Nomic, Again!

[xinoehp512 he/him]

I will vote yes for PR#19.

@Doomstick, does that cause it to pass?

Edited September 14, 2023 by xinoehp512

[+Doomstick he/him]

1 hour ago, xinoehp512 said:

I will vote yes for PR#19.

@Doomstick, does that cause it to pass?

No, it needs at least 3 votes

[The Wandering Wizard he/him]

I will vote aye to proposals 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, and 19

I propose 20. The rule of Bad luck: This rule allows the shop to sell the black clover card for 10,000 dollar bucks. 

I propose 21. The rule of mystical cards: This rule gives each card a magical power that is bestowed upon the user upon gaining it.

I propose 22. The dragon games: This rule places the Three headed dragon card as the trophy for winning the board game.

Reasoning:

20. The shop has to sell something super valuable at least. And this helps us get the cards into play and viable ways to gain them 

21. What use is owning a card if it doesn't help you in some way in gaining another one

22. Another card enters the playing field

I vote aye to rules 20,21,22

[+Doomstick he/him]

PR#s 7, 8, 12, 14, and 19 pass

I change my vote on PR#4 form Aye to Nay, causing it to be rejected

I vote Aye on PR# 20 and 21 and Nay on 22 (I don't think there should be a way to win the board, also I think that each card should be able to be taken from another player if certain things are done, otherwise once someone has a card, nobody else can win)

MP: I get 4, Xino and Raven get 2

I will exercise my rights under The Constant Action Rule:

23) Farming Simulator: On a player's turn, if their game piece occupies an empty space and they haven't spent MPs this turn, they may spend 2 MPs to construct a farm on that space. At the beginning of a player's turn, they gain 1 dollar buck per farm they own.

[The Wandering Wizard he/him]

37 minutes ago, Doomstick said:

I don't think there should be a way to win the board, also I think that each card should be able to be taken from another player if certain things are done, otherwise once someone has a card, nobody else can win

Fair points on both. And I agree with the card stealing. Even thinking up an item or something else to take them. 

I vote aye to proposal 23

[xinoehp512 he/him]

9 hours ago, The Wandering Wizard said:

I propose 20. The rule of Bad luck: This rule allows the shop to sell the black clover card for 10,000 dollar bucks. 

Aye.

9 hours ago, The Wandering Wizard said:

I propose 21. The rule of mystical cards: This rule gives each card a magical power that is bestowed upon the user upon gaining it.

I agree with the idea, but... this rule doesn't actually do anything as far as I can see.  I will vote nay, but propose an amendment. (Later in the post, for organizational purposes.)

I also can't help but notice that in the spreadsheet it is written as each of the seven cards (as in, trading cards), but the actual text of the rule only mentions cards- so it would technically have effect on the mosquito card.

9 hours ago, The Wandering Wizard said:

I propose 22. The dragon games: This rule places the Three headed dragon card as the trophy for winning the board game.

I will abstain, but I do think that the card should be obtained from the board in a certain way.

8 hours ago, Doomstick said:

23) Farming Simulator: On a player's turn, if their game piece occupies an empty space and they haven't spent MPs this turn, they may spend 2 MPs to construct a farm on that space. At the beginning of a player's turn, they gain 1 dollar buck per farm they own.

Aye. I am of the opinion that the Ace of Spades card should interact with this part of the game.

Now on to the proposals!

I propose PR#24: The Dependency Rule.

When a rule is proposed, it may be declared as "dependent" on another proposal. When a rule passes, all proposals that it depends on automatically pass if they have not already done so (even if they were previously rejected).

This rule gives us that systemic way to propose modifications or extensions to existing proposals without having to worry about "dangling amendments." 

I propose PR#25: The Moderator Rule (amendment).

The text of The Moderator Rule is changed to include the following at the end:

"Executive Decisions cannot in any way alter the text or effect of this rule, nor can they affect any action that would alter either the text/effect of this rule or the process that allows this rule to be altered. Executive Decisions may be overturned by a majority vote of three or more players.

The Moderator may be removed from office with a majority vote of three or more players."

 This is very important because otherwise the Moderator would have no bounds on what they could do.

I propose PR#26: Action Points. (amendment to the Movement Points rule)

Any instance of the words "movement points"/"MP" in the text of any rules or proposals is replaced with the words "action points"/"AP".

Especially with the introduction of the Farming Sim rule, it seems that MP are going to be generalized beyond simply allowing movement; I feel the name should be changed to reflect that.

I propose PR#27: The Trading Card Rule (amendment)

The list of Trading Cards in the Trading Card Rule is changed to the following:

"

Ace of Spades
Two of Wands
Three-Headed Dragon
Black Clover
Ouroboros
Honeycomb
Seven-Pointed Star

"

This way the names are all consistent (no dangling "the"s.)

Now to my proposed changes to PR#21.

I propose PR#28: The Rule of Mystical Cards (amendment to PR#21)

If this rule passes, PR#21 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. 

The text of PR#21 reading "is bestowed upon the user upon gaining it" is replaced by "can be activated by the owner if they are not the Moderator"

This way the power of the cards is actually tied to the cards themselves, so it's not that once you get a card you have its power forever.

I propose PR#29: The Power of the Black Clover.

The power of the Black Clover is as follows: "Tap this card to gain ten action points." Tapped cards cannot be tapped again until they untap. Tapped cards untap at the start of their owner's turn.

I propose PR#30: The Power of the Ace of Spades.

The power of the Ace of Spades is as follows: "On your turn, you may spend 2MP to construct a farm on the space you are currently on."

I propose PR#31: Farming Simulator (amendment to PR#23)

If this rule passes, PR#23 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. 

The text of PR#23 reading "an empty space" is replaced by "a space without a farm on it".

Technically speaking a space that you are on can never be empty, because you are on it; thus no farms could ever be built.

My ideas for more card powers depend on a new set of rules being added to the game.

 

The next few rules are meant as a combat system.

I propose PR#32: The Health Rule.

All players have a health value (HV) and a maximum health value (MHV) that both start at 100. The health value of a player can never be higher than their maximum health value, and it can never be lower than 0. Players may increase their health value by one for each hour that elapses while it is not their turn. A player that falls to 0 health moves to I9. A player at 0 health cannot spend any resources that they have.

I propose PR#33: The Monster Rule.

Monsters are pieces on the game board. Monsters have a health value (HV) and an power value (PV) (if not declared, they are assumed to be 0). If a monster's health is ever at or below 0, it dies and is removed from the board.

Monsters are controlled by the Moderator unless otherwise specified. Whenever a monster attacks a target, it reduces that target's health value (if it has one) by the power of its attack (unless otherwise specified, the power of a monster's attack is equal to its PV). If the target does not have an health value, it is instead removed from the board. Unless otherwise stated, monsters may make one attack on a piece they share a square with on their controller's turn.

I propose PR#34: The Three-Headed Dragon.

(If this rule passes, PR#33 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

The Three-Headed Dragon is a monster that starts on A1 with HV 20 and PV 20.

On their turn, the controller of the Three-Headed Dragon may have it perform up to one of the following actions:

1) Raze: The dragon flies any number of squares horizontally or vertically, making a power 5 attack against any piece occupying a square it moves through.

2) Freeze: The dragon freezes a piece on its square or an adjacent one. A frozen piece cannot move. At the end of a players turn, if their piece is frozen, it becomes unfrozen.

3) Thunderstorm: The dragon creates a thunderstorm on an adjacent tile. Any player piece that starts their turn in or enters a tile with a thunderstorm reduces their health value by 5.

When the dragon is killed, the Three-Headed Dragon card is dropped on the square it was on and may be picked up by any player occupying that square on their turn.

I propose PR#35: The Ouroboros. 

(If this rule passes, PR#33 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

The Ouroboros is a monster that spawns on Q17 with HV 1 and PV 1. If it would ever be removed from the board, the HV and PV values in this rule are both increased by 1, and it instead respawns.

The Ouroboros is controlled by whomever holds the Ouroboros card. The controller of the Ouroboros may spend MP to move the Ouroboros as if it were their own piece.

I propose PR#36: Goblins.

(If this rule passes, PR#33 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

Goblins are monsters with HV 5 and PV 5. Their controller may move them 1 space orthogonally on their turn up to three times. When this rule is passed, goblins will start on the squares F6, F12, L6, and L12.

 

I would also like to suggest that we include the exact text of each rule passed in the "Existing Rules" spreadsheet as it is currently in effect, and hide the amendments rather than hiding the original rules. As it is, I feel that the spreadsheet is not accurately representing the game state as described by the Organizational Rule.

I will spend 2MPs to move to I6.

Edited September 14, 2023 by xinoehp512

[Experience he/him]

Okay, I can be switched back to being active now! Now I just need to catch up on all the proposals...

[+Doomstick he/him]

PR#20 and 23 have passed! Wizard and I gain 2 MP

I vote Aye to PR#s 24-30 and 32.

I vote Nay to PR#31

will take time to consider the others, and I will exercise my rights under The Constant Action Rule:

Quote

37) Farming Simulator (amendment to PR#23): (If this rule passes, PR#23 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already, and PR#31 automatically fails regardless of status) if it has not already.) The text of PR#23 reading "an empty space" is replaced by "a space whose sole resident is the building player's game piece."

I plan to introduce other types of buildings later, and also people shouldn't be able to build farms when there are other players or monsters (if passed) in the same space.

@Experience you should vote for A Better Way To Count, also it is your turn

1 hour ago, xinoehp512 said:

I would also like to suggest that we include the exact text of each rule passed in the "Existing Rules" spreadsheet as it is currently in effect, and hide the amendments rather than hiding the original rules. As it is, I feel that the spreadsheet is not accurately representing the game state as described by the Organizational Rule.

the original rule is hidden because once an amendment is in effect, it gains a new ER#. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Doomstick

[Experience he/him]

I vote Nay for PR#3 & PR#5. Dice + Cards = No.

For the time being I abstain from PR#15. I feel that this system of counting would make things more complex than needed.

I vote Aye for PR#20. Cuz y not.

I vote Aye for PR#21, because magic is fun.

I vote Nay for PR#22, as there shouldn't be ways to win other than winning the entire game.

I will vote Nay from PR#23, as the wording would mean you can never place a farm, as a space your are in is never empty.

I believe the wording for PR#24 needs to be changed to be more clear, as right now I am not sure which proposal has to pass in order for the other to pass. For now, I abstain.

I vote Aye for PR#25-PR#32.

I will abstain for PR#33-PR#36, as I believe it still needs to be fleshed out. I think control of monsters isn't perfectly stated (as some require a player to hold its card but it does not say who starts with said card, or how it would initially be achieved). I also think that the moderator shouldn't be the one to control most of the monsters, should they become a part of the game, as it is likely that the position will be used to target whichever player is currently performing the best.

@Doomstick, is it now my turn? So I can make proposals now? Also, do I need to update the numbers in the sheet for all my ayes and nays? 

 

[xinoehp512 he/him]

1 hour ago, Experience said:

I believe the wording for PR#24 needs to be changed to be more clear, as right now I am not sure which proposal has to pass in order for the other to pass. For now, I abstain.

For an example of how this would work, consider PR#s 34-36 (the monsters). If one of those were to pass and PR#33 did not, the rules would not make a good deal of sense. To put it another way, PR#s 34-36 depend on PR#33. Right now I'm expressing the dependency with the text in parentheses, but that's kind of a hacky solution. If 24 passes, future rules like 34-36 could simply be declared as dependent instead of needing the parentheses text.

To be clear, the rule isn't allowing people to do something they couldn't already do, it just makes it simpler.

1 hour ago, Experience said:

will abstain for PR#33-PR#36, as I believe it still needs to be fleshed out. I think control of monsters isn't perfectly stated (as some require a player to hold its card but it does not say who starts with said card, or how it would initially be achieved). I also think that the moderator shouldn't be the one to control most of the monsters, should they become a part of the game, as it is likely that the position will be used to target whichever player is currently performing the best.

Nobody needs to control the monsters. If no one controls them they'll just sit there until someone does.

If you feel it's not fleshed out enough, you could always add a rule to flesh it out further.

The Moderator can't win the game, so they have no incentive to target any player in particular. They essentially act as the GM.

1 hour ago, Doomstick said:

PR#20 and 23 have passed! Wizard and I gain 2 MP

I vote Aye to PR#s 24-30 and 32.

I vote Nay to PR#31

will take time to consider the others, and I will exercise my rights under The Constant Action Rule:

I plan to introduce other types of buildings later, and also people shouldn't be able to build farms when there are other players or monsters (if passed) in the same space.

@Experience you should vote for A Better Way To Count, also it is your turn

the original rule is hidden because once an amendment is in effect, it gains a new ER#. 

Could you walk me through how the Organization rule causes that to happen? I'm not entirely sure how the text as written would lead to the effects you describe.

[+Doomstick he/him]

some things pass, Xino gains 14 MP, Wizard gains 4

10 hours ago, xinoehp512 said:

Could you walk me through how the Organization rule causes that to happen? I'm not entirely sure how the text as written would lead to the effects you describe.

each accepted proposal gets a new ER#, including amendments, and since the amendment changes the text of a specific rule, it coming into effect is with all that text, the old version is moved to RRA and gets an RRA number.

@Experience, yes it is your turn, you should propose away.

[Experience he/him]

Okay, here we go.

I Propose PR#38: Bloodsucking

The Mosquito card is available in The Store of Unimaginable Wealth for 100 dollar bucks. 

I Propose PR#39: Mosquito Bounty (Amendment to ER#19)

The following text is added to ER#19: A player may give this card to another player on their turn, but doing so forfeits all other actions (other than making proposals and voting for them).

I Propose PR#40: Bug Spray Card

There is a new card named Bug Spray. There are three (3) of these cards available in the Store of Unimaginable Wealth for 150 dollar bucks. The following effects any player that holds a Bug Spray Card: You cannot be given the Mosquito Card. You cannot obtain a Bug Spray Card if you currently hold the Mosquito Card. If you would obtain the Bug Spray Card and you currently hold the Mosquito Card, the Bug Spray Card is dropped on the Game Board in the space the player is currently occupying.

I Propose PR#41: Currency (Amendment to ER#7)

The phrase 'dollar bucks' is replaced with 'coins'. All current instances where the phrase 'dollar bucks' is used are replaced by the word 'coins'.

I Propose PR#42: DeModeration (Amendment to ER#22)

The following text is added to ER#22: The Moderator may choose to step down as the Moderator on their turn. If the Moderator steps down, they cannot win the game until their next turn.

I Propose PR#43: [Clarifications]

Clarifications can be given in proposals using the '[' and ']' or the '(' and ')' symbols. After this proposal, any words put in between these two symbols are not included in the final proposal.

I Propose PR#44: Turn Counter

There is a Turn Counter added to Game State Sheet. When you have completed your turn, you switch the name on the Turn Counter to the following player.

I Propose PR#45: Bounty Board

At any time, a player may add a Bounty to the Bounty Board. A Bounty includes a Title, a Description (no more than 200 characters), and a Price. At any time, a player may accept an existing Bounty. Only one player can accept any given Bounty at one time. Each player can only accept up to three Bounties at one time. When a player accepts a Bounty, they must mark which Player's Turn it is. A player has until that Player's Next Turn to complete the Bounty. If the Bounty is not completed within this time constraint, it is returned to the Bounty Board. A player may not accept a Bounty that they previously accepted. When making Bounties, players cannot make duplicated Bounties. When determining the price of any Bounty, the player making the Bounty must currently have the  resources stated. When a Bounty is completed by a player, the resources named in the Price of the Bounty are immediately transferred from the player who placed the Bounty on the Bounty Board to the player who completed the Bounty. If the player who placed the Bounty on the Bounty Board does not currently have all the resources necessary to pay the Price of the Bounty, the must forfeit all of their cards to the player who completed the Bounty. If the player who placed the Bounty on the Bounty Board has no cards at this time, their next turn is skipped.

I Propose PR#46: Minimum Wage

A player may choose to skip their turn (take no actions, and no passive actions are activated) and receive 10 dollar bucks.

I Propose PR#47: Gems

Gems are another type of currency, though not accepted in the Store of Unimaginable Wealth. 

I Propose PR#48: Grandfather's Fortune

(If this rule passes, PR#47 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

Any time a player joins the game for the first time they receive 5 gems. All players already in the game when this Proposal passes immediately receive 7 gems.

I Propose PR#49: Round Counter

There is a Round Counter added to the Game State sheet. Every time the last player in the list of players finishes their turn, the Round Counter is increased by 1.

I Propose PR#50: The Power of the Beehive 

(If this rule passes, PR#49 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

The power for the Beehive Card is as follows: "On your turn, you have access to X dollar bucks, where X is equal to the Round Counter. You cannot save dollar bucks earned from the Beehive for later rounds."

 

 

Okay I think that's good for now. Time to add them to the sheet.

EDIT: I vote aye for all of these proposals.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Experience

[xinoehp512 he/him]

12 hours ago, Doomstick said:

since the amendment changes the text of a specific rule, it coming into effect is with all that text

Why does an amendment gain the text of the rule it amends?

12 hours ago, Doomstick said:

the old version is moved to RRA and gets an RRA number.

Why does an amendment cause the rule it amends to become repealed?

What happens if an amendment modifies multiple rules (such as with PR#41)?

On 9/14/2023 at 0:59 PM, Doomstick said:

37) Farming Simulator (amendment to PR#23): (If this rule passes, PR#23 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already, and PR#31 automatically fails regardless of status) if it has not already.) The text of PR#23 reading "an empty space" is replaced by "a space whose sole resident is the building player's game piece."

Fair enough. I vote yea. I will note that I don't think that the failure clause is technically necessary, as if PR#31 were to pass after PR#37, the words "an empty space" would no longer exist in the text of PR#23, and so nothing would happen.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#38: Bloodsucking

The Mosquito card is available in The Store of Unimaginable Wealth for 100 dollar bucks. 

Yea!

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#39: Mosquito Bounty (Amendment to ER#19)

The following text is added to ER#19: A player may give this card to another player on their turn, but doing so forfeits all other actions (other than making proposals and voting for them).

I will vote yea, although I think that a later amendment should reword "doing so forfeits all other actions (other than making proposals and voting for them)" to "after they do so they may not take actions that require spending resources for the rest of their turn." That way it catches any action that requires spending AP or dollar bucks (and potentially gems, or any other resource), but it for sure will not interfere with actions that shouldn't be interfered with, such as ending a turn. It also brings it in line with the penalty for falling to 0 HP. (A reminder to myself to propose an amendment to The Health Rule to add "At the end of their turn," to the beginning of the sentence "Players may increase their health value by one for each hour that elapses while it is not their turn." and change "spend any resources that they have" to "take actions that require spending resources" if no one else does.)

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#40: Bug Spray Card

There is a new card named Bug Spray. There are three (3) of these cards available in the Store of Unimaginable Wealth for 150 dollar bucks. The following effects any player that holds a Bug Spray Card: You cannot be given the Mosquito Card. You cannot obtain a Bug Spray Card if you currently hold the Mosquito Card. If you would obtain the Bug Spray Card and you currently hold the Mosquito Card, the Bug Spray Card is dropped on the Game Board in the space the player is currently occupying.

Yea. I will note that technically speaking the player and the player piece are two separate things, and that player pieces might not always be on the board. Perhaps we should amend The Gameboard Rule so that a player piece and the player it belongs to may be referred to interchangeably.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#41: Currency (Amendment to ER#7)

The phrase 'dollar bucks' is replaced with 'coins'. All current instances where the phrase 'dollar bucks' is used are replaced by the word 'coins'.

Nay. (Dollar Bucks forever)!

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#42: DeModeration (Amendment to ER#22)

The following text is added to ER#22: The Moderator may choose to step down as the Moderator on their turn. If the Moderator steps down, they cannot win the game until their next turn.

Abstain. I will note that even without this rule, the Moderator can quit being the Moderator by leaving the game and re-joining, at the cost of all player data.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#43: [Clarifications]

Clarifications can be given in proposals using the '[' and ']' or the '(' and ')' symbols. After this proposal, any words put in between these two symbols are not included in the final proposal.

Nay. I think clarifications should stay in the text of the rule.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#44: Turn Counter

There is a Turn Counter added to Game State Sheet. When you have completed your turn, you switch the name on the Turn Counter to the following player.

Nay. I agree that we need to create a rule to standardize turns, but I don't think that it should depend on the Game State Sheet.

Instead, I will propose PR#51: The Turn End Rule.

A player's turn ends only when they declare that it has ended.

Yea to PR#s 45-47.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#48: Grandfather's Fortune

(If this rule passes, PR#47 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

Any time a player joins the game for the first time they receive 5 gems. All players already in the game when this Proposal passes immediately receive 7 gems.

Yea. Technically speaking, any time a player joins it will be for the first time, because if a player leaves the game essentially forgets they ever existed.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#49: Round Counter

There is a Round Counter added to the Game State sheet. Every time the last player in the list of players finishes their turn, the Round Counter is increased by 1.

Nay, partially for the same reasons as PR#44, (The Round Counter shouldn't reference the Game Sheet at all) and partially because I think the Round Counter should increase when the first player in line takes their turn (and should be set to however many rounds have already elapsed.)

2 hours ago, Experience said:

I Propose PR#50: The Power of the Beehive 

(If this rule passes, PR#49 automatically passes (regardless of status) if it has not already. The text of these parentheses is removed after it has taken effect.)

The power for the Beehive Card is as follows: "On your turn, you have access to X dollar bucks, where X is equal to the Round Counter. You cannot save dollar bucks earned from the Beehive for later rounds."

Uh... there is no Beehive card. It got renamed to Honeycomb.

2 hours ago, Experience said:

EDIT: I vote aye for all of these proposals.

Not necessary, The Easy Aye Rule has passed!

 

I will also vote myself as Moderator.

Edited September 15, 2023 by xinoehp512

[Ravenclawjedi42]

So it’s my turn now. And once again I was gone for too long. To start I vote aye on 24, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, and 48, vote nay on 22, 40, 41, 49, and 51, and abstain on 23, 31, 37, 42, and 50. 
I propose:

The Chasmfiend Rule: (dependent one the monster rule) there is a monster known as the Chasmfiend that starts on C8 and can only attack if someone attacks it. It has HV 42 and PV 50. At one point in the game, it can bring it’s HV to equal its PV. When killed, the player who killed it gains a Wild Card, which can be given to the Store of Unimaginable Wealth in exchange for any other card, which will then sell it for 1,000,000,000 Dollar bucks.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Ravenclawjedi42

[+Doomstick he/him]

Aye: 42, 51, Xino for moderator

Nay:

Spoiler

34-36: I think the ideas are good, but need to be reworked a bit and some holes patched and I can't do that now.

39-I think that if someone has all the TCs and the mosquito, if they can just give it away, then the mosquito has no effect, there should be some necessary action/quest to giving it away.

40- similar reasoning to 39

41 - dollar bucks!

43- sometimes rules have brackets or parentheses that are not clarifications

44,49

50- one: this power is pretty weak (maybe the beehive could give AP? ("busy bee")), two: there is no longer a round counter proposal, and no text saying this rule automatically fails if that one does.

I don't have time to do resolution stuff, can someone else?

the big one:

Spoiler

52) Friendly Fire: On 
Five Battle Cards are created and placed in the Store for 50 dollar bucks each, there are unlimited copies of each of these cards available in the store.
The Battle Cards are as follows:
Bouquet (1)
Handwritten Card (2)
Wad of Cash (3)
Token of Eternal Friendship (4)
Ring (5)
When a player moves their game piece to a space containing another player’s piece or an improvement (farm, etc.) they have built, they may initiate a battle with a player who has a game piece or an improvement on that space if they own at least one Battle Card. Multiple battles may be initiated by the same move, but the attacker must decide which order for the battles to proceed in. The Moderator cannot attack or be attacked.
When a battle is started, each player involved privately messages the Moderator (or an agreed upon third party, if there is no Moderator) one Battle Card that they own that they wish to give to the other player involved in the battle, then the Moderator (or third party) reveals each person’s card. Each card is majorly victorious over the card with number one greater than it and minorly victorious over the card with number 2 greater than it (e.g. the Bouquet is majorly victorious over the Handwritten Card and minorly victorious over the Wad of Cash). The battle is then resolved.
After the battle is resolved, the card the victor played is given to the defeated player and vice versa

During battle resolution,
If a player is minorly victorious, the they may do one of the following:

• Move the defeated player one space orthogonally.
• Gain control of one of the defeated player’s farms, provided it is on the space the victor’s game piece is on.
• Take 25 Dollar Bucks from the defeated player, if the defeated player has less than 25 Dollar Bucks, no Dollar Bucks can be taken.
• Take one AP from the defeated player, if they have one.

If a player is majorly victorious, they may do one of the following:

• Choose two effects from the options for minor victories (as if they won two minor victories against the same player in a row).
• Influence the vote of the defeated player by turning an Aye or Nay on one proposal into an Abstain, or vice versa, possibly causing a proposal to be accepted or rejected. (A lack of a vote counts as an Abstain for this action.) Votes influenced this way cannot be changed by the voting player without the victor agreeing to the change.
• Give the Mosquito card to the defeated player, if they own it.

I was thinking a rock paper scissors pvp would be nice because it won't disadvantage new players too much, also I think it's funny for the battle to be giving gifts to the other player and if your gift is better, then they owe you a favor to be cashed out immediately.

more proposals!

Spoiler

53) Castles
(Dependent on PR#52)
A player may build a castle on a space that contains their game piece and nothing else by spending 12 APs, provided they have not spent any AP this turn. 
If a non-castle improvement or game piece is within 1 space (including diagonals) of a friendly (owned by the same player) castle or within 2 spaces (including diagonals) of two friendly castles, it cannot be involved in a battle that its player does not initiate.
If a castle is attacked, its player may play two Battle Cards, choosing one to be counted for the battle after all cards are revealed, keeping the card they do not choose. If the castle’s player is defeated when it is attacked, the castle is destroyed, and and major or minor victory actions are skipped.

54) Roads
(Dependent on PR#53)
If two friendly castles can be connected by a vertical or horizontal straight line, any friendly game piece’s can move twice as far per AP spent when following that line, as long as the piece stays between the castles.

55) Portals

(Dependent on PR#53)

A player may build a portal on a space occupied by a friendly castle and their game piece. A player whose game piece occupies a space with a friendly portal may move and perform actions as if it were in any space with a friendly portal.

56) The Cosmetics Industry

A piece of text in a rule that causes a change in terminology without adding new text is considered to be a cosmetic amendment. A cosmetic amendment can be its own proposal or part of another.

57) The Fair Compensation Act

(dependent on PR#56)

If a proposal is passed via a proposal dependent to its passage, the number of AP gained by the proposer is reduced by 1, if both were proposed by the same player, the maximum AP gained by the proposer for those rules’ passage is 2.
Proposals that are only cosmetic amendments do not provide AP to the proposer when they pass.

58) The So People Can Do Stuff On Their Turn Rule
If a player would have less than 2 AP at the beginning of their turn, they instead have 2 AP.

59) Punishment for Rule Breaking
If a player breaks a rule, they must choose between being losing 5% of their dollar bucks (rounded up), not being able to spend action points on their next turn, or returning one of their Trading Cards to its default position.

60) Neutrality Act
No player may build on I9 on the game board, or any space orthogonally or diagonally adjacent to it.

61) We’re Gonna Need a Bigger Board
The game board is mapped to the center of a 27x27 grid, with I9 being mapped to N14 and all other board features the same distance and direction from N14 as they were from I9 on the previous board. Any rule or proposal made before the passage time of this rule referencing I9 instead references N14. Any rule or proposal referencing a space that would be a corner on the original board instead references the corresponding corner on the new board. (the last two sentences are considered a cosmetic amendment if PR#56 passes)

62) So Abstaining Does Something
A player who abstains from a vote is not counted when determining the number of votes required for a proposal to pass or fail.

63) The Rule of Slightly Fewer Limitations
Players may submit at most four proposals on their turn.

64) @xinoehp512 Are You Happy Now?

(dependent on PR#56) Any non-cosmetic amendment is treated once passed as a new rule with the text of the original rule, amended in the proper way. The original rule is removed from the list of ERs and added to the list of RRAs. Cosmetic amendments do not gain a new ER# and instead change the text of the original rule, retaining its ER#, the original text of the modified rule is still put in RRA and given its proper RRA#.

65) Stonks
On their turn, a player may buy as many items they wish from the Store of Unimaginable Wealth (which may be refered to as "the Store"), so long as they have enough dollar bucks and the items they wish to buy are available.
Additionally, whenever Black Clover is purchased, its price permanently rises by 1000 dollar bucks. When a player could buy an item from the Store, they may also buy Black Clover from another player, as long as they can pay its full price. The dollar bucks used in this purchase are given to the previous owner of Black Clover.

explanations:

Spoiler

53: castles are cool, also I'm doing the time honored marketing strategy of creating a problem (they can attack my farms!) and providing a solution to it

56: it's useful for later proposals I made

57: encourages fully formed ideas and discourages AP inflation.

59: there is no punishment right now

60: being able to claim the start space is a bad idea

61: read the rule title

62: there is no rule saying that abstaining actually does something, and my Sheets code already follows this rule

63: this is too much. I am part of the problem. people should be able to take a turn in less than an hour, especially if they've written their rules already.

64:are you happy now?

65: there is nothing actually allowing people to buy things, I believe. At least there is nothing saying when things can be bought. also buying thr card form others is good.

I move to L11 (3 AP for 2 diagonal, 1AP for 1 horizontal)

Edit: I pass the turn to @Ravenclawjedi42. Also you'll want to resubmit your proposal because it is not a legal interturn proposal (over 50 words and over 300 characters). Please number it too!

Edited September 16, 2023 by Doomstick

[xinoehp512 he/him]

On 9/15/2023 at 1:15 AM, Doomstick said:

some things pass, Xino gains 14 MP, Wizard gains 4

Am I missing something? The only of Wizard's rules that passed between this and the last update was Rule 21, with 3 yeas and 1 nay. Should it not be 1 MP gained, not 4, for a total of 3?

21 hours ago, Ravenclawjedi42 said:

So it’s my turn now. And once again I was gone for too long. To start I vote aye on 24, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, and 48, vote nay on 22, 40, 41, 49, and 51, and abstain on 23, 31, 37, 42, and 50. 
I propose:

The Chasmfiend Rule: (dependent one the monster rule) there is a monster known as the Chasmfiend that starts on C8 and can only attack if someone attacks it. It has HV 42 and PV 50. At one point in the game, it can bring it’s HV to equal its PV. When killed, the player who killed it gains a Wild Card, which can be given to the Store of Unimaginable Wealth in exchange for any other card, which will then sell it for 1,000,000,000 Dollar bucks.

24,38,39,45,46,47,48 all pass with no nays. I get 2 AP and Experience gets 12.

22 is rejected.

13 hours ago, Doomstick said:

Aye: 42, 51, Xino for moderator

Nay:

  Reveal hidden contents

34-36: I think the ideas are good, but need to be reworked a bit and some holes patched and I can't do that now.

39-I think that if someone has all the TCs and the mosquito, if they can just give it away, then the mosquito has no effect, there should be some necessary action/quest to giving it away.

40- similar reasoning to 39

41 - dollar bucks!

43- sometimes rules have brackets or parentheses that are not clarifications

44,49

50- one: this power is pretty weak (maybe the beehive could give AP? ("busy bee")), two: there is no longer a round counter proposal, and no text saying this rule automatically fails if that one does.

I don't have time to do resolution stuff, can someone else?

41 and 49 are rejected.

Nay to 50. (Forgot to do that last time.)

Aye to 52, though it doesn't seem like it is very rock paper scissors at the moment- there would need to be a clause allowing, for instance, the Ring to beat the Bouquet and Card.

Aye to 53-56.

Nay to 57- AP farming goes brrrrrr

Aye to 58.

Nay to 59- the Moderator ought to determine whether punishment is in order or whether the violation was an accident, then resolve the situation accordingly.

Aye to 60-62.

Nay to 63- I don't want people collapsing all of their proposals into four to get them all through.

Aye to 64. I'm never happy.

Aye to 65, though I would argue that the wording of the original rule - "contains items that can be bought" - already allows for purchase of items.

 

[+Doomstick he/him]

8 hours ago, xinoehp512 said:

though it doesn't seem like it is very rock paper scissors at the moment- there would need to be a clause allowing, for instance, the Ring to beat the Bouquet and Card.

 

...I forgot to account for that didn't I? Someone fix this please!

8 hours ago, xinoehp512 said:

Nay to 63- I don't want people collapsing all of their proposals into four to get them all through.

no please i can't keep up im starting school soon.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Doomstick

[danex he/him]

Proposal 66: Referendum: Any proposal (e.g. even one that breaks prior rules) immediately passes once it receives a number of Yeas greater than or equal to the number of Active Players multiplied by 2/3, added to the number of current Nays. This rule applies retroactively to itself as a proposal, but not to any proposals with a Proposal Number less than 66. 

reasoning: you'll catch on. if you're confused by the math, its 66% of active players, with one aditional Yea needed for each Nay. So each Nay still has voting power and cancels out a Yea. 

Proposal 67: The Abolition of Turns: The current concept of a "turn" is removed, (e.g., the idea that it is one player's "turn" at any given moment and that they must complete (or pass) an action before play may continue), and a "turn" shall be redefined as a "Post". A "Post" is a message sent in this thread consisting of any action, proposal, or otherwise game-state-altering declaration, with the exception of casting a vote. A player may make one Post every 24 hours, with no regard given to whether any specific player, or any number of players, has made a Post before them. If a player has not made a Post for 48 continuous hours, they are considered an Inactive Player, and all rules shall apply to them as thus. 

reasoning: i got no fn clue whose turn it is, and this game is gonna die so fast if we keep waiting 24 hours for a player to pass. you'll notice this proposal breaks many rules, hence i need a different way to pass it, hence proposal 66. proposal 66 also breaks many rules, hence it applies retroactively to itself. 

Proposal 68: You Thought It'd Be That Easy?: The complete abolition and deletion of ER#3.

reasoning: i mean cmon, is it really nomic if we don't jump into the deep end?

Edited September 17, 2023 by dannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnex

[+Doomstick he/him]

10 hours ago, dannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnex said:

Proposal 66: Referendum: Any proposal (e.g. even one that breaks prior rules) immediately passes once it receives a number of Yeas greater than or equal to the number of Active Players multiplied by 2/3, added to the number of current Nays. This rule applies retroactively to itself as a proposal, but not to any proposals with a Proposal Number less than 66. 

reasoning: you'll catch on. if you're confused by the math, its 66% of active players, with one aditional Yea needed for each Nay. So each Nay still has voting power and cancels out a Yea. 

Proposal 67: The Abolition of Turns: The current concept of a "turn" is removed, (e.g., the idea that it is one player's "turn" at any given moment and that they must complete (or pass) an action before play may continue), and a "turn" shall be redefined as a "Post". A "Post" is a message sent in this thread consisting of any action, proposal, or otherwise game-state-altering declaration, with the exception of casting a vote. A player may make one Post every 24 hours, with no regard given to whether any specific player, or any number of players, has made a Post before them. If a player has not made a Post for 48 continuous hours, they are considered an Inactive Player, and all rules shall apply to them as thus. 

reasoning: i got no fn clue whose turn it is, and this game is gonna die so fast if we keep waiting 24 hours for a player to pass. you'll notice this proposal breaks many rules, hence i need a different way to pass it, hence proposal 66. proposal 66 also breaks many rules, hence it applies retroactively to itself. 

Proposal 68: You Thought It'd Be That Easy?: The complete abolition and deletion of ER#3.

reasoning: i mean cmon, is it really nomic if we don't jump into the deep end?

(It isnt your turn, so you can make at maximum 1 proposal of no greater than 50 words or 300 characters per other person’s turn)

as we now have six active players, the threshold for a rule to pass or fail is 4 votes. I just checked the formatting for colouring things in and I think I set it to greater than or equal to, so don’t trust a Green or red highlight until I can fix it later today!

Edited September 17, 2023 by Doomstick

[Experience he/him]

Is it my turn?

We really need a better way to keep track of who's turn it is.

[xinoehp512 he/him]

1 hour ago, Experience said:

Is it my turn?

We really need a better way to keep track of who's turn it is.

The player list keeps track of what order play happens in. It was @Ravenclawjedi42's turn, but they have not acted in 24 hours so their turn is skipped. That makes it @The Wandering Wizard's turn.

[danex he/him]

2 hours ago, Doomstick said:

(It isnt your turn, so you can make at maximum 1 proposal of no greater than 50 words or 300 characters per other person’s turn)

just vote for proposal 66 and that doesn’t matter anymore 

retroactivity go brrr

[danex he/him]

2 hours ago, Doomstick said:

as we now have six active players, the threshold for a rule to pass or fail is 4 votes.

i refute this, the rules state “a majority of three”. there is no current process in place which states a rule may be updated automatically when it’s information is outdated. 3 is no longer a majority, but the rule is still in place as such.

but its also impossible for us to have a “majority of three”, since three isn’t a majority. 

therefore the game can’t actually continue until we lose one player to inactivity, vote on a new proposal to change that wording (which is then able to pass since we will be able to have a majority of 3 at that point)

(or vote for proposal 66 which would be able to supersede it)

sry for double post editing in quotes sucks on mobile

Edited September 17, 2023 by dannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnex

[xinoehp512 he/him]

37 minutes ago, dannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnex said:

i refute this, the rules state “a majority of three”. there is no current process in place which states a rule may be updated automatically when it’s information is outdated. 3 is no longer a majority, but the rule is still in place as such.

but its also impossible for us to have a “majority of three”, since three isn’t a majority. 

therefore the game can’t actually continue until we lose one player to inactivity, vote on a new proposal to change that wording (which is then able to pass since we will be able to have a majority of 3 at that point)

(or vote for proposal 66 which would be able to supersede it)

sry for double post editing in quotes sucks on mobile

Good sir the rule says a majority of three or more.

Also we do have an inactive player now; Raven.

[danex he/him]

1 minute ago, xinoehp512 said:

Good sir the rule says a majority of three or more.

yes and that's nonsensical, it still states that a majority of three is possible. actually, upon review, the entire rule is nonsensical. 

Quote

Upon a majority vote of three or more players"

Upon a vote of players? we aren't voting players. We're voting votes. the sentence structure is fundamentally flawed. grammatically incorrect. Proper phrasing would be more like

Quote

"Upon reaching a majority vote, wherein the number of affirmative votes is greater than or equal to three..."

and that's still not perfect, just fixes the fundamental flaw. you still need to define "voting" better in the first place.