DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
nomic
HTML https://nomic.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Proposals and Voting
*****************************************************
#Post#: 73--------------------------------------------------
Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: iqforu Date: December 16, 2010, 10:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Proposal of a new rule for Supreme Nomic. The rule reads as
follows:
S7. Requirements of Sub-nomics
1. Sub-nomics must meet the following requirements:
a. Have a Dictator, or other like ruler, declared in
the Ruleset
b. Have at least two players
c. Have a winning condition for players
2. If a sub-nomic does not meet all of these requirements,
they have 48 hours to meet them. After 2 days, they may be
subject to a accusation and Supreme Nomic hearing.
#Post#: 74--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: JamesSupreme Date: December 16, 2010, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
For.
#Post#: 75--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: iqforu Date: December 16, 2010, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
My thought process behind this is: every Nomic should have a
goal. This keeps players moving towards something. It will give
players a purpose to perform actions, as well as propose rules
to make the winning condition more legitimate, fun, and
airtight. If this proposal is adopted, each Nomic could easily
adapt to meet this.
#Post#: 87--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: RobertVarulfur Date: December 16, 2010, 1:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
While I'm not 100% for 1.c because my nomic isn't going to be
designed so much as a game that can be won because once a game
in won it is lost. Or at least thats my view point of it.
However, as Pharaoh I'll simply make the goal too high to reach
for.
So long as thats alright, I vote FOR
#Post#: 95--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: iqforu Date: December 16, 2010, 11:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I would also like to point out that having a winning condition
does not necessarily mean the end of the game. Winning the game
could just mean a soft reset of rules, transfer of dictator
power, extra privileges in the game, recognition, etc.
#Post#: 98--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: RobertVarulfur Date: December 17, 2010, 12:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That shall be how it is in my game. I'm designing it so that
long after I'm dead and gone people can play. The dictatorship
will even be replaced someday. Until I've built my empire of
course I have all the power. WUAHAHA
#Post#: 104--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: iqforu Date: December 18, 2010, 1:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Two-thirds of us must move for ending discussion on the
proposal, according to rule S4.3.d and S4.3.e.
I move for ending discussion the proposal ;D
#Post#: 111--------------------------------------------------
Re: Proposal: New Rule. Require Winning Condition
By: JamesSupreme Date: December 19, 2010, 8:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I second that motion.
*****************************************************