone disagrees with the proposal, I'm don't want it to pass in a maybe-not-completely-legal way.