thank you for actually making some comments on this, i was beginning to
get concerned that it would just get overlooked :)
On 6/11/2020 2:38 PM, James Cook via agora-discussion wrote:
I've been rattling this idea around in my mind for a bit. I decided to
put together a proto-proposal to see what others think.
This has a lot in common with G.'s "stones" proto. Last posted in
September, I think:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2019-September/055498.html
I thought the rules about stones escaping were fun. Also, there were
some creative kinds of stone which you might want to combine with your
list.
Ooh, this is definitely interesting. I will probably steal-er, take some
inspiration from some of these ideas.
Title: Amulets ver. 0.1
AI: 1.0
Author: ATMunn
Co-author(s):
Enact a power-1 rule entitled "Amulets" with the following text:
Amulets are a class of assets, tracked by the Teasuror, which can be
owned by players. Each amulet has the following attributes: type,
effect, tier. The effect and tier are tied to the type of the
amulet, and are all defined elsewhere in the rules.
Wearer is an amulet switch, with possible values of all active
players or none (the default). A player CAN wear (syn. put on,
equip) an amulet e owns by announcement, flipping the amulet's
wearer to emself. E is then said to be wearing that amulet. A player
CAN take off (syn. dequip) an amulet e is wearing, flipping the
amulet's wearer to none. Players CANNOT wear more than one amulet at
a time. An amulet with its wearer set to a player CANNOT be
transferred.
If the rules define the effect of a type of amulet to be passive,
then the effect takes place for as long as it is worn by a player.
If the rules define the effect of a type of amulet to be active,
then the wearer of the amulet CAN activate it, causing its effect to
This CAN needs a method. Also this is in conflict with the last
paragraph about expired amulets (though it's clear the last paragraph is
intended to override it).
occur. Active amulets have a cooldown attribute, which unless
specified otherwise, is 7 days after the time the amulet was most
recently activated. Attempts to activate an amulet during its
cooldown are INEFFECTIVE, even if the amulet's wearer has changed.
If an amulet has existed for at least 3 months, and/or it is an
active amulet and has been activated 5 or more times, it is
considered to be expired. Expired amulets have no effect and CANNOT
be activated. Any player CAN destroy an expired amulet by
announcement.
Enact a power-1 rule entitled "Amulet Types" with the following text:
The following is a list of tier-1 amulet types and their effects:
- Amulet of Victory (passive): At the beginning of each Agoran week,
the wearer of this amulet earns a Victory Point.
This is pretty powerful compared to G.'s proposal of auctioning card per
week. I think it's roughly equivalent to winning half those auctions for
free.
Yeah, I felt like these were a bit too powerful. Maybe a card a month
for 6 months?
I may also implement something like G.'s "escaping" mechanism instead of
a set lifespan; that might fix the problem.
- Amulet of Justice (passive): At the beginning of each Agoran week,
the wearer of this amulet earns a Blot-B-Gone.
- Amulet of Legislation (passive): At the beginning of each Agoran
week, the wearer of this amulet earns a Pendant.
- Amulet of Voting (passive): At the beginning of each Agoran week,
the wearer of this amulet earns an Extra Vote.
- Amulet of Economy (passive): Every Payday, the wearer of this
amulet earns an additional 10 coins.
The following is a list of tier-2 amulet types and their effects:
- Amulet of Drawing (passive): The wearer of this amulet CAN specify
at any time, by announcement, a type of card e wishes to earn from
this amulet. At the beginning of each Agoran week, e earns one of
that type of card. If no type is specified, the type defaults to
Victory Cards. The wearer MAY change the type of card specified,
even if e has already earned cards of a different type.
- Amulet of Influence (active): Upon activation, the wearer's voting
strength on any one proposal that e specifies is increased by two.
Jason suggestedout last month that voting strength is evaluated
continuously, and instantaneous changes like this won't do anything.
Thread: "Sets v0.9"
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-discussion/2020-May/057669.html
G.'s stones proto had the same problem.
Sets v1.4 amends R2422 to explicitly cover the case of paying an Extra
Vote. Maybe you could piggy-back on that by using the Buy Strength
action?
That might work. I'll look into that.
