Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment  (Read 3420 times)

lordcooper

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm a number!
    • View Profile
Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« on: January 30, 2010, 05:52:30 pm »

I stumbled across this brain melter of a game and think it would be pretty cool to give it a go. I'm checking interest on several sites I'm on, with the intention of hosting my own nomic if enough people are willing to give it a go.

Summed up in a nutshell, nomic is a game in which players make amendments to the rules in order to win the game.

Quote from: Peter Suber (the creator of Nomic)

Nomic is a game in which changing the rules is a move. In that respect it differs from almost every other game. The primary activity of Nomic is proposing changes in the rules, debating the wisdom of changing them in that way, voting on the changes, deciding what can and cannot be done afterwards, and doing it. Even this core of the game, of course, can be changed. 

Because the rules are always changing, there is no absolute set of rules to Nomic. There is only the starting or initial set of rules. There are 29 numbered rules in the Initial Set. Most are "procedural" and govern the process of changing the rules or the facts of life in a game where the rules are always changing. The chief exception is Initial Rule 202, which should be read first. Rule 202 is practically the only "substantive" rule in the Initial Set. It tells how to earn points to win. The mechanism is as simple as possible: one throws a die or makes a calculation. The substantive portion of the game is deliberately simple so that the players can decide, through rule-changes, what kind of game they want to play. If they make no decision here, they will be fully occupied in what I call a "procedural" game, which many players choose deliberately. In a substantive game, players aim to score points and win. In a procedural game, players try to tie the rules into the most interesting knots imaginable and to win not by points (Rule 208) but by paradox (Rule 213).


For more information: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/nomic.htm

Anyone interested?
Logged
Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth

Leafsnail

  • Bay Watcher
  • A single snail can make a world go extinct.
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2010, 06:22:44 pm »

Hmm... possible tactic.  Let's say that players A, B, C and D are playing.

"The votes of C and D count for nothing"
Logged

qwertyuiopas

  • Bay Watcher
  • Photoshop is for elves who cannot use MSPaint.
    • View Profile
    • uristqwerty.ca, my current (barren) site.
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #2 on: January 30, 2010, 06:49:44 pm »

There *is* a game, but it mostly died, and the recent attempt to revive it only lasted a short while.


However, starting a new game may work out well enough...
Logged
Eh?
Eh!

qwertyuiopas

  • Bay Watcher
  • Photoshop is for elves who cannot use MSPaint.
    • View Profile
    • uristqwerty.ca, my current (barren) site.
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2010, 10:01:49 pm »

I am considering creating a computer program that would basically run similar to a script engine, and could be programmed in a very simplified language. It would be set up to process the turns of a game and I would host a game using it.

I think it would be event driven, mostly, and only have one base type, CODE, and all other things will be treated as classes of generic objects. Probably with an ID field being the only required data. Hmm...

Code: [Select]
[PLAYER:new]
{
    [NAME:Qwertyuiopas]
    [CODE]
    {
        event: start_turn
        {
            win
        }
    }
}

Or something similar. The "new" would mean new object, otherwise it would be the numerical ID.

Rules would probably have a DESCRIPTION, CODE, and a variety of other things.


Depending on how powerful it is, I would have to decide if the engine would be external, as engine scripts, or hard-coded, at least partially.

Regardless, the engine would contain only the metagame aspects such as loading and saving data, and running the code, everything else would be done by rules.
Logged
Eh?
Eh!

lordcooper

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm a number!
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #4 on: January 31, 2010, 12:05:46 pm »

@Leafsnail:  It could be quite tough to get a majority vote on that...

Maybe "The votes of D count for nothing" then for the next rule "The votes of C count for nothing"

@qwertyuiopas:  Sounds pretty interesting, but in the meantime a simple forum should do the job  ;)

@All:  I'm partway through setting one up and can launch a game pretty much whenever.

Anyone wanna put their names down?
« Last Edit: January 31, 2010, 12:08:34 pm by lordcooper »
Logged
Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth

lordcooper

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm a number!
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #5 on: January 31, 2010, 12:46:49 pm »

Sign up to this forum if interested: http://nomicia.forum-motion.net/forum.htm

Play will begin when we have sufficient (5+) members.
Logged
Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth

qwertyuiopas

  • Bay Watcher
  • Photoshop is for elves who cannot use MSPaint.
    • View Profile
    • uristqwerty.ca, my current (barren) site.
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #6 on: January 31, 2010, 03:06:00 pm »

"The votes of D count for nothing"

will only pass if D is a generally disliked player, since some players might question your motives.

However, D's vote shall be given to C will likely get better support, at least from C.
Logged
Eh?
Eh!

Tilla

  • Bay Watcher
  • Slam with the best or jam with the rest
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #7 on: January 31, 2010, 04:58:27 pm »

I played a card game that had a similar idea. Except you had to make logic statements using the cards you drew, to prove that 1> You exist and 2> the other players do not. It lead to MASS arguments the entire time and was pretty entertaining.
Logged

lordcooper

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm a number!
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2010, 05:38:48 pm »

I played a card game that had a similar idea. Except you had to make logic statements using the cards you drew, to prove that 1> You exist and 2> the other players do not. It lead to MASS arguments the entire time and was pretty entertaining.

Sounds pretty good, gotta link to where I can read more about it?

Don't be scared of signing up now people :)
Logged
Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth

Gigalith

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • O and H Books
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2010, 11:16:55 pm »

I've been playing in nomics for years. Several are still going on.

Some words of advice:

1. Either you are going to have to have an actual winner, a cataclysmic rule-trimming now and then, or the game will die off by apathy. In fact, the first two won't even guarantee your game will survive.

2. You'll want some rule to allow new players in to replace old players quitting. In longer-running nomics, the entire player base will be replaced multiple times.

Winnable nomics don't generally need this, although you'll still want it anyway.

3. There are two general kinds of nomics: Procedural, and Substantive. Substantive nomics are all making a game to play, and the nomic is merely part of the process. Procedural nomics are mainly into modifying the nomic itself.

4a. For substantive nomics: Think of the weirdest, feature-burdened, most unbalanced, least playtested and overall ramshackle game you have ever played.

Your Nomic will that game look like Go by comparison.

Every player has their own vision of how the game should be, and the result will be an amalgamation of anything that seemed cool at the time. Expect bizarre, overcomplicated, poorly-fitting, and outright broken rules. There will be no playtesting. Needless to say, it will be a blast.
 
4b. For pure procedural nomics. Indescribable. Ordinary conceptions of 'nonsensical' rules will no longer be sufficient. The ruleset will be at war with itself, and lose. You have been warned. Have fun.

4c. It's also possible to mix the above. They don't tend to be quite as insane as pure procedurals, but definitely add much more weird.

5. Use the right starting ruleset. The character of your initial rules will determine the character of the rest of the game. There are several levels of verbosity, each with vastly different feels. For example, take the following proposals:

A: "Every turn you get an apple, and you can eat for 10 health."

B: "Add the following rule to the ruleset:

'An Apple is a kind of Item. At the beginning of a player's turn, that player receives an apple. Apples may be eaten to gain 10 health points. To do this, a player removes the apple from their inventory and increases their health by 10.'"

C: "Create a new Kind of Tool with the following characteristics:
{
Name: Apple

Use Action: Eat: Destroy this Apple: The User adds 10 to their current Health Points.
}

Create a new rule with the following text:
{
At the beginning of each player's turn, an Apple is added to that player's Inventory.
}"

All of those are, more or less, how the same proposal would appear in three different nomics. No one way is 'right'.

Also, if you are looking for a substantive game, do not use the Suber ruleset.  Don't be fooled by the fact you can change the rules, you'll have to fight with them until you get what you actually want. Specifically, rule 112 will cause you suffering the moment you want something other than a simple, point-based victory.

If you're looking for a procedural game, the Suber ruleset is acceptable as-is, but flawed. The turn-based nature isn't suitable for online play. You might also want to make the judging system more democratic. Fix both of those and you'll be fine.

6a. For substantive nomics: It's much better to have a goal too close and achieved early than a goal too far which is never achieved.

6b. For procedural nomics: Have a good Justice system, because things are going to break massively. Have an emergency system when the Justice system breaks.

6c. For all nomics: Short proposals are better.

7. You WILL need a full-time admin guy, and quite possibly multiple.

8. Have fun. Don't take things too seriously.

----

Leafsnail: I wish I saw games that cut-throat. Most nomics tend to be too nice.

Taking that situation, B would be in a great situation to negotiate with C or D, while meanwhile A has torpedoed his own chances. Exiling just D would have the same difficulty: Everyone is going to see the opportunity for a cheap ally.

D's vote to C, though, seems cunning enough to pass. Of course, you haven't actually gotten rid of any enemy votes, and now C is even more powerful...
Logged
Check out my books at O and H Books

lordcooper

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm a number!
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2010, 10:31:21 am »

Nomicia is running and active, last time I'm bumping this.

New players welcome :)
Logged
Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth

Tylui

  • Bay Watcher
  • O_o
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2010, 04:54:40 pm »

Sorry for necroing... What happened to this?
Logged

Puck

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2010, 07:12:29 pm »

Quote from: Peter Suber (the creator of Nomic)
Nomic is a game in which changing the rules is a move. In that respect it differs from almost every other game.
Sounds a bit like Calvinball.

Nikov

  • Bay Watcher
  • Riverend's Flame-beater of Earth-Wounders
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2010, 01:00:42 am »

There *is* a game, but it mostly died, and the recent attempt to revive it only lasted a short while.


However, starting a new game may work out well enough...

My game of Regulatory Bureaucracy? Yeah, that went to hell.
Logged
I should probably have my head checked, because I find myself in complete agreement with Nikov.

lordcooper

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm a number!
    • View Profile
Re: Nomic: A game of Self Amendment
« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2010, 06:49:18 am »

Second necro:

Kinda fizzled out, I would be interested in restarting a nomic if enough people wanted in.
Logged
Santorum leaves a bad taste in my mouth
Pages: [1] 2 3