There's an idea that's been bouncing around my head for a while now, a succession fortress based on the game of nomic.
Nomic is a game where the main move is changing the rules, in its base form that is the whole game, this idea is like that but we dictate what rules and raws the current overseer should use, after each turn the incumbent overseer gets one rule or amendment no questions asked and every other player can submit one to be voted on if they want.
I can't really host one myself right now so I'm posting this to see if people are interested and let anyone start their own of they want, here's the starting rules I drew up. They're based on the standard set found at
http://www.gamecabinet.com/rules/Nomic.html----------
Immutable Rules
101
All players must always abide by all the rules then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect. The rules in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of rules 101-118 (immutable) and 201-210 (mutable).
102
Initially, rules in the 100's are immutable and rules in the 200's are mutable. Rules subsequently enacted or transmuted (ie, changed from immutable to mutable or vice versa) may be immutable or mutable regardless of their numbers, and rules in the Initial Set may be transmuted regardless of their numbers.
103
A rule change is any of the following:
the enactment, repeal, or amendment of a mutable rule
the enactment, repeal, or amendment of an amendment
the transmutation of an immutable rule into a mutable rule, or vice versa
All newly enacted rules are mutable by default
104
The incumbent overseer can submit their own rule change at the end if their reign which will be added without question.
All other rule changes proposed in the proper way shall be voted on. They will be adopted if and only if they receive the required number of votes.
105
Every player is an eligible voter. Every eligible voter may participate in every vote on rule changes.
106
Any proposed change to the raws must be written in the way it should appear and state the file and location it should be inserted before it is voted on. If adopted, it must guide play in the form in which it was voted on.
Any change to the rules should be written in the form it should appear as before it is voted on. If adopted, it must guide play in the form in which it was voted on.
107
No rule change may take effect earlier than the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it, even if its wording explicitly states otherwise. No rule change may have retroactive application.
108
Each proposed rule change shall be given a rank-order number (ordinal number) for reference. The numbers shall begin with 1000, and each rule change proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the proposal is adopted.
If a rule is repealed and then re-enacted, it receives the ordinal number of the proposal to re-enact it. If a rule is amended or transmuted, it receives the ordinal number of the proposal to amend or transmute it. If an amendment is amended or repealed, the entire rule of which it is a part receives the ordinal number of the proposal to amend or repeal the amendment.
Raw changes should follow the same procedure, except starting from 2000 rather than 1000
109
Rule changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules may be adopted if and only if the vote is unanimous among the eligible voters.
110
Mutable rules that are inconsistent in any way with some immutable rule (except by proposing to transmute it) are wholly void and without effect. They do not implicitly transmute immutable rules into mutable rules and at the same time amend them. Rule changes that transmute immutable rules into mutable rules will be effective if and only if they explicitly state their transmuting effect.
111
If a rule change as proposed is unclear, ambiguous, paradoxical, or clearly destructive of play, or if it arguable consists of two or more rule changes compounded, or is an amendment that makes no difference, or if it is otherwise of questionable value, then the other players may suggest amendments or argue against the proposal before the vote. A reasonable amount of time must be allowed for this debate. The proponent decides on the final form in which the proposal is to be voted on and decides the time to end debate and vote. The only cure for a bad proposal is prevention: a negative vote.
Any such rule change proposed by may be vetoed by a majority of the other players if the next player due to become overseer calls such a vote
112
The state of affairs that constitutes winning may not be changed from being voted the !!Funnest!! Player at the death of the fortress.
113
A player always has the option to forfeit the game rather than continue to play or incur a game penalty. No penalty worse than losing, in the judgement of the player to incur it, may be imposed.
If a forfeit is given in the middle of a a turn, their time as overseer is considered null and the most recent previous save is loaded for the next overseer
114
There must always be at least one mutable rule. The adoption of rule changes must never become completely impermissible.
115
Rules changes that affect rules needed to allow or apply rule changes are as permissible as other rule changes. Even rule changes that amend or repeal their own authority are permissible. No rule change or type of move is impermissible solely on account of the self-reference or self-application of a rule.
116
Whatever is not explicitly prohibited or regulated by a rule is permitted and unregulated, with the sole exception of changing the rules, which is permitted only when a rule or set of rules explicitly or implicitly permits it.
117
Utilities such as dwarf therapist etc may be used, although anything considered cheating or against the spirit of the game by the other players is not permitted
118
Rule changes cannot be proposed during the gameplay section of a turn
Mutable Rules
201
Players shall alternate in a pre determined order, taking one whole in game year apiece. Turns may not be skipped or passed without forfeiting.
202
One turn consists of three parts, in this order: playing the fortress for the agreed length of time, proposing one rule change and adding it and other players proposing rule changes if they so choose
203
A rule change is adopted if and only if the vote is a majority among the eligible voters.
204
An adopted rule change takes full effect at the moment of the completion of the vote that adopted it.
205
Each player has exactly one vote.
206
Players may not conspire or consult on the making of future rule changes.
207
If two or more mutable rules conflict with one another, or if two or more immutable rules conflict with one another, then the rule with the lowest ordinal number takes precedence.
If at least one of the rules in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another rule (or type or rule) or takes precedence over another rule (or type of rule), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence.
If two or more rules claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method must again govern.
208
If players disagree about the legality of a move or the interpretation or application of a rule, then the incumbent overseer is to be the Judge and to decide the question. Disagreement, for the purposes of this rule, may be created by the insistence of any player. Such a process is called invoking judgement.
When judgement has been invoked, the next player may not begin his or her own turn until the judge agrees that any disagreements have been settled
The Judge's judgement may be overruled only by a unanimous vote of the other players, taken before the next turn is begun. If a Judge's judgement is overruled, the player preceding the Judge in the playing order becomes the new Judge for the question, except that no player is to be Judge during his own turn or during the turn of a teammate.
Unless a Judge is overruled, one Judge settles all questions arising from the game until the next turn is begun, including questions as to his or her own legitimacy and jurisdiction as Judge.
New Judges are not bound by the decisions of old Judges. New Judges may, however, settle only those questions on which the players currently disagree and that affect the completion of the turn in which judgement was invoked. All decisions by Judges shall be in accordance with all the rules then in effect; but when the rules are silent, inconsistent, or unclear on the point at issue, then the Judge's only guides shall be common morality, common logic, and the spirit of the game.
209
If the rules are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move is impossible to determine with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the judge will be invoked to return the game to its last playable state.
210
The game world should be generated using the default parameters after selecting "create a new world" from the main menu
----------
These probably aren't as exhaustive as they should be but they're a start.
Any suggestions? Questions?
Again, I can't host this myself because of real life but anyone interested is welcome to take it over
Author
Topic: Possible nomic fortress? (Read 1724 times)