Anyway, here's the raw betaish system I have in the works for Deathmatch Nomic involving separation of combat and lawmaking. Its basically an avatar system, and here's the gist of it. I'm still working out the kinks of course. Actually you know what? Have the whole list of initial rules. Ordinarily I'd put this in rtd brainstorming or gaming block, but what the heck.
101: All players must always abide by all the laws then in effect, in the form in which they are then in effect.
102: The laws in the Initial Set are in effect whenever a game begins. The Initial Set consists of laws 101 to 118, and every new law thenceforth will have a number that is one higher than the law just before it.
103: Person is the Arbitrator, and will settle any disagreements between players, after each presents a case as to their interpretation of the laws or other issue.
104: The current state of the game will be tracked in the first post. If the first post has not been updated with current information, the current information is still valid. For example, if a player joins in the proper manner, they are still considered a player even if their name is not yet in the first post.
105: Each player can have up to two avatars. There are two types of valid avatar, and a player can only have one of each type of avatar at any given time.
The first type of avatar is a Lawmaker avatar. Lawmaker avatars can make motions and vote on them. Lawmaker avatars exist only within the Hall of Law. Lawmaker avatars are incapable of attacking other Lawmaker avatars in any way.
The second type of avatar is a Combatant avatar. Combatant avatars exist only inside the Combat Arena. Combatant avatars are incapable of making motions or voting on them. By default, Combatants avatars possess the following attributes:
While a player can have an avatar of both a Lawmaker and a Combatant, those avatars are considered seperate entities for all purposes except the player that controls them. A player can still vote on a motion if they have a Combatant avatar, but only if their Lawmaker avatar is allowed to do so, as that avatar is the way in which they do so. When a Combatant loses, that Combatant ceases to exist.
106: A non-player becomes a player by making a motion, supporting a motion, opposing with a motion, or by entering them self as a Combatant. If a player makes a motion, supports a motion, or opposes a motion they gain a Lawmaker avatar. If a player enters them self as a Combatant, they gain a Combatant avatar. A player with a Lawmaker avatar can still enter as a Combatant, and a Player with a Combatant avatar can still enter as a Lawmaker.
107: In order for a player to gain a Combatant avatar, they must fill in a Combat Sheet with valid information, and submit it as a post in the Combat Thread. By default, a player has 6 Attribute points to assign every time they fill in the following character sheet. A player can reduce the value of an attribute on their avatar sheet by 1. If they do, they gaining an Attribute point. They can do this as many times as they desire. Increasing an Attribute on their avatar sheet by 1 costs 1 Attribute point. Only the arbitrator can make changes to an avatar sheet
Attributes consist of Strength, Dexterity, Targeting, Toughness, Speed, and Mind. An attribute can have no more than 3 attribute points added to it, and no more than 3 attribute points removed from it. All attribute points must be spent for the character sheet to be valid. After a player submits their character sheet, only the Arbitrator may make changes to it.
This is the base for a valid Combat Sheet:
Player Name: Fill in your username here
Name: This will be the name of your Combatant avatar
Health: Optimal (Do not change this unless you are the arbitrator)
Strength: 0
Dexterity: 0
Targeting: 0
Toughness: 0
Speed: 0
Mind: 0
Yeah I totally ripped off looters delight.
Note to self: Define the Hall of Law and the Combat Arena next. Also define health. Chunky salsa rules are probably best. Hall of Law and Combat Arena might just be thread names.
108: 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 judgment of the player to incur it, may be imposed. A player can forfeit entirely, removing all their avatars, or only forfeit one of their avatars. By default, the first option is assumed. Once an avatar forfeits, that avatar ceases to exist. If a Lawmaker avatar forfeits, any motions they made that turn are removed. In addition, any votes they have made on motions that turn are removed. If a Combatant avatar forfeits, that avatar ceases to exist. Any items that avatar has ownership of also cease to exist, except where it is stated otherwise.
109: Lawmaker avatars can make motions.
110: A motion is an alteration, addition, removal, or any other change applied to one or more laws.
111: Each motion shall be given a number for reference. The numbers shall begin with 301, and each motion proposed in the proper way shall receive the next successive integer, whether or not the motion is passed.
112: Lawmaker avatars may vote on motions. Votes either support a motion or oppose it.
113: When a Lawmaker avatar makes a motion, that avatar has an implied vote supporting that motion until otherwise changed.
114: By default, it is only possible for a Lawmaker avatar to vote once on each motion.
115: The Hall of Law operates in real time. The Combat Arena operates in turns. One day in the Hall of Law lasts 48 hours. One turn in the Combat Arena consists of a valid action from each applicable Combatant avatar. Doing nothing is a valid action, and is assumed to be the default if no action is given. A minimum of one turn should occur in the Combat Arena per week. If a previously valid action has been rendered invalid by something that occurs in the Hall of Law after that action is submitted, then the submitter of that action must submit a new action, as otherwise their action for that turn in the Combat Arena will be the default of doing nothing.
116: At the end of a day in the Hall of Law, the votes on all motions are collected. Any motion that has a supporting majority vote of the votes is passed, and that motion's instructions are followed. Otherwise, that motion ceases to exist. A supporting majority vote is a collection of votes in which more than half the votes cast are supporting. An opposing majority vote is a collection of votes in which more than half the votes cast are opposing. A tie vote is a collection of votes in which the amount of supporting and opposing votes are equal. An unanimous supporting vote is a collection of votes in which all of the votes are supporting. A unanimous opposing vote is a collection of votes in which either all of the votes are opposing, or all of the votes except one are opposing.
117: If two or more laws conflict with one another, then the law with the lowest number takes precedence. If at least one of the laws in conflict explicitly says of itself that it defers to another law (or type of law) or takes precedence over another law (or type of law), then such provisions shall supersede the numerical method for determining precedence. If two or more laws claim to take precedence over one another or to defer to one another, then the numerical method again governs.
118: If the laws are changed so that further play is impossible, or if the legality of a move cannot be determined with finality, or if by the Judge's best reasoning, not overruled, a move appears equally legal and illegal, then the player that caused that situation is the winner. This law takes precedence over every other law determining the winner.
Proposing proposals will instead be making motions. It sounds better/less redundant, and uses less characters.
If all those references to the Hall of Law and Combat Arena confuse you, those will probably just be the names of the threads if I use two threads. In retrospect, I probably won't do that unless the game grows large enough to warrant it. There will still be some degree of separation between lawmaking and fighting though.
Alternatively, I'll just dispense with that sort of separation entirely and we'll get to imagine gladiators yelling off motions to do things and votes on those things at the top of their lungs while swinging a sword around. How's that for "Talking is a Free Action", eh?
Player 1: "I MAKE A MOTION THAT PLAYER 2 DIES!"
Attack player 2.Player 2: "I OPPOSE THAT MOTION!"
Swing my sword at player 1.Player 3: "I SUPPORT THAT MOTION!"
Fire by bow at Player 2.Player 2: "TRAITOROUS SWINE! I MAKE A MOTION THAT PLAYER 3 DIES!"
Okay that would probably get out of hand really quickly. But still, silly example is meant to be silly. It'd be more the players than the characters they play doing the voting and such. But I've made my point.
You know what, the more I look at it, the whole avatar system is needlessly complex anyway. I have a gift for doing that it seems. Plus, that other sort of system has the advantage of being absolutely hilarious. Still, what would you all prefer?
The thing with Nomic is more players is almost always better, but a combat game rapidly becomes exponentially more difficult to make turns for with each player added. So I'd say that maybe participation in the lawmaking would be mandatory, because it'll give players something to do while waiting for someone to die. It'd be the combat that's optional, because it is inherently secondary to the lawmaking process. Sound good?
Edit: Of course I'll give a break. Doing otherwise would be stupid.
Author
Topic: A Game of Nomic: Turn 23: Game Over (Read 16334 times)