In “Distractions”, change

even if their Location values are the same.

to

even if their Location values are the same, unless the Burglar is Located at a Spot at which “Create a Back Door” was performed since the end of the last Break-In.

Make these changes to both the main and shadow rulesets

Add “The Round Number is publicly tracked on the gamestate tracking page and defaults to 4”

In “The Break-In” replace

If any Burglar who Encountered no Guards during this atomic action is holding at least one Artifact, increase the Successes of all Burglars by the round number, including Sidelined Burglars; otherwise, increase the Successes of all Guards by the round number, including Sidelined Guards.
Increase the Round Number by 1

If quorum of EVCs on this proposal include the phrase “Adjust it” then replace Agent’s successes with the following

ais523: 6
Clucky:  6
Darknight: 3
DoomedIdeas: 5
JonathanDark: 0
lendunistus: 1
qenya: 4
trapdoorspyder: 2

A seemingly short and uneventful night at the Hotel Nagelburg, but many hours later the security team chance across signs of forced entry, and realise that not everything is where it was.

Burglars encountered no Guards. No Camera Traps were triggered.

Add a new rule named “Rumors” with the following text:

Rumors is a list of flavor text strings that is publicly tracked, defaulting to an empty list, where each string in the list is no more than 100 characters and may only include the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet, numbers, underscores, hyphens, full stops, spaces, and apostrophes.

If they have not done so within the past 24 hours, as a Virtual Action an Agent may add a string to the Rumors.

In the rule “The Break-In”, just before the step of Breaking In that starts with the text “Post a blog entry”, insert the following step:

* Set Rumors to an empty list

In the rule “The Hotel”, after the text “A Spot is an Ingress if and only if it appears on the List of Ingresses, which is a publicly tracked list of Spots.” insert the text “By default, C, G, N and X are Ingresses.”

In the rule “Assessing the Patrols” add the following text:

There is a Guard Timer, which is a time and date that is privately tracked by the Concierge and contains the most recent time and date among the following events:
* The time and date the Concierge most recently performed Breaking In
* The time and date of the most recent enactment or failure of an Accuasation
* The time and date of the most recent change of a Guard’s route

While the current phase is Setting Patrols and there are no Pending Accusations, if it has been at least 48 hours since the time and date of the Guard Timer, and the Concierge should perform Secret Entrances, which is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Collect the set of Spots where each Spot meets all of the following criteria:
** Is not an Ingress and is not adjacent to an Ingress
** Is not in the Home(s) of any Artifact and is not adjacent to the Home(s) of any Artifact
* From the set of Spots in the preceding step, secretly randomly select a Spot and add it to the List of Ingresses.

In the rule “The Break-In” insert the following text as the first paragraph of the rule:

There is a Burglar Timer, which is a time and date that is privately tracked by the Concierge and contains the most recent time and date among the following events:
* The time and date the Concierge most recently performed Patrol Assessment
* The time and date of the most recent enactment or failure of an Accuasation
* The time and date of the most recent change of a Burglar’s route

While the current phase is Planning the Break-In and there are no Pending Accusations, if it has been at least 48 hours since the since the time and date of the Burglar Timer, the Concierge should perform Security Enhancements, which is an atomic action with the following steps:
* If there is at least one Artifact with the Mundane trait, secretly randomly select one such Artifact, secretly randomly select a non-Mundane trait, and set that Artifact’s trait to the result.
* If no Artifacts were selected in the previous step, secretly randomly select an Artifact that has the Antique or Keycard type and set that Artifact’s type to Evidence.

In the same rule, just before the step of Breaking In that starts with the text “Post a blog entry”, insert the following step:

* Reset the List of Ingresses to its default value

Rename “Preparation Actions” to “Preparation”, repeal its subrules, and reword the rule to the following:-

Each Agent has a piece of Groundwork, which is either blank, or a specific Prep and (if that Prep specifies a required Target) a described Target for it. Groundwork is tracked privately by the Concierge. Preps and their Effects, required Targets and Onsite/Offsite statuses are:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Prep !! Target !! Status !! Effect
|-
! Back Door
| A lettered Spot that does not contain an Artifact || ''Offsite'' || Until the end of the next Break-In, the specified Spot is considered to connect to “Grounds” for the purpose of determining whether Routes submitted by Burglars are complete.
|-
! Camera Trap
| A lettered Spot || Onsite || Any time a Burglar’s Location becomes equal to the specified Spot, that Burglar is considered to have Encountered a Camera Trap.
|-
! Distraction
| A number from 1 to 12 || Onsite || Burglars are not considered to have the same Location as Guards while the Minute is the specified number, even if their Location values are the same.
|-
! Power Cut
| none || Onsite || Burglars are never considered to encounter Camera Traps, the Alarmed effects of Artifacts do not apply, and Keycards can’t be taken.
|-
! Training
| A Skill and a Flaw (which are not Opposites of each other) || ''Offsite'' || The Agent’s Skill and Flaw are set to the specified Skill and Flaw.
|}

An Agent is Capable if there are at most 2 other Agents whose Fame is greater than or equal to theirs, or if there are at most 3 other Agents whose Infamy is greater than or equal to theirs.

If a Capable Agent’s Groundwork is blank or an Onsite Prep, they may change their Groundwork as a virtual action. When an Agent’s Groundwork is set to an Offsite prep, its effect is applied immediately.

If any Preparation Actions were taken during the current phase, they have no further effect. If any Training Preparation Actions were taken during the current phase, the Concierge should undo their effects. The Concierge may repeal this paragraph from the ruleset once those effects have been undone, or if no such actions were taken.

Add a step after the third in the bullet list in “The Break-In”:-

* Apply the effects of all Groundworks which are Onsite Preps; these apply until the end of the current Break-In

Since Clucky’s Accusation wasn’t a Votable Matter.

In the subrule “The Break-In”, replace the text

For each Burglar who is the only Agent at a Spot which contains an Artifact, set that Artifact’s location to be that Burglar’s name.

with the text

For each Burglar who is the only Burglar at a Spot which contains an Artifact, set that Artifact’s location to be that Burglar’s name.

If there are at least 5 EVCs on this proposal that contain the word “caught”, instead replace the text

For each Burglar who is the only Agent at a Spot which contains an Artifact, set that Artifact’s location to be that Burglar’s name.

with the text

For each Burglar who is the only Burglar at a Spot which contains an Artifact (not counting Burglars who have Encountered a Guard this Break-In), set that Artifact’s location to be that Burglar’s name.

Remove the bullet point “It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours.” from the “Accusations” rule.

Add a subrule to “Routes” called Power Moves

Each position in a route may have a Power Move associated with it. Power Moves may be Traditional or Special. Each route by default may only contain up to 1 Traditional Power Move. Routes may not contain Special Power Moves unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Make Extra Spots a subrule of Power Moves and give it the following text

Extra Spots are Special Power Moves. When specifying an Extra Spot, an Agent must specify another Spot which is Connected to the Spot at the given position of in their Route they wish to perform the Extra Spot Power Move.

Make a subrule of Power Moves called “Smoke Canister”

Smoke Canister is an Traditional Power Move. If a position in an Agents route has a Smoke Canister, then no Burglars at that Spot can be encountered if the current Minute is equal to the Smoke Canister’s position

Make a subrule of Power Moves called “Focus”

Focus is an Traditional Power Move. If a position in an Agent’s route has a Focus, then that Agent may still be encountered by Burglars if the current Minute either matches the Focus’s position or is one more than the Focus’s position, despite the effects of the rules Smoke Canister or Distractions

Nothing personal, just business. One less guy to worry about betraying us.

Enact a subrule to “Guards and Burglars” named “Retirement”:-

Each Agent may or may not be Retired; this status is publicly tracked. At any time, an Agent may change whether or not they are Retired.

In “Guards and Burglars”, replace “If there are any Civilians and it is the Setting Patrols phase” with:-

If there are any non-Retired Civilians and it is the Setting Patrols phase

In “Assessing the Patrols”, replace “and there are no Civilians” with “and there are no non-Retired Civilians”.

The Clocktower proposal had feedback to “just ask people” and I’ve now withdrawn it, so here’s a blog post with that question.

How long do people generally expect to take to submit their Routes this dynasty, not including time taken waiting for private negotiations to get responses?

Some curtained windows of the hotel glow late into the night, and voices can be heard from the streets below.

One Guard has a route with E and E in the 4th and 9th Spots. Another has a route with O and O in the 4th and 9th Spots. A third has a route with V and V in the 4th and 9th Spots.

If the proposal “Power Up” passes, this proposal does nothing.
Replace the text of the subrule “Extra Spots” with the text

An Extra Spot is a Spot in an Agent’s Route that is not counted as part of the Route itself with respect to the length of that Route. When setting or changing their Route, if an Agent is allowed to have one or more Extra Spots in their Route, they must identify each Extra Spot and its position in their Route in order for it to be counted as an Extra Spot. An Agent cannot have multiple Extra Spots in the same position in their Route, and each of an Agent’s Extra Spots must be Connected to the Spot they share a position with. By default, an Agent’s Route does not have any Extra Spots. Agents may not have Extra Spots in their Route unless explicitly allowed by a rule.

In the Effect description for the Skill “Quick”, replace the text

that Agent may specify up to two Extra Spots with their Route

with

that Agent may specify up to four Extra Spots with their Route

Add a subrule to “Routes” called Power Moves

Each position in a route may have a Power Move associated with it. Power Moves may be Traditional or Special. Each route by default may only contain up to 1 Traditional Power Move. Routes may not contain Special Power Moves unless explicitly stated otherwise.

Make Extra Spots a subrule of Power Moves and give it the following text

Extra Spots are Special Power Moves. When specifying an Extra Spot, an Agent must specify another Spot which is Connected to the Spot at the given position of in their Route they wish to perform the Extra Spot Power Move.

Make a subrule of Power Moves called “Flashbang”

Flashbang is an Traditional Power Move. If a position in an Agents route has a Flashbang, then no Burglars at that Location can be encountered if the current Minute is equal to the Flashbang’s position

Make a subrule of Power Moves called “Focus”

Focus is an Traditional Power Move. If a position in an Agents route has a Focus, then that Agent may still be encountered by Burglars during the current Minute either matches the Focus’s position or is one more than the Focus’s position, despite the effects of Flashbang or Distractions

In “The Break-In”, change

For each Burglar who is the only Agent at a Spot which contains an Artifact, set that Artifact’s location to be that Burglar’s name.

to

For each Spot that contains an Artifact and at least one Burglar (not counting Burglars who have Encountered a Guard this Break-In), set that Artifact’s location to the name of a secretly randomly chosen such Burglar.

In “Valuables”, change this text:

Selected Spots may not be any Spots which are listed as Points of Ingress, nor may they be adjacent to any such Spots, and they may not be the Grounds

to this text:

A selected Spot may not be any Spot that is listed as an Ingress or a Station, nor may it be any Spot that is adjacent to an Ingress but not a Station, and it may not be the Grounds.

In the subrule Valuables of the rule The Hotel, replace the text

Selected Spots may not be any Spots which contained artifacts immediately prior to the previous Breaking In action.

with the text

Selected Spots may not be any Spots which are listed as Stations.

In the rule “Guards and Burglars” add a subrule named “Retiring” with the following text:

There is a publicly tracked list named Retiring in which each entry contains the name of an Agent, defaulting to an empty list.

At any time, an Agent may add their name to Retiring or remove their name from Retiring.

In the rule “The Break-In”, add the following just before the last step in Breaking In:

* For every Agent whose name is in Retiring, remove that Agent’s name from Retiring and idle that Agent.

Burglars made their way into the hotel having been tipped off about a few valuable antiques left forgotten and undusted on public display there. Two ran into guards, and although the others kept a low profile, they ultimately left empty-handed.

Burglar JonathanDark encountered Guard DoomedIdeas.

Burglar Lendunistus encountered Guard Darknight.

No Camera Traps were triggered.

To “Phases”, add a paragraph:-

Each Agent has a publicly tracked Clock value, representing the number of hours that they generally expect to take to submit their Routes this dynasty (not including time taken for private negotiations that may delay this). An Agent may change their Clock at any time.

Add the following to “Routes”

Each Agent can also has a Bid which is privately tracked by the Concierge and is a integer between 1 and 10 inclusive and defaults to 1. An Agent may change their Bid as a virtual action.

Add a subrule to “Guards and Burglars” called “The Sideline”

An Agent may be Sidelined but defaults to not being Sidelined. For the purposes of The Break-In, if an Agent is Sidelined they are not considered to be a Guard or a Burglar unless explicitly stated otherwise

Add the following steps to the start of to the Break In

* If there are more Guards than Burglars, randomly select a Guard which has the lowest Bid among all Guards and make them Sidelined. Repeat this process until the number of Guards equals the number of Burglars
* If there are more Burglars than Guards, randomly select a Burglar which has the lowest Bid among all Burglars and make them Sidelined. Repeat this process until the number of Burglars equals the number of Guards

In “The Break In” after the step “For each Burglar that encountered no Guards, set their Infamy to 12 minus the number of spots in their Route that are Grounds, minus 2 (to a minimum of 0) if they encountered a Camera Trap, plus 4 for every artifact they are holding.” add the following steps

* For each Sidelined Guard, set their Fame to be the average Fame of all Guard, rounded down.
* For each Sidelined Burglar, set their Infamy to be the average Infamy of all Burglars, rounded down.

In “The Break In” replace “If any Burglar who Encountered no Guards during this atomic action is holding at least one Artifact, increase the Successes of all Burglars by one; otherwise, increase the Successes of all Guards by 1.” with

* If any Burglar who Encountered no Guards during this atomic action is holding at least one Artifact, increase the Successes of all Burglars by one, including Sidelined Burglars; otherwise, increase the Successes of all Guards by 1, including Sidelined Guards.

In “The Break In” replace “The Agents disperse: set every Agent to be a Civilian, all Locations to blank, all Routes to blank.” with

* The Agents disperse: set every Agent to be a Civilian, all Locations to blank, all Routes to blank, all Bids to 1 and make every Agent no longer Sidelined

Add a new rule named “Accusations” with the following text:

An Accusation is a Story Post - Votable Matter with a title that starts with the text “Accusation:” followed by the name of an Agent. The author of an Accusation is the Accuser for that Accusation, and the Agent named in an Accusation title is the Accused for that Accusation. Members of an Accusation are the set of all Agents (including the Accuser) whose type (Guard or Burglar) are the same as the Accuser.

If the current Phase is Planning the Break-In, any Agent may post an Accusation if all of the following criteria are true:
* That Agent is not a Civilian
* The Accused is same type of Agent (Guard or Burglar) as that Agent
* The Accused does not have more Successes than that Agent
* There is not a Pending Accusation whose Accuser is the same type of Agent (Guard or Burglar) as that Agent
* There have been less than 2 Accusations posted since the most recent performance of Breaking In

When determining an Accusation’s Quorum, Popular, or Unpopular status, only the Members of that Accusation are included. Votes on an Accusation by Agents that are not Members of that Accusation are treated as invalid.

The oldest Pending Accusation may be Enacted by any Admin if all of the following are true:

* It is Popular.
* It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours.
* It has not been Withdrawn.

The oldest Pending Accusation may be Failed by any Admin, if any of the following are true:

* It is Unpopular.
* It has been Withdrawn.

When an Accusation is Enacted, the Admin Enacting it must change the type of that Accusation’s Accused to Civilian.

In the rule “The Break-In”, after the text “If every Agent has a complete Route,” add the text “and there are no Pending Accusations,”

Per the Reminders rule, this is a notification that the game is still waiting for the remaining Burglars Lendunistus and Qenya to submit their Routes. They were reminded to do so more than 24 hours ago.

(For game speed context: the current “Planning the Break-in” phase began at 17:30UTC on Tuesday. Two plans had been received from Burglars within the first 25 hours. It’s now been 65 hours.)

As a new paragraph at the end of “Guards and Burglars”, add:

If a particular Agent currently has more Successes than every other Agent, and also had more Successes than every other Agent immediately prior to the most recent Breaking In action, that Agent has achieved victory.

Add a new rule named “Accusations” with the following text:

An Accusation is a Story Post - Votable Matter with a title that starts with the text “Accusation:” followed by the name of an Agent. The author of an Accusation is the Accuser for that Accusation, and the Agent named in an Accusation title is the Accused for that Accusation. Members of an Accusation are the set of all Agents (including the Accuser) whose type (Guard or Burglar) are the same as the Accuser.

If the current Phase is Planning the Break-In, any Agent may post an Accusation if all of the following criteria are true:
* That Agent is not a Civilian
* The Accused is same type of Agent (Guard or Burglar) as that Agent
* There is not a Pending Accusation whose Accuser is the same type of Agent (Guard or Burglar) as that Agent
* There have been less than 2 Accusations posted since the most recent performance of Breaking In

When determining an Accusation’s Quorum, Popular, or Unpopular status, only the Members of that Accusation are included. Votes on an Accusation by Agents that are not Members of that Accusation are treated as invalid.

The oldest Pending Accusation may be Enacted by any Admin if all of the following are true:

* It is Popular.
* It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours.
* It has not been Withdrawn.

The oldest Pending Accusation may be Failed by any Admin, if any of the following are true:

* It is Unpopular.
* It has been Withdrawn.

When an Accusation is Enacted, the Admin Enacting it must change the type of that Accusation’s Accused to Civilian.

In the rule “The Break-In”, after the text “If every Agent has a complete Route,” add the text “and there is no Pending Accusation,”

In the subrules of “Preparation Actions”, replace all instances of “that only Burglars can perform” and “that only Guards can perform” with “that any Agent can perform”, then replace all instances of “after a Burglar performs” and “after a Guard performs” with “after an Agent performs”.

Add a subrule to “Preparation Actions” called “Cutting the Power”:-

“Cutting the Power” is a virtual Preparation Action that only Burglars can perform. When this action is performed, until the next Break-In action has completed, Burglars are never considered to encounter Camera Traps, the Alarmed effects of Artifacts do not apply, and Keycards can’t be taken.

In the rule “Guards and Burglars”, insert the following text as the second paragraph:

Each Agent has a Protecting and Thieving, which are both publicly tracked numbers that default to 0 (unless otherwise specified in other rules).

In the same rule, replace the bulleted list with the following text:

* If there are more Burglars than Guards, make them a Guard and increase their Protecting by 1
* If there are more Guards than Burglars, make them a Burglar and increase their Thieving by 1
* If there are as exactly many Guards as Burglars:
** If their Thieving is greater than their Protecting, make them a Guard and increase their Protecting by 1
** If their Protecting is greater than their Thieving, make them a Burglar and increase their Thieving by 1
** If neither of the above are true, make them either a Guard or a Burglar in a secrely random manner, then increase their Protecting by 1 if they were made a Guard or their Thieving by 1 if they were made a Burglar

In the rule “Guards and Burglars”, add a subrule named “Career History” with the following text:

The default values for Protecting and Thieving are defined per Agent as follows:

* ais523: 2 Protecting, 0 Thieving
* Clucky: 2 Protecting, 0 Thieving
* Darknight: 2 Protecting, 0 Thieving
* DoomedIdeas: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving
* JonathanDark: 0 Protecting, 2 Thieving
* lendunistus: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving
* qenya: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving
* SingularByte: 0 Protecting, 2 Thieving
* Trapdoorspyder: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving

In the rule “Guards and Burglars”, insert the following text as the second paragraph:

Each Agent has a Protecting and Thieving, which are both publicly tracked numbers that default to 0.

In the same rule, replace the bulleted list with the following text:

* If there are more Burglars than Guards, make them a Guard and increase their Protecting
* If there are more Guards than Burglars, make them a Burglar and increase their Thieving
* If there are as exactly many Guards as Burglars:
** If their Thieving is greater than their Protecting, make them a Guard and increase their Protecting
** If their Protecting is greater than their Thieving, make them a Burglar and increase their Thieving
** If neither of the above are true, make them either a Guard or a Burglar in a secrely random manner, then increase their Protecting if they were made a Guard or their Thieving if they were made a Burglar

Set the Protecting and Thieving of each Agent to the following:

* ais523: 2 Protecting, 0 Thieving
* Clucky: 2 Protecting, 0 Thieving
* Darknight: 2 Protecting, 0 Thieving
* DoomedIdeas: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving
* JonathanDark: 0 Protecting, 2 Thieving
* lendunistus: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving
* qenya: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving
* SingularByte: 0 Protecting, 2 Thieving
* Trapdoorspyder: 1 Protecting, 1 Thieving

Clinks and shuffling noises drift across the cold, still air of the town square. One Noisy Guard has a route with V as the fourth spot and V as the ninth. A second Noisy Guard has a route with K as the fourth spot and K as the ninth.

In the rule “The Break-In”, after the text “where Discovered is a list of pairs of Agents and Spots” add the following text:

in which new entries to Discovered are always added to the end of the list and duplicate entries are allowed

Since the debate about lists has come to the conclusion that we should define a list per use in its specific dynasty, here it is: a definition of a list specifically for its use in this dynasty.

In the rule “Skills and Flaws”, replace the Effect of Quiet with the following text:

Information about this Agent is not revealed to other Agents with the Observant skill, as described in “Assessing the Patrols” and “The Break-In”.

In the rule “Assessing the Patrols”, after the text “Leak the Routes of all Guards without a Flaw of Noisy privately to every Burglar with the Observant Skill”, add the following text:

, skipping over Guards with the Quiet Skill

In “Valuables”, replace the first two items of the definition of the “Scattering Valuables” atomic action with:

* Add 4 artifacts to the list of artifacts

Add a new Artifact trait of “Locked” to the table in “Valuables”, with this effect:

Can’t be taken in the first two Minutes of a Break-In, or by Burglars who weren’t present in this Artifact’s Location during both of the previous two Minutes.

In the Effect of “Keycard”, replace “The Alarmed effects of other Artifacts do not apply” with:-

The Alarmed and Locked effects of other Artifacts do not apply

Replace the Effect of “Disguised” with:-

Can’t be taken by Burglars who are not Observant.

Add to the end of that rule:-

If an Artifact “can’t be taken” in a certain circumstance, this means that if an Agent would start to hold it in that situation, the Artifact instead does not have its Location changed.

In the “Quiet” skill effect in “Skills and Flaws”, replace “The Agent’s name is not revealed to Agents with the Observant skill” with:-

The Agent’s Route is not leaked to Agents with the Observant skill

Add the following to “Numbers and Variables”

Unless otherwise specified, a list can contain repeated elements, the elements of a list remain in the order in which they were added to the list, and when an item is added to a list, it is added to the end.

Unless otherwise specified, a set or collection cannot contain repeated elements, and when an item is added to a set or collection, it is added alphabetically (if its text based), in increasing order (if its is numeric) or at the end (in any other circumstances).

At their earliest convenience, the Concierge should inform all Agents who had a non-empty Discovery during the most recent Breaking In of their Discovery, using the above definition of a list.

Add the following to “Numbers and Variables”

Unless otherwise specified, a list is ordered and can contain repeated elements and when an item is added to a list, it is added to the end.

Unless otherwise specified, a set or collection is unordered and cannot contain repeated elements and when an item is added to a set or collection, it is added alphabetically (if its text based), in increasing order (if its is numeric) or at the end (in any other circumstances)

At their earliest convenience, the Concierge should inform all Agents who had a non-empty Discovery during the most recent breaking in of their Discovery, using the above definition of a list.

In the shadow ruleset, add a paragraph to the end of the rule “The Break-In”:-

After performing a Breaking In action the Concierge must then replace the full dynastic ruleset with a copy of the shadow ruleset.

If the proposal “Commas matter” enacted, replace “that are Grounds minus” with “that are Grounds, minus” in the shadow ruleset version of “The Break-In”.

If the proposal “Electric Boogaloo” enacted, add ” (which also can be referred to as the Break-In, the Break In, or Breaking-In)” after “may perform the following atomic action of Breaking In” in the shadow ruleset.

Then replace the text of the rule “The Break-In” in the dynastic ruleset with the version currently in the shadow ruleset.

In “The Break-In” after “may perform the following atomic action of Breaking In” add ” (which also can be referred to as the Break-In, the Break In, or Breaking-In)”

Add a paragraph to the end of the rule “The Break-In”:-

After performing a Breaking In action the Concierge must then replace the full dynastic ruleset with a copy of the shadow ruleset.

Then replace the text of the rule “The Break-In” in the dynastic ruleset with the version currently in the shadow ruleset.

In “The Break-In”, change

set their Infamy to 12 minus the number of spots in their Route that are Grounds minus 2 (to a minimum of 0) if they encountered a Camera Trap

to

set their Infamy to 12 minus the number of spots in their Route that are Grounds, minus 2 (to a minimum of 0) if they encountered a Camera Trap

If this change was made to the Shadow Ruleset, make it to the dynastic ruleset as well (rather than changing the Shadow Ruleset again).

At the end of “Guards and Burglars”, add a new paragraph:

Any Agent may reduce their own Fame or Infamy by 9 (as long as it was at least 9 before the reduction) in order to increase their own Successes by 1.

Not a great first night for the Burglars, with three of their team encountering guards, and neither of their two remaining members securing any artifacts.

Burglar DoomedIdeas encountered Guard Lendunistus.

Burglar SingularByte encountered Guard Ais523.

Burglar JonathanDark encountered Guard Darknight.

No Camera Traps were triggered.

Hi.

Hate to leave. This dynasty seems like it’s getting a little confusing for my liking. Will probably be back for next dynasty.

In the rule “Guards and Burglars” rename the subrule “Plans” to “Patrols and Plans”, then insert the following text at the beginning of that rule:

There is a publicly tracked Patrols which is the number of Guards who have a complete Route out of the total number of Guards.

Directly apply the proposed changes of the proposals “Too many sticks make a stuck” and “The Fix is Already In” to the dynastic ruleset (rather than the Shadow Ruleset).

Add a subrule to “The Hotel”:-

Whenever the Concierge is required to make a choice between several outcomes during the course of a dynastic action, they should do so in a secretly random manner.

In “Valuables”, replace “There is a list of Artifacts that currently exist. All artifacts have a publicly tracked name, which is one of the listed items on [[Souveniers]] and which is not shared with any current artifacts. When the artifact is created, its creator (normally the Concierge), must select a name from that list to be its name, and it must be unique with respect to all artifacts on the list of Artifacts. That name is flavour text. In the event that any artifacts share a name, it is permissible for any player to append numerical digits onto one of those names such that it becomes unique, and that is considered a valid name.” with:-

There is a publicly tracked list of Artifacts that currently exist; each Artifact in this list has a type which may be either Briefcase, Jewellery, Artwork, Antique, Evidence or Keycard. When an Artifact is created, its creator must select a type for it, which must be unique among Artifacts in the list, where possible.

Remove “, choosing an appropriate name for them as described in the rule Valuables” from the rule.

Add to the same rule:-

Some Artifact types also have effects, as follows:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Type !! Effect
|-
| Antique || When a Burglar holding an Antique gains Infamy during the Breaking In action, they gain an additional 2 Infamy.
|-
| Artwork || A Burglar may not hold both an Artwork and another Artifact; if a rule would cause them to do so, it instead does not.
|-
| Keycard || The Alarmed effects of other Artifacts do not apply if ''any'' Burglar is holding a Keycard.
|}

Remove the “Rare” trait from the Artifact Trait table.

In the rule “Guards and Burglars” add a subrule named “Plans” with the following text:

There is a publicly tracked Plans which is set to one of the following:
* While the Phase is Setting Patrols, Plans is always 0.
* While the Phase is Planning the Break-in, Plans is the number of Burglars who have a complete Route out of the total number of Burglars.

Add the following to the end of the rule Reminders:

If, 24 hours after having sent any necessary Reminders, no Breaking In action has taken place in the preceding 24 hours and any number of due Agents lack a complete Route, then the Concierge may make a public post naming any Agents who lack a complete Route.

The game is Stuck when the Concierge cannot carry out an action that would progress its state (i.e. either its phase changing or the performance of a Breaking In action) for reasons that rely on knowledge that is not public information. If, at any point, the Concierge believes that the game is Stuck then they may make a public post detailing the issue and suggesting ruleset remediations that would allow the game to cease being Stuck.

Delete the text “Each Agent also has a privately tracked variable called Loot, which may be any positive integer and defaults to 0.” from Guards and Burglars.

Replace the rule Valuables with:

There is a list of Artifacts that currently exist. All artifacts have a publicly tracked name, which is one of the listed items on [[Souveniers]] and which is not shared with any current artifacts. When the artifact is created, its creator (normally the Concierge), must select a name from that list to be its name, and it must be unique with respect to all artifacts on the list of Artifacts. That name is flavour text. In the event that any artifacts share a name, it is permissible for any player to append numerical digits onto one of those names such that it becomes unique, and that is considered a valid name.

All artifacts have up to one publicly tracked artifact trait, defaulting to no trait.

All artifacts have a privately tracked Location which is either a spot, or the name of a player, or blank, and all artifacts a publicly tracked Home, which is a spot. The Home is said to contain that artifact, but this is not necessarily true. If the Location is the name of a player, that player is said to be holding that artifact. If the Location is ever simultaneously the name of an Agent and the name of a spot, then that Agent is not said to be holding that artifact.

If there are no Artifacts, the Concierge may take the atomic action titled “Scattering Valuables” which is as follows:

*Secretly randomly determine a number between 2 and 4 inclusive.
*Add that many artifacts to the list of artifacts, choosing an appropriate name for them as described in the rule Valuables
*Select a spot for each new artifact, and set the Home and Location to that selected Spot for that artifact.
**Selected Spots may not be any Spots which contained artifacts immediately prior to the previous Breaking In action.
**Selected Spots may not be any Spots which are listed as Points of Ingress, nor may they be adjacent to any such Spots, and they may not be the Grounds.
*For each of those artifacts, give them a privately randomly selected trait from the artifact trait list, excluding any traits which are already held by at least one artifact in the list of artifacts

The list of Artifact traits and their effects are found in the table below.

Artifact Trait | Effect
Mundane | -
Alarmed | When an Artifact with this trait has its Location changed to the name of a Burglar, any Guards in Spots connected to that Burglar’s Location Encounter that Burglar
Concealed | Artifacts with this trait have three Homes. When an Artifact gains this trait, the Concierge should select two more Homes for it such that each of those Homes is connected to at least one other of this Artifact’s Homes. Then, its Location should be set to one of its Homes.
Disguised | Burglars without Observant cannot hold an Artifact with this trait. If such an artifact would have its location set to that Burglar’s name, it instead does not have its location changed.
Rare | When a Burglar gains Infamy during the Breaking In action, if they are holding an artifact with this trait, they gain an additional 2 infamy.

In the rule The Break-In, replace the bullet point starting “For each Burglar who is the only Agent at a Spot which contains an Artifact” with:

For each Burglar who is the only Agent at a Spot which contains an Artifact, set that Artifact’s location to be that Burglar’s name.

In the same rule, replace “plus 4 for each point of Loot they currently have” with:

plus 4 for every artifact they are holding.

In the same rule, replace the bullet point starting “If any Burglar who Encountered no guards” with:

If any Burglar who Encountered no Guards during this atomic action is holding at least one Artifact, increase the Successes of all Burglars by one; otherwise, increase the Successes of all Guards by 1.

In the same rule, remove the text “, and set all Agent’s Loot to 0.”

In the same rule, replace the bullet point starting “Remove all Spots” with:

Remove all Artifacts from the list of Artifacts, then perform the “Scattering Valuables” atomic action.

If the proposal “The Flaw In Our Skills” enacted, then add the following paragraph to the end of “Skills and Flaws”:-

If an Agent has no Skill or Flaw, they may, as a virtual action, set their Skill and Flaw to non-empty legal values which are not Opposites of each other.

Repeal the rule “Effects”.

Replace the text of “Skills and Flaws” with:-

Each Agent has a Skill and Flaw privately tracked by the Concierge, both of which default to empty.

Each Skill and Flaw has an Effect that applies to any Agent who has it, as described in that Effect.

The Skills, Flaws and their Effects are:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Skill !! Effect !! Flaw !! Effect
|-
! Quiet
| The Agent's name is not revealed to Agents with the Observant skill, as described in the rule The Break-in.
! Noisy
| Additional information about this Agent’s actions is disclosed to other Agents, as described in “Assessing the Patrols” and “The Break-In”.
|-
! Observant
| This Agent learns additional information about other Agents’ actions, as described in “Assessing the Patrols” and “The Break-In”.
! Inattentive
| If the Agent is a Guard, only Burglars with the Noisy Flaw in the same Location as that Guard are considered to have Encountered that Guard. If the Agent is a Burglar, that Agent treats any Spots with Artifacts as if those Artifacts were not in those Spots.
|-
! Quick
| When the Agent sets their Route as a virtual action, that Agent may specify up to two Extra Spots with their Route, as described in the rule Extra Spots.
! Slow
| The Agent must have at least four Spots in their Route where the next Spot in their Route is the same Letter as that Spot.
|-
|}

If a Skill is listed in the same row as a Flaw in this table, then the two of them are considered to be Opposites of each other.

In the rule “Phases” just before the subrule “The Break-In” insert a subrule named “Bribes” with the following text:

There is a list named Bribery that is privately tracked by the Concierge, defaulting to an empty list, where each entry is the name of a Burglar, the name of a Guard, an amount of Successes, and a Status.

If the current Phase is Planning the Break-In, as a virtual action a Burglar may send a Bribe to the Concierge that contains the name of a Guard and an amount of Successes between 1 and that Burglar’s Successes. When resolving a Bribe, if that Burglar already has an entry with their name in the Bribery, the Bribe action fails, otherwise that Burglar’s name, Guard’s name, and amount of Successes is added to the Bribery along with a Status of Pending.

If the current Phase is Planning the Break-In, as a virtual action a Guard may sent an Acceptance to the Concierge that contains the name of a Burglar and an amount of Successes. When resolving an Acceptance, if that Guard’s name, that Burglar’s Name, and that amount of Successes all match the same entry in the Bribery where that entry has a status of Pending, the Acceptance succeeds and the Concierge should perform a Bribe Exchange on that Bribery entry, otherwise the Acceptance fails. Bribe Exchange is an atomic action with the following steps:
* Set that entry’s status to Accepted.
* Privately communicate the route and Preparation Action (if any) of the Guard named in that entry to the Burglar named in that entry.

In the rule “The Break-In”, just before the step that starts with “Post a blog entry” in Breaking In, add the following steps:

* For each entry in the Bribery with a status of Accepted, add the amount of Successes in that entry to the Successes of the Guard named in that entry.
* Remove all entries from the Bribery.

In the rule The Hotel, remove “A Spot is an Ingress if and only if it appears on the List of Ingresses, which is a publicly tracked list of Spots.” In the same rule, change ““Grounds” is considered to connect to each Ingress.” to read:

“Grounds” is considered to connect to spots W, V, X, H, G, B, A, C, D, M, N and S.

In the rule Valuables, remove the text “may not be any Spots which are listed as Points of Ingress, nor may they be adjacent to any such Spots, and they”.

In the rule Routes, change “are each either “Grounds” or an Ingress (they may be the same or different)” to:

is “Grounds”

Add the following list items at the end of the list in “Renovation”:

* Update J and E to be connected
* Update P and M to be connected
* Update R and X to be connected
* Update U and Y to be connected
* Update V and Z to be connected

A week into the dynasty, I think it’s worth taking a sounding on how people feel about the recent timing change on early proposal enactment (previously 12 hours, upped to 24 at the end of the last dynasty). Have people found that it’s improved or impaired their early game experience?

It becomes apparent to all onlookers that a Noisy Guard has a route with O in the fourth spot and T as the ninth spot.

If “Hiding in the Shadows” failed, do nothing. Otherwise:

In the Shadow Ruleset, before “The Route’s Agent is not a Civilian” in the section with title “Routes”, add a new list item:

Each lettered Spot appears no more than four times in their Route

Add an entry to the bullet list in “Renovation”:

* Remove C as an Ingress, and add A as an Ingress

Add a subrule to “Shadow Ruleset” called “Stopwatches”:-

Each Guard has a Stopwatch, being a piece of flavour text (tracked privately by the Concierge) which is either blank or the name of a proposal. A Guard may set their Stopwatch as a virtual action. If a Guard has a Stopwatch set which names a pending proposal, then the Concierge may not perform the Patrol Assessment action.

If a Guard includes a comment on a dynastic proposal consisting of the single word “PIVOTAL”, then that proposal is a Pivotal one. A Pivotal Proposal may not be enacted by Agents (or idle Agents) who are not the Concierge. The Concierge should not enact a Pivotal Proposal if there are unresolved virtual actions.

Add the following to “The Hotel”

A Spot is an Station if and only if it appears on the List of Stations, which is a publicly tracked list of Spots. By default, E, O, I and V are stations.

In “Routes” replace

If the Route’s Agent is a Guard, “Grounds” does not appear in their Route

with

If the Route’s Agent is a Guard, “Grounds” does not appear in their Route and the first Spot is a Station

Add a new dynastic rule called “Shadow Ruleset” and give it the following text

The Shadow Ruleset (also known as the Shadow Rules) exists at https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?title=Ruleset/Shadow235. The entirety of the Shadow Ruleset is considered to be flavor text.

If the current phase is Planning the Break-in, then unless explicitly stated otherwise any changes to dynastic rules are instead make to the shadow rules.

In the Patrol Assessment atomic action, right before “Set the current Phase to Planning the Break-In.” add a new step which is

Replace the shadow ruleset with a copy of the dynastic ruleset

In the “The Break-In” atomic action right after “Privately inform each Agent of their Discovered”, add a new step which is

Replace the dynastic ruleset with a copy of the shadow ruleset, expect for any changes to the Breaking In atomic action which are not replaced

After “the Concierge may perform the following atomic action of Breaking In” add ”—when doing so, they should use the entirety of the text of the action as it is written when they start to perform the action”

Copy the dynastic ruleset to the shadow ruleset

If Wet Paint failed, this proposal does nothing.


In the rule “Renovation”, add the following to the list.

Update W and S to be connected

Add the following as a new third paragraph to the Appendix rule Official Posts:

An official post may be altered by its author if it is less than 30 minutes old and either no Agent has commented on it or (if it is a Votable Matter) if all comments on it contain no voting icon; this provision may be overruled by dynastic or Building Blocks rules.

Repeal the Building Block Edit Window.

On Rule “Hotels”, add a subrule denoted as “Picklocking” with the following text:

Some of the Connected have Doors(that change from each Break-In Phase). If a Connected has a Door, then it has a Key in a random Spot that is not in either Spot of the of the Connected that the Door is located. The Concierge will only know the locations the Keys are located unless an Agent was in a location and could pick it up. If an Agent, has possession of the key, and is over at the Door that the Key is located in, then the Agent could use the Key to lock the Door while they pass through the Connected(or unlock if the door was previously locked). If a Door is locked, other Agents can’t pass through the connected. The exception to the last sentence is that if an Burglar wishes sacrifice their last Spot in their Route to roll DICE4, and hence making the Door unlocked if their result a 4. Doors start off as unlocked as Default. Additionally, Agents will know what Door their Key they possess will work for.Agents and can only possess 1 Key.

Add a step to the end of atomic action in “The Break-In”:-

* If any changes to the Map or gamestate are defined in a list in the rule “Renovation”, apply them in order, then remove those changes from that rule

Then move “Set the current Phase to Setting Patrols” to be the final step in the atomic action.

Enact a subrule of “The Hotel” called “Renovation”:-

The following is a list of changes (if any) to be made when the Hotel is Renovated:

Add the following to “The Hotel”

A Spot is an Station if and only if it appears on the List of Stations, which is a publicly tracked list of Spots.

In “Routes” replace “Guards can perform this action only if “Grounds” does not appear in the Route.” with

Guards can perform this action only if “Grounds” does not appear in the Route, and the first Spot in their route is a Station

Set E, O, I and V to be Stations.

Add “Update W and S to be connected, then delete this step” to the final step of the Break-In

In “The Break-In” replace “Each Burglar who has the same Location as a Guard is now considered to have Encountered that Guard” with

* For each Location that has both at least one Burglar and and at least one Guard in that location, secretly randomly pair off Burglars and Guards who share that location so that as many pairs as possible are created with no Guard or Burglar being paired off more than once. Then for each pair, the Guard in that pair is considered to have Encountered the Burglar in the pair. If that Burglar has any loot, it is reduced by 1 and the Guard in the pair gains 2 fame.

In the Inattentive Effect replace “If the Agent is a Guard, only Burglars with the Noisy Flaw in the same Location as that Guard are considered to have Encountered that Guard” with

If the Agent is a Guard and would Encounter a Burglar, they only do so if that Burglar is Noisy

Add a new rule named “Competence” with the following text:

Each Agent has a publicly tracked number named Competence that defaults to 0.

In the rule “Phases” append the following text:

There is a publicly tracked number named Round that defaults to 1.

In the rule “The Break-In” add the following as the last steps of Breaking In:

* If the sum of the Fame of all Guards is greater than the sum of the Infamy of all Burglars, increase the Competence of each Guard by 1. Otherwise, increase the Competence of each Burglar by 1.
* Increase the Round by 1

If Stasis Breaker was enacted, this proposal does nothing.

Add a new paragraph at the end of “Guards and Burglars”:

Each Agent has a publicly tracked count of Successes, defaulting to the median value of Successes among all other Agents, rounded down.

Add a new list item to “The Break-In”, immediately before the list item starting “The Agents disperse”:

If any Burglar who Encountered no Guards during this atomic action has nonzero Loot, increase the Successes of all Burglars by one; otherwise, increase the Successes of all Guards by 1.

Then move the list item starting “The agents disperse” to be immediately after the list item starting “Post a blog entry”.

Set each Agent’s Successes to 0.

I’m having trouble understanding the Extra Spots rule (to the extent that I don’t really understand what it’s meant to mean).

How is the Extra Spots mechanic supposed to work, and does the current rule text actually capture that behaviour?

Secretly randomly choose 3 Guards, and set the Fame of each of those Guards to 1.
Secretly randomly choose 3 Burglars, and set the Infamy of each of those Burglars to 1.

Add a new paragraph at the end of “Guards and Burglars”:

Each Agent has a publicly tracked count of Successes, defaulting to the median value of Successes among all other Agents, rounded down.

Add a new list item to “The Break-In”, immediately before the list item starting “The Agents disperse”:

If any Burglar who Encountered no Guards during this atomic action has nonzero Loot, increase the Successes of all Burglars by one; otherwise, increase the Successes of all Guards by 1.

Then move the list item starting “The agents disperse” to be immediately after the list item starting “Post a blog entry”.

Set each Agent’s Successes to 0.

In “Routes”, replace:-

A Route is complete if each of its Spots after the first is Connected to the previous Spot in the Route (or is the same as that previous Spot) and if the Route is exactly twelve Spots in length. Civilians cannot perform this action. Burglars can perform this action only if the first and last Spots in the Route are each either “Grounds” or an Ingress (they may be the same or different). Guards can perform this action only if “Grounds” does not appear in the Route.

with

An Agent’s Route is complete if all of the following are true of it:
* The Route is exactly twelve Spots in length
* Each of its Spots after the first is Connected to the previous Spot in the Route (or is the same as that previous Spot)
* The Route’s Agent is not a Civilian
* If the Route’s Agent is a Burglar, the first and last Spots in their Route are each either “Grounds” or an Ingress (they may be the same or different)
* If the Route’s Agent is a Guard, “Grounds” does not appear in their Route

In the two subrules of Phases, replace “non-blank Route” with “complete Route” both times.

In the rule “Reminders”, replace “non-blank” with “complete” and then “blank” with “non-complete”.

Remove the step “Set all Agents’ Skills and Flaws to empty” from “The Break-In”.

In “Skills and Flaws”, replace the paragraph beginning “While an Agent’s Route is empty” with:-

If an Agent has no Skill or Flaw, they may, as a virtual action, set their Skill and Flaw to non-empty legal values which are not Opposites of each other.

Add a subrule to “Preparation Actions” called “Training”:-

“Training” is a virtual Preparation Action that any Agent can perform, and a Skill and a Flaw (which are not Opposites of each other) must be specified in order to perform it. When this action is performed, the Agent’s Skill and Flaw are set to that Skill and Flaw.

In the rule “The Break-In”, after the text “Set each Agent’s Location to the Spot in their Route at the position equal to the Minute” add the following text:

. If that position in that Agent’s Route has an Extra Spot that is Connected to it, that Agent’s Location is considered to be both that Spot and that Extra Spot for all rules regarding that Agent’s Location at the current Minute.

In the Building Blocks rule “Revisions Allowed”, replace the text “If a proposal’s author withdraws it using REVISE, and there were at least as many votes REVISE as votes AGAINST among the other (non-author) Agents’ Votes on that proposal at the time” with the text “If a Proposal is considered Revisable”.

In the same rule, insert the following as a second paragraph in that rule:

A Proposal that is Pending is considered Revisable if any of the following are true:
* If a Proposal’s author withdraws it using REVISE, and there were at least as many votes REVISE as votes AGAINST among the other (non-author) Agents’ Votes on that proposal at that time
* If a Proposal’s author withdraws it using REVISE, and the sum of FOR and REVISE votes for that Proposal exceeds or equals Quorum at that time

In the same rule, append the following text:

When the Concierge has a valid REVISE vote on a Votable Matter, then all votes of DEFERENTIAL on that Votable Matter are instead considered to be valid and counted as REVISE votes.

If “Skillful Applications” failed, do nothing. Otherwise:

Retitle “Showing the Patrols” to “Assessing the Patrols”, and change its text to:

To “Leak” a particular Route is to communicate the fourth and ninth Spots in that route.

If every Guard has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians, then the Concierge may perform the Patrol Assessment atomic action, which has the following steps:
# Leak the Routes of all Guards with a Flaw of Noisy publicly in a blog post.
# Leak the Routes of all Guards without a Flaw of Noisy privately to every Burglar with the Observant Skill.
# Set the current Phase to Planning the Break-In.

Guards cannot set their Flaw to Noisy if the current Phase is Planning the Break-In.

In the rule “Effects”, replace the Effect of Noisy with:

Additional information about this Agent’s actions is disclosed to other Agents, as described in “Assessing the Patrols” and “The Break-In”.

and replace the Effect of Observant with:

This Agent learns additional information about other Agents’ actions, as described in “Assessing the Patrols” and “The Break-In”.

In “The Break-In”, change “minus 4 (to a minimum of 0)” to “minus 2 (to a minimum of 0)”.

Reword “Reminders” from:-

Remind is an action in which the Concierge sends a private communication to every Agent with a blank Route where that communication contains a reminder for that Agent to set their Location and Route. If half of the Agents (rounded down) or less have a blank Route, at their earliest convenience the Concierge should perform Remind if the Concierge has not done so since the last time Breaking In was performed or since the start of this dynasty, whichever is most recent.

To:-

Guards are Due if it is the Setting Patrols phase; Burglars are Due if it is the Planning the Break-in phase.

If half of the Due Agents (rounded up) have a non-blank Route, the Concierge may send the Due Agents who have a blank Route a private reminder to set their Route.

In the rule The Hotel, remove the text that reads “The red letters, yellow circles and blue lines on the map image are not considered to be flavour text”.

In the rule Rules and Votable Matters, change “an illustration and a caption to an illustration must be treated as flavour text” to read:

an illustration may not be treated as containing ruletext, and may not be considered to possess any meaning other than that given to it by ruletext, and a caption to an illustration must be treated as flavour text.

Create a new rule, called “Challenges”:

Challenges are publicly tracked in an alphabetically ordered list called “Challenge Locations”, which contains the name of each Challenge along with it’s currently assigned Challenge Spot. Each Point of Ingress, along with the spots E, I, and T, are Challenge Spots. Each Challenge must have a name, which is Flavor Text, and a Threshold, which is a positive integer greater than 4.
The list of Challenges is as follows:
**Guard Dog**
*Threshold: 18
**Keypad**
*Threshold: 12
**Stuck Door**
*Threshold: 8
**Tough Lock**
*Threshold: 6

Create a subrule “Restructuring” of the rule “Challenges”:

After a Break In has occurred, the Concierge may perform the atomic action “Restructuring”, which is as follows:
*Clear all Challenge Spots of Challenges.
*Randomly order all Challenges, and assign each a number according to their order.
*Roll an N-sided dice for each Challenge Spot, with N being the number of Challenges.
*Assign each Challenge Spot to the Challenge represented by the dice’s result.
*Update the list of Challenge Locations.

Create a subrule “Activation” of the rule “Challenges”:

A Challenge is Activated if both of the following statements are true:
*Two or more Agents have a Location equal to the Challenge’s assigned Challenge Spot during a Break In.
*One or more of the above Agents is a Burglar.
*One or more of the above Agents has Committed to the Challenge.
When a Challenge is Activated and all involved Agents are Burglars, then it is Shared.
*If the Threshold is exceeded, then each involved Burglar gains 1 Loot, and is not considered to have the same Location as any Camera Traps during the current Minute.
*If the Threshold is not met, each involved Burglar cannot gain any more Loot for the remainder of the current Break In.
*If the Challenge’s state cannot be set to Success or Failure, or the Threshold is met exactly, then the Challenge is no longer Active.
When a Challenge is Activated and the involved Agents are on different teams, then it is Fought.
*If the Threshold is met or exceeded, and more than half of the Committed points were provided by the Guards, then each of the involved Guards are considered to have Encountered 2 unique Burglars for each Burglar they Encounter this Minute.
*If the Threshold is met or exceeded, and more than half of the Committed points were provided by the Burglars, then none of the involved Burglars are considered to have the same Location as any of the involved Guards, or any Camera Traps, during the current Minute.
*If the Challenge’s state cannot be set to Success or Failure, or the Committed points are evenly split between the involved Guards and Burglars, then the Challenge is no longer Active.

At the end of the sentence

An Agent may change their Route to any complete Route, or to a blank string, as a virtual action.

add the text

If any of the Spots in their new Route contain a Challenge, they may choose to Commit a whole number of their current Fame or Infamy points to the Challenge. If the Agent Commits to multiple Challenges in the same Route, the total number of points they Commit may not exceed their current number of Fame or Infamy points.”

in the same paragraph.

In “Guards and Burglars”, replace “If there are any Civilians, then the Concierge should select one in a secretly random manner and either:” with:-

If there are at least two Civilians, then the Concierge should select one in a secretly random manner, blank their Route if they have one, then either:

Then add a paragraph after the bulleted list:-

If there is only one Civilian and the numbers of Guards and of Burglars are different, then the Concierge should blank that Civilian’s Route if they have one, and make them a Guard (if there are more Burglars than Guards) or a Burglar (if there are more Guards than Burglars).

In “The Break-In”, replace “If every Agent has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians” with:-

If every Agent has a non-blank Route and there are fewer than two Civilians

In “Routes”, remove “Civilians cannot perform this action.” and add to the end of the paragraph:-

Civilians can perform this action only if “Grounds” does not appear in the Route, and if all the Spots in the Route are different.

pleas idle me. id do it myself but its been a bit busy lately

Set all Agents’ Skills and Flaws to empty.

In the rule “Skills and Flaws”, replace “Each Agent has a publicly tracked Skill and Flaw” with “Each Agent has a Skill and Flaw privately tracked by the Concierge” and replace “If an Agent has not done so since the beginning of this dynasty, they may set their Skill and Flaw to non-empty legal values as an atomic action” with “While an Agent’s Route is empty, if they have not done so since beginning of this dynasty or since the last performance of Breaking In, whichever is most recent, as a virtual action an Agent may set their Skill and Flaw to either both empty values or both non-empty legal values”.

In the same rule, remove the bullet points containing “Dexterous”, “Cunning”, “Strong”, “Clumsy”, “Dim”, and “Weak”.

In the same rule, add a subrule named “Effects” with the following text:

Each Agent’s Skill and Flaw has an Effect that applies to that Agent as described in that Effect. The Effects are detailed in the table below:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Skill/Flaw !! Effect
|-
| Quiet || The Agent's name is not revealed to Agents with the Observant skill, as described in the rule The Break-in.
|-
| Quick || When the Agent sets their Route as a virtual action, that Agent may specify up to two Extra Spots with their Route, as described in the rule Extra Spots.
|-
| Observant || The Agent learns the name and Location of each other Agent that they encounter, as described in the rule The Break-in.
|-
| Noisy || The Agent reveals their name and Location to all other Agents that they encounter, as described in the rule The Break-in.
|-
| Slow || The Agent must have at least four Spots in their Route where the next Spot in their Route is the same Letter as that Spot.
|-
| Inattentive || If the Agent is a Guard, only Burglars with the Noisy Flaw in the same Location as that Guard are considered to have Encountered that Guard. If the Agent is a Burglar, that Agent treats any Spots with Artifacts as if those Artifacts were not in those Spots.
|}

In the rule “Routes”, add a subrule named “Extra Spots” with the following text:

An Extra Spot is a Spot that is Connected to another Spot in the Route of an Agent but is not counted as part of the Route itself with respect to the length of that Route. When setting or changing their Route, if an Agent is allowed to have one or more Extra Spots in their Route, they must identify each Extra Spot and the Spot it is Connected to in order to be counted as an Extra Spot. By default, an Agent’s Route does not have any Extra Spots. Agents may not have Extra Spots in their Route unless explicitly allowed by a rule.

In the rule “The Break-In”, after the text “Set each Agent’s Location to their Letter in their Route” add the following text:

. If that position in that Agent’s Route has an Extra Spot that is Connected to it, that Agent’s Location is considered to be both the Letter of that Spot and the Letter of that Extra Spot for all rules regarding that Agent’s Location at the current Minute.

and in the same rule, add the following as the first step in Breaking In:

* Privately track a Discovered for each Agent, where Discovered is a list of pairs of Agents and Spots. Set each Agent’s Discovered to an empty list.

and in the same rule, add the following sub-bullets under the second step of Breaking In:

** For each Agent that has the Observant Skill, whenever that Agent is in the same Location as other Agents, add the names and Location of the other Agents in that same Location to that Agent’s Discovered, skipping over Agents with the Quiet Skill.
** For each Agent that has the Noisy Flaw, whenever that Agent is in the same Location as other Agents, add that Agent’s name and the Location to the Discovered of each other Agent in that same Location.

and in the same rule, add the following as the last steps in Breaking in:

* Privately inform each Agent of their Discovered
* Set all Agents’ Skills and Flaws to empty

If “Let’s go over the plan” was enacted, in the rule “Effects” replace the Effect of Observant with:

If the Agent is a Guard, that Agent learns the name and Location of each other Agent that they encounter, as described in the rule The Break-in. If the Agent is a Burglar, that Agent learns the Routes and Preparation Actions of every Guard, as described in the rule Showing the Patrols.

If “Let’s go over the plan” was enacted, in the rule “Effects” replace the Effect of Noisy with:

If the Agent is a Burglar, the Agent reveals their name and Location to all other Agents that they encounter, as described in the rule The Break-in.. If the Agent is a Guard, that Agent reveals their the Route and Preparation Actions to every Burglar, as described in the rule Showing the Patrols.

If “Let’s go over the plan” was enacted, replace the text of “Showing the Patrols” with the following text:

If every Guard has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians, then the Concierge should perform the Show the Patrols atomic action, which has the following steps:
* For every Guard with a Flaw of Noisy, privately send every Burglar that Guard’s Route and Preparation Action
* Set the current Phase to Planning the Break-In

If the current Phase is Planning the Break-In, whenever a Burglar sets their Skill and Flaw, if that Burglar’s Skill is Observant, the Concierge should privately send every Guard’s Route and Preperation Actions to that Burglar.

Append as a new paragraph at the end of “Routes”:

The Concierge may publicly reveal the number of Agents who have blank Routes as a daily action, either via a blog post or comment or via placing the value on the gamestate tracking page. The Concierge is encouraged to do so in cases where they believe that gameplay is stalled due to a lack of Route submissions, and may do so at other times.

In the Appendix, in Appendix rule “Numbers and Variables”, remove

If a piece of information is described as being tracked secretly or privately by the Concierge (including secretly random selections), then that information may only be revealed by the Concierge when the ruleset allows it. If an Agent should already know such a piece of information (in that the Concierge has already told them it, or vice versa, and there is no way that the information could have been changed since then), the Concierge may repeat it to them.

In the Appendix, after “Numbers and Variables”, add a new Appendix rule “Privately tracked information”:

“Secretly tracked” and “privately tracked” are considered to be synonyms. Selections that are made secretly randomly are also considered to be privately tracked, as is the history of a privately tracked gamestate variable.

If a piece of information was described as being privately tracked at the point in time when it most recently changed, then the person tracking it may only reveal it in situations where the Ruleset permits doing so, or when an enacted proposal specifies that it should be revealed, or when performing an action that is explicitly permitted by the ruleset and that requires the information to be revealed. If a rule describes such information as being tracked by the Concierge, the reference to the Concierge refers to the person who was Concierge at the time the information most recently changed (even if there is now a different Concierge, e.g. due to an enacted Declaration of Victory).

Agents and idle Agents who are privately tracking information may reveal it if both of the following requirements are met:
* Prior to the point at which the information was most recently changed, but during the same dynasty, the player who was Concierge at the time had stated an Imperial Style that indicates circumstances under which the information may or should be disclosed, and those circumstances currently hold.
* The information is revealed in a blog post or comment (and not, e.g., in a private message).

If an Agent should already know such a piece of privately tracked information (in that the person tracking it has already told them it, or vice versa, and there is no way that the information could have been changed since then), the person tracking it may repeat it to the Agent who should already know it.

Add a new section to the Imperial Styles wiki page, with title “Disclosure of privately tracked information”, and text:

* Undisclosed (specifies that privately tracked information generated during the dynasty will not be revealed even after the dynasty, except via dynastic mechanics that would reveal it)
* Disclosed (specifies that privately tracked information generated during the dynasty should be disclosed after the dynasty or during Interregnum, unless it has already become revealed earlier)
* Open (specifies that no privately tracked information is expected to be used in the dynasty, and any privately tracked information that does come into existence may be revealed immediately)

Create a new rule called Phases:

The game is split into two phases: Setting Patrols, and Planning the Break-in. The current phase is publicly tracked and defaults to Setting Patrols.

Guards may only make Preparation Actions during the Setting Patrols phase. Guards may only change their Route during the Setting Patrols phase.

Make a subrule of Phases called Showing the Patrols:

If every Guard has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians, then the Concierge may perform the Show the Patrols atomic action by doing the following:
* They make a post that does the following:
** Displays the Routes of every Guard.
** Displays each Preparation Action performed by each Guard during this phase as well as the Locations chosen for those actions
** Displays the locations of Artifacts
* They set the current Phase to Planning the Break-In

Make “The Break-In” a subrule of Phases. Remove the text ” and there are no Civilians” from it.

To the bullet point list in “The Break-In”, append

* Set the current Phase to Setting Patrols

In the rule Guards and Burglars, replace “If there are any Civilians” with

If there are any Civilians and it is the Setting Patrols phase

If the proposal “Lootin’ for sure this time” fails, then this proposal does nothing. Otherwise:
After the text

Each Agent has a Fame value and an Infamy value, both of which are publicly tracked numbers that default to 0.

as part of the same paragraph, add the text

Each Agent also has a privately tracked variable called Loot, which may be any positive integer and defaults to 0.

Replace the text

remove that Spot from the list of Spots which contains Artifacts

with

remove that Spot from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts, and increase said Burglar’s Loot by one.

Also, replace the text

Plus 4 for each Spot that was removed from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts as a result of that Burglar

with

, plus 4 for each point of Loot they currently have.

Also, replace the text

all Locations to blank, and all Routes to blank

with

all Locations to blank, all Routes to blank, and set all Agents’ Loot to 0.

In the subrule “Valuables”, replace the text “Select that many Spots and add them to the list of rooms which contain artifacts” with the following:

Select that many Spots and add them to the list of Spots which contain artifacts

In the sub rule “Valuables”, replace the text “Selected Spots may not be any Spots which contained artifacts prior to the previous Breaking In action.” With the following:

Selected Spots may not be any Spots which contained artifacts immediately prior to the previous Breaking In action.

In the rule “The Break In”, replace the text “remove that Spot from the list of rooms which contains an Artifact” with the following:

remove that Spot from the list of Spots which contains Artifacts

In the rule “The Break In”, remove the text “and increase the Burglar’s Reputed Infamy by 4 for each Spot that was removed from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts as a result of that Burglar” and add the following to the end of the bullet point in the same action which begins with “For each Burglar that encountered no Guards”:

Plus 4 for each Spot that was removed from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts as a result of that Burglar”

@TDS: I enacted “Loot Grabbin’” but I think there are two issues with it:

“Select that many Spots and add them to the list of rooms which contain artifacts” and “remove that Spot from the list of rooms which contains an Artifact” may not make sense since “rooms” isn’t well-defined

The proposal instructions said to add ” and increase the Burglar’s Reputed Infamy by 4 for each Spot that was removed from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts as a result of that Burglar” to the second-to-last bullet point in Breaking In, but I’m not sure that’s the right place, or maybe the phrase “the Burglar” doesn’t make sense because we don’t know which Burglar that applies to.

Take a look at the rules “Valuables” and “The Break-In” and you’ll see what I mean.

In “Guards And Burglars” replace

Each Agent is either a Guard, a Burglar or a Civilian, defaulting to Civilian. This is publicly tracked.

If there are any Civilians, then the Concierge should select one in a secretly random manner and either:

with

Each Agent is either a Guard, a Burglar, a Civilian or Unassigned, defaulting to Civilian. This is publicly tracked.

If it has been at least 48 hours since end of the last Break In and they have not already done so since the last Break In, then the Concierge may set all Agents to be Unassigned

If there are any Unassigned Agents, then the Concierge should select one in a secretly random manner and either:

In “The Break-In” replace “If every Agent has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians” with

If every non-Civilian Agent has a non-blank Route and there are no unassigned Agents

In the rule “The Break-In” add a subrule named “Reminders” with the following text:

Remind is an action in which the Concierge sends a private communication to every Agent with a blank Route where that communication contains a reminder for that Agent to set their Location and Route. If half of the Agents (rounded down) or less have a blank Route, at their earliest convenience the Concierge should perform Remind if the Concierge has not done so since the last time Breaking In was performed or since the start of this dynasty, whichever is most recent.

Create a new dynastic rule named “Money” with the following body:

The Surplus is a publicly tracked non-negative integer defaulting to 0.

Each Agent has a certain amount of Money, which is a publicly tracked non-negative integer value defaulting to 0, and a Haul, which is privately tracked by the Concierge and is set to 0 at the beginning of each Breaking In action. Each Spot (that is not an Ingress) also has a certain amount of Income, which is a publicly tracked non-negative integer defaulting to 0. If all Incomes are 0, the Concierge may set each Income to an integer between 1 and 20 inclusive selected in a secretly random manner, separately for each Spot.

Directly after “is now considered to have Encountered that Guard”, add “. If a Burglar has Encountered three or more Guards during the course of this action, they are considered to be Caught for the remainder of this action”

Add the following substep to the end of the first step in the Breaking In atomic action in the rule “The Break-In” (if Loot Grabbin’ was enacted, add it before the substep that that Proposal added):

** If the Spot that the Agent’s Location was just set to has an Income and they are the only Agent at that Spot, add that Location’s Income to that Agent’s Haul

If Loot Grabbin’ was enacted, directly after “There are Spots which contain Artifacts, which are publicly tracked on the gamestate page as a list.”, add “If a Spot contains an Artifact, its Income is considered to be doubled for the purposes of the Breaking In atomic action.”

Add the following steps to the end of the Breaking In atomic action:

* Add up the Haul of every Burglar that wasn’t Caught. Divide that sum by the number of Burglars who weren’t caught, add the remainder to the Surplus and add an amount of Money equal to the rounded-down result of the division to each Burglar who wasn’t Caught
* Set the Income of each Spot that isn’t an Ingress to an integer between 1 and 20 inclusive, selected separately for each Spot in a secretly random manner.

To the end of the appendix rule Random Generators, append:

Statistical flaws in the Dice Roller are to be treated as non-existent for the purposes of generating random results.

Append as a new paragraph at the end of “Routes”:

The Concierge may publicly reveal the number of Agents who have blank Routes at any time, either via a blog post or comment or via placing the value on the gamestate tracking page, and is encouraged to do so whenever the number changes.

In the Appendix rule “Numbers and Variables”, after

If a piece of information is described as being tracked secretly or privately by the Concierge (including secretly random selections), then that information may only be revealed by the Concierge when the ruleset allows it.

add

The Concierge is always allowed to reveal such information during Interregnum, or if the rule that defines that piece of information has been repealed, and dynastic rules may define other conditions under which it may be revealed.

In “Routes”, replace “A Route is complete if each of its letters after the first is that of a Spot which is Connected to the Spot whose letter is the previous letter in the Route (or is the same as that previous letter)” with:-

A Route is complete if each of its Spots after the first is Connected to the previous Spot in the Route (or is the same as that previous Spot)

In “The Break-In”, replace “Set each Agent’s Location to their Letter in their Route at the position equal to the Minute” with:-

Set each Agent’s Location to the Spot in their Route at the position equal to the Minute

Add a new entry to the “Desired Gamestyle” section of the Imperial Styles wiki page:

* Timekeeper (will oppose mechanics which reward or punish players for being online or offline at particular times - which may include daily and weekly actions - or which incentivise rapid responses to game events)

In the phrase “defined on the wiki page Imperial Styles” in “Victory and Ascension”, replace “Imperial Styles” with “[[Imperial Styles]]”.

If there is a rule called The Break-In, amend the following text in it:

If every Agent has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians, then the Concierge may perform the following atomic action of Breaking In:

to read as follows:

If there are no Civilians, and at least half (rounded up) of all Agents have a non-blank Route, then the Concierge may Put Out The Call, which is an action in which they make a Story Post with a title that contains the phrase Putting Out The Call in its title. If the Concierge has most recently Put Out The Call more than 24 hours ago, and has not carried out the Breaking In action since the last time they Put Out The Call, then they may perform the following atomic action of Breaking In, with any Agent whose Route was blank at its commencement being considered not an Agent for the purposes of its completion:

If “A Measure of Competence” failed, do nothing. Otherwise:

Create a new rule, “Preparation Actions”:

Some actions are defined as Preparation Actions. If an Agent performs a Preparation Action, that Agent cannot perform another Preparation Action (nor another copy of the same Preparation Action) until after the next Break-In action has been completed.

An Agent cannot perform Preparation Actions unless at least one of the following statements is true for that Agent:
* There are at most 2 other Agents whose Fame is greater than or equal to that Agent’s, or
* There are at most 3 other Agents whose Infamy is greater than or equal to that Agent’s.

Create a subrule “Distractions” of “Preparation Actions”:

“Plan a Distraction” is a virtual Preparation Action that only Burglars can perform, and a number must be specified in order to perform it. During the next Break-In action after a Burglar performs the Plan a Distraction action, Burglars are not considered to have the same Location as Guards while the Minute is the specified number, even if their Location values are the same.

If “The Way In” was enacted, create a subrule “The Back Door” of “Preparation Actions”:

“Create a Back Door” is a virtual Preparation Action that only Burglars can perform, and a lettered Spot must be specified in order to perform it. When this action is performed, until the next Break-In action has completed, the specified Spot is considered to connect to “Grounds” for the purpose of determining whether Routes submitted by Burglars are complete.

If “The Way In” and “Loot Grabbin’” were both enacted, change “a lettered Spot must be specified” to “a lettered Spot that does not contain an Artifact must be specified” in “The Back Door”.

If “Treasure” was enacted, create a subrule “Treasure Radar” of “Preparation Actions”:

“Locate the Treasure” is a virtual Preparation Action, and three Spots must be specified in order to perform it. When an Agent performs this action, the Concierge should as soon as possible inform that Agent of the amount of Treasure in each of the chosen Spots.

Create a subrule “Camera Trap” of “Preparation Actions”:

“Place a Camera Trap” is a virtual Preparation Action that only Guards can perform, and a lettered Spot must be specified in order to perform it. During the next Break-In action after a Guard performs the Place a Camera Trap action, any time a Burglar’s Location becomes equal to the specified Spot, that Burglar is considered to have Encountered a Camera Trap.

In “The Break-In”, change “who encountered Guards, and naming the Guards that each encountered” to “who encountered Guards or Camera Traps, naming the Guards that each encountered and specifying whether each encountered a Camera Trap”.

In “The Break-In”, after “For each Burglar that encountered no Guards, set their Infamy to 12 minus the number of spots in their Route that are Grounds” add “minus 4 (to a minimum of 0) if they encountered a Camera Trap”

Just as a reminder to folks who weren’t around in the last dynasty, we have a new Building Block called Revisions Allowed which makes use of the voting icon to indicate that you like a Proposal but it has some things that need tweaking, as opposed to completely disliking anything about a Proposal.

This gives the author a chance to have their Proposal resolved as “failed” out-of-sequence with others in the queue, giving them a slot back sooner to re-post the Proposal with any recommended changes.

On the whole BlogNomic moves way, way too fast for me, but the basic framework for this dynasty seems relatively easy to keep up with so far. Here’s hoping it stays that way.

Please unidle me.

If the proposal “Treasure” Passed, this proposal does nothing

Create a new subrule of the rule “The Hotel”, titled “Valuables”:

There are Spots which contain Artifacts, which are publicly tracked on the gamestate page as a list. If there are no Spots which currently contain Artifacts, the Concierge may take the atomic action titled “Scattering Valuables” which is as follows:
* Secretly randomly determine a number between 2 and 4 inclusive.
* Select that many Spots and add them to the list of rooms which contain artifacts.
** Selected Spots may not be any Spots which contained artifacts prior to the previous Breaking In action.

Add the following as an additional step to the “Breaking In” atomic action, as a third substep of the first item in the action:

** For each Burglar who is the only Agent at a Spot which contains an Artifact, remove that Spot from the list of rooms which contains an Artifact.

If the proposal “A measure of Competence” passed, also add the following, appended to the end of the second-to-last bullet point of the “Breaking In” atomic action:

and increase the Burglar’s Reputed Infamy by 4 for each Spot that was removed from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts as a result of that Burglar

Add the following as a final step in the “Breaking In” atomic Action:

* Remove all Spots from the list of Spots which contain Artifacts, then perform the “Scattering Valuables” atomic action.

If the proposal “The Way In” enacted, add the following as another sub-bullet point for the second step in the “Scattering Valuables” atomic action:

** Selected Spots may not be any Spots which are listed as Points of Ingress, nor may they be adjacent to any such Spots, and they may not be the Grounds.

If the proposal “Be prepared. Be very prepared” passed, append the following sentence to the subrule “The Back Door”:

A Spot which contains an Artifact may not be selected in this manner.

Add a new dynastic rule called “Treasure” and give it the following text

Each Agent has a Score, which is publicly tracked and defaults to 0.

Each spot has a non-negative integer amount of Treasure in it, which is privately tracked by the Concierge and defaults to 0

Each Burglar can carry up to three Treasure, and by default caries 0. The number of Treasures a Burglar is carrying is privately tracked by the Concierge.

When one or more Burglars Scout the same Spot at the same time, then the Concierge should secretly determine a random order for those Burglars and then in that order: if the scouted Spot has least one Treasure in it and the selected Burglar is not already carrying three Treasures, the number of Treasures in the room are reduced by 1 and the number of Treasures the Burglar is carrying are increased by 1

When a Guard Scouts a Spot, the Concierge should privately inform them how much Treasure is in that spot. This happens after any Burglars Scout the same spot.

When a Burglar Encounters a Guard, all Treasures they are carrying are moved to the room they encountered the Guard in, and the Guard(s) they encountered each receive score equal to the number of Treasures the Encountered Burglar was carrying

When the Agents disperse, if a Burglar’s Location is the Grounds, they cease to be carrying all Treasures they were carrying and gain that number of score

In “The Break In” after “Set each Agent’s Location to their Letter in their Route at the position equal to the Minute” add “. If their position remained unchanged as a result of this action, they are considered to have Scouted the spot. This happens before any Encounters”

If either “The Way In” or “Cops and Robbers” was not enacted, this proposal does nothing.

As a new paragraph, append to Guards and Burglars:

Each Agent has a Fame value and an Infamy value, both of which are publicly tracked numbers that default to 0.

In the Breaking In atomic action of “The Break-In”, immediately above the bullet point starting “The Agents disperse”, add the following bullet points.

* For each Agent, set their Fame and Infamy values to 0.
* For each Guard that was encountered during this break in, set that Guard’s Fame to 3 multiplied by the number of unique Burglars they were encountered by
* For each Burglar that encountered no Guards, set their Infamy to 12 minus the number of spots in their Route that are Grounds

I’m un-idling myself!

In the Appendix rule “Random Generators”, add a subrule named “Dice Roller Flaws” with the following text:

The Dice Roller must not be used to generate random results except when explicitly allowed as described in dynastic rules. The rest of the text in this rule after this sentence is flavor text.

The issue with the Dice Roller’s random number generator is described in the blog post An analysis of the PHP 7.0.33 random number generation bug.

Add a new rule named “Skills and Flaws” with the following text:

Each Agent has a publicly tracked Skill and Flaw, both of which default to empty.

The set of valid Skills are the following, with the Flaw considered Opposite of that Skill indicated in brackets below:
* Quiet (Noisy)
* Dexterous (Clumsy)
* Quick (Slow)
* Cunning (Dim)
* Observant (Inattentive)
* Strong (Weak)

The set of valid Flaws are the following, with the Skill considered Opposite of that Flaw indicated in brackets below:
* Noisy (Quiet)
* Clumsy (Dextrous)
* Slow (Quick)
* Dim (Cunning)
* Inattentive (Observant)
* Weak (Strong)

If an Agent has not done so since the beginning of this dynasty, they may set their Skill and Flaw to non-empty legal values as an atomic action, as long as the Skill and Flaw chosen are not considered Opposites of each other.

An idea to allow interaction between Guards and Burglars to vary depending on the Skills and Flaws that meet up with each other. This also leads to strategic routes for both Guards and Burglars depending on their specific Skill and Flaw.

Please unidle me.

Create a new rule, “Preparation Actions”:

Some actions are defined as Preparation Actions. If an Agent performs a Preparation Action, that Agent cannot perform another Preparation Action (nor another copy of the same Preparation Action) until after the next Break-In action has been completed.

Create a subrule “Distractions” of “Preparation Actions”:

“Plan a Distraction” is a virtual Preparation Action that only Burglars can perform, and a number must be specified in order to perform it. During the next Break-In action after a Burglar performs the Plan a Distraction action, Burglars are not considered to have the same Location as Guards while the Minute is the specified number, even if their Location values are the same.

If “The Way In” was enacted, create a subrule “The Back Door” of “Preparation Actions”:

“Create a Back Door” is a virtual Preparation Action that only Burglars can perform, and a Spot must be specified in order to perform it. When this action is performed, until the next Break-In action has completed, the specified Spot is considered to connect to “Grounds” for the purpose of determining whether Routes submitted by Burglars are complete.

Amend the Appendix rule Date and Time Tracking to be the following:

The Entry Date field of an Official Post may be modified by its author, an Admin, or the Concierge, only under the following conditions and only in the following ways:
* If an Official Post is older than 7 days but needs to remain Sticky on the front page of the Blog then its Entry Date may be edited to the time of the edit, to within a minute, with the original date and time at which it was posted added to the Commentary or flavour text field of that post, in which case the original time of posting remains the time at which it was posted.
* If an Official Post has been made visible on the blog within the preceding 6 hours, then the Entry Date field may be amended to match the timestamp for the first revision of the post (i.e. the timestamp for the initially posted version).

In “The Hotel”, after “(The red letters, yellow circles and blue lines on the map image are not considered to be flavour text.)”, append as part of the same paragraph:

Additionally, “Grounds” is a Spot, but not a lettered Spot.

Add as a new paragraph to the end of “The Hotel”:

A Spot is an Ingress if and only if it appears on the List of Ingresses, which is a publicly tracked list of Spots. “Grounds” is considered to connect to each Ingress.

In “Routes”, after “if the Route is exactly twelve letters in length.” but in the same paragraph, add:

Civilians cannot perform this action. Burglars can perform this action only if the first and last Spots in the Route are each either “Grounds” or an Ingress (they may be the same or different). Guards can perform this action only if “Grounds” does not appear in the Route.

In “Routes”, change “if the Route is exactly twelve letters in length” to “if the Route is exactly twelve Spots in length” and change “string of letters” to “string of Spots”.

Set the List of Ingresses to C, G, N, X.

Enact a new rule, “Guards and Burglars”:-

Each Agent is either a Guard, a Burglar or a Civilian, defaulting to Civilian. This is publicly tracked.

If there are any Civilians, then the Concierge should select one in a secretly random manner and either:
* If there are more Burglars than Guards, make them a Guard
* If there are more Guards than Burglars, make them a Burglar
* If there are as exactly many Guards as Burglars, make them either a Guard or a Burglar in a secrely random manner

Each Agent has a Location, which is either a Spot in the Hotel Nagelburg, or blank (indicating that they are not present in the Hotel). Locations are tracked privately by the Concierge.

Enact a new rule, “The Break-In”:-

If every Agent has a non-blank Route and there are no Civilians, then the Concierge may perform the following atomic action of Breaking In:

* For each of the numbers 1 through 12 in sequence, repeatedly perform the following substeps with that number as its “Minute”:
** Set each Agent’s Location to their Letter in their Route at the position equal to the Minute
** Each Burglar who has the same Location as a Guard is now considered to have Encountered that Guard
* The Agents disperse: set every Agent to be a Civilian, all Locations to blank, and all Routes to blank
* Post a blog entry announcing the end of the Break In, and naming all Burglars (if any) who encountered Guards, and naming the Guards that each encountered

Enact a new rule, “The Hotel”:-

[[File:Hotel Nagelburg.png|thumb|The map of the Hotel Nagelburg]]

The Hotel Nagelburg has a number of lettered Spots, indicated on its map as a red letter inside a yellow circle. If two Spots are joined by a blue line that passes through no other Spots, then those two Spots are Connected. (The red letters, yellow circles and blue lines on the map image are not considered to be flavour text.)

The Concierge may make edits to the map of the Hotel Nagelburg at any time, so long as doing so would not change how any rules interpreted its content.

Enact a new rule, “Routes”:-

Each Agent has a Route, being a string of letters which is privately tracked by the Concierge.

A Route is complete if each of its letters after the first is that of a Spot which is Connected to the Spot whose letter is the previous letter in the Route (or is the same as that previous letter) and if the Route is exactly twelve letters in length.

An Agent may change their Route to any complete Route, or to a blank string, as a virtual action.

As you can see, the Hotel Nagelburg very much dominates Zahndorf’s town square, and is one of very few buildings to survive from the valley’s silver mining days. When the hotel was built, the town was a bustling one, with travellers and brokers flocking from across the empire and needing a place to rest, to eat and to do business. The ground floor restaurant - ah, right on cue I see old Magnus is dimming the grand chandeliers - would have swelled with light and music well into the night, with patrons drifting in from the Crown Theatre next door which, yes, you see is nothing but wasteland today, it was sadly never rebuilt. Do mind your step through the fence here.

The tall sash windows on this side are no less ornate, if a little neglected, and you’ll note that the baroque woodwork on the ... third, fourth, fifth ... window’s jamb is of a style that can easily - if you’ll just, ah, give me a leg up here, thank you - can easily support a person’s weight as a handhold. The mechanism should be, if I can just, yes, has been left unlocked.

Of course, the old hotel itself only has minimal security on staff these days, but its clientele will often bring their own protection or hire locally when they’re staying or holding a meeting in these side rooms. Our target will be through the kitchens on the north side, and Magnus says they take the dogs out to the courtyard at ... a quarter to midnight, yes, there we see the torch lights. No, they can’t hear us at this distance.

This ballroom would have been a sight in its heyday! These aren’t the original fittings of course, but are very much in the style. The place is rarely used now, and as you see, keep down behind the dust sheets please, it’s really more of a storage space. From this side of the room we’ll have five minutes or so before the - who? Behind us? No, Magnus said those doors would be… Ah. Ah now.

Change “Nomicer” to “Agent” and “Imperator” to “Concierge”. Change the gamestate tracking page to “The Town”.

Activate the Building Blocks “Reinitialisation”, “Virtual Actions”, “Precondition Unidling”, “Edit Window” and “Revisions Allowed”.

My Imperial Style will be Gardener/Preservationist/Powerhouse/Guarded/Methodical plus a new non-existent style I will call “Scam-Gradual” (which I think someone else had a similar take on recently): I’ll play it as Scam-Mundane in the late game, but may move to close loopholes I notice in the first week or so of play. I’ll also invoke and later propose to enshrine a new Style of “Timekeeper”: I’ll be against mechanics which strongly incentivise players to act at particular times of day or in rapid response to their opponents (as the daily/weekly actions did last dynasty) and will propose to amend any that emerge.

Throughout the rest of this proposal, replace the term “Player” and “Players” with the appropriate synonymous terms as outlined in the current dynasty

Remove the following text from rule 1.2.1:

, or if that Player has not posted an entry or comment in the past 168 Hours (7 days).

Add a new subrule to rule 1.2.1, called Torpor:

If an Active Player has been an Active Player in the current Dynasty for the past 7 days and meets any of the following criteria then they are in a state of Torpor:
* They have posted neither any proposals nor any comments for the past 168 hours (7 days)

Any Admin may render a Player who is in a state of Torpor Idle at any time.

Add the following as a new Building Block, called Tighter Torpor:

If an Active Player has been an Active Player in the current Dynasty for the past 7 days and meets any of the following criteria then they are in a state of Torpor:
* They have posted neither any proposals nor any comments for the past 96 hours (4 days)
* They have taken no dynastic actions in the past 168 hours (7 days)

Throughout the rest of this proposal, replace the term “Player” and “Players” with the appropriate synonymous terms as outlined in the current dynasty

Add a new building block to the building blocks called “The Bench” with the following text

Some Players may be On The Bench, and are signified as such with a ! next to their name on the sidebar. Unless otherwise stated by a dynastic or Building Blocks rule, then for the purposes of dynastic and Building Blocks rules other than this one, the Players who are on the Bench are not considered to be Players

By default, new Players who join or who unidle are On the Bench (even if they were not previously on the bench when they idled, they are still put on the bench when they unidle). Active Players at the time this rule is enabled (or a new dynasty begins with this rule included) are not on the bench. The act of Unbenching a Player consists of making them no longer on the bench.

If there are no dynastic rules which outline how a Player is to be unbenched, players who wish to be unbenched are encouraged create a proposal requesting to be unbenched

If it is not the 24th Dynasty of Josh, and the current Emperor’s EVC includes the phrase “Turn it on”, then copy The Bench building block to the active building blocks for the current dynasty.

A post-dynastic debrief thread.

Under the Imperator’s Assessment of the Nomicers, I have achieved victory as the most Meritous Nomicer.

Kevan.

Just a quick reminder that the rules around enacting Popular proposals changed recently from a 12-hour minimum to 24 hours, to those admins who might be up late Saturday night.

In “Mill”, change

and Record the Sin that they view this Nomicer as having performed

to

and Record a Sin (they should choose a Sin that they consider the Nomicer whose Equity was reduced to have performed)

In the rule “Lacunaic Actions”, add the following text:

Lacunaic Actions may only be taken while the game is in a state of Lacuna.

Revert all Heightened Mill actions taken between 06 April 2025 18:24 UTC and the enactment of this Proposal.

In the rule “Equity”, replace “Add any way to gain or remove Chips or Jokers” with “Add any way to gain or remove Discs or Jokers”.

Give each Nomicer 3 Jokers, including the idle Nomicer SingularByte.

In “Equity” replace “Add any way to gain or remove Chips or Jokers, outside of Nomicers spending them to perform game actions.” with “Add any way to gain or remove Disks or Jokers, outside of Nomicers spending them to perform game actions.”

Remove the following from the Appendix rule Names:

Within the Ruleset, a word only refers to the name of a Nomicer if it is explicitly stated that it refers to a Nomicer’s name.

Add the following to the bulleted list in the rule Fair Play:

A Nomicer should not interpret any text in the ruleset as being the name of a Nomicer unless it clearly and unambiguously is intended to refer to that Nomicer, nor should they attempt to amend their own name or the name of any other Nomicer with the intent creating ambiguity of meaning by matching text in the ruleset.

In “Announcements of Attainment”, change “provided that they have an Equity that is at least 3 times greater than the Float” or ““provided that they have an Equity that is at least 2 times greater than the Float” (whichever exists in the rule) to ““provided that they have an Equity that is at least 5 times greater than the Float”.

Set the Standard Reward to 2.

For each Nomicer who was Active at 20:47:54 on April 1 2025, set that Nomicer’s Joker count, Disc Count, and Equity to match the value that it had on the tracker at that time.

For each Nomicer who was not Active at that point in time, set that Nomicer’s Jokers to 3, set that Nomicer’s Discs to 3, and that Nomicer’s Equity to 9.

Change the history of the gamestate by considering all Reinitialisation actions this dynasty to not have been performed.

In the first bullet point in “Announcements of Attainment”, change “Nomicers who used the action defined in “Reinitialisation” during Lacuna” to:

Nomicers who used the action defined in “Reinitialisation” during the current state of Lacuna

In “Announcements of Attainment”, change “When a Nomicer has made such a post in this way, the game is placed into a state of Lacuna” to:

When a Nomicer has made such a post in this way, excluding such a post by ais523 on 1 April 2025, the game is placed into a state of Lacuna

And add after the sentence containing that clause:

The game may not be in a state of Lacuna as a result of the aforementioned post by ais523 on 1 April 2025.

Remove from “Equity” the sentence “The default starting Equity for a new Nomicer is their Liability, divided by the number of Nomicers including themselves, rounded up to the nearest integer.” Add a new subrule to Actions above all other subrules called “Initialize” as follows:

No more than once per dynasty, after a Nomicer is unidled but before voluntarily taking any other game actions, a Nomicer may set their equity to their Liability divided by the number of Nomicers including themselves, rounded up to the nearest integer.

Repeal “No Rolling”.

Add a new dynastic rule, called Imperator Pick:

As a Lacunaic Action, the Imperator may Assess the Nomicers. Assessing the Nomicers entails evaluating each Nomicer along the following axis, to the best of their knowledge and from their own perspective, using a mixture of objective and subjective data at their own discretion, which is prioritised in the following list from most heavily weighted to least:
* Extent to which they advanced their own position through the contents of Proposals that they made;
* Extent to which they used their votes on the Proposals of others to advance their own positions;
* Quality of tactical choices made in the execution of dynastic actions;
* Development of scams and pooling agreements with other Nomicers;
* Equity held as of this gamestate edit.

The Imperator should then privately give each Nomicer a Merit Score, which should be derived wholly from the assessment made previously in the same Assess the Nomicers action with the weightings for the different criteria consistently applied, such that the top-weighted factor accounts for 25% of each Nomicer’s Merit Score and the bottom-weighted factor accounts for 15% of each Nomicer’s Merit Score.

The Imperator should then privately assess which of the Nomicers is the most Meritous. The most Meritous Nomicer will generally be the Nomicer whose Merit Score is highest; if, however, more than one Nomicer is essentially tied for the highest Merit Score (i.e. within 5% of each other’s value) then the Imperator may make a subjective selection amongst those Nomicers to be the most Meritous.

The Nomicer who is most Meritous has achieved Victory. The Imperator should make a post announcing the identity of the most Meritous Nomicer. This ends the Assessing the Nomicers action.

The Imperator is strictly forbidden from allowing any Nomicer, including themselves, to influence the outcome of an Assess the Nomicers action for reasons unrelated to the merit performance of the participants in this dynasty.

According to Kevan, BlogNomic (and thus its dice roller) are currently running on PHP 7.0.33. This version of PHP contained a random number generation bug, which I’ll use this post to try to explain in case it informs voting on any of the relevant CFJs. (We were a bit unlucky with the version choice here; the very next version of PHP contained a partial fix for the bug, and it was fully fixed in 7.2.)

PHP 7.0.33’s random number generators, rand() and mt_rand(), suffer from a bug known as “modulo bias”. This often occurs naturally when trying to simulate a dice roll using a roll of a larger dice, if the number of sides of the smaller dice doesn’t divide into the number of sides of the larger dice, and don’t allow for the remainder of the division. For example, suppose we tried to simulate a DICE3 using a DICE100. The correct way to do that looks like this:

DICE100 result is 1-33: DICE3 result is 1
DICE100 result is 34-66: DICE3 result is 2
DICE100 result is 67-99: DICE3 result is 3
DICE100 result is 100: reroll

However, random number generators with modulo bias don’t have the reroll case, and instead treat the “remainder” results as one of the other cases, usually the lowest ones. If a random number generator with modulo bias tries to simulate a DICE3 using a DICE100, it does something like this:

DICE100 result is 1-34: DICE3 result is 1
DICE100 result is 35-67: DICE3 result is 2
DICE100 result is 68-100: DICE3 result is 3

This avoids rerolling, but the probabilities aren’t quite the same – there’s a very small bias towards low numbers (in this case, the result of 1 is ⅔% more likely than it should be, and the results of 2 and 3 are ⅓% less likely than they should be).

In PHP 7.0.33, rand() and mt_rand() simulate a random number by first rolling a DICE4294967296, and then mapping that onto the range of desired outputs using an algorithm with modulo bias. That means that if the number of sides on the dice doesn’t exactly divide into 4294967296, then some of the outcomes (usually the lowest) will be marginally more likely than others (usually the highest). However, the probabilities are only wrong in cases which would otherwise be a reroll. For example, 4294967296 ÷ 237 has a remainder of 208, so 4294967088/4294967296 of the time (i.e.99.999995% of the time), you get a fair result on a DICE237; the other 208/4294967296 of the time (i.e. 0.000005% of the time) you get a bias towards certain outcomes. (I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether you think such a small bias is relevant.)

It’s almost impossible to observe this sort of issue experimentally unless you roll a dice with a very large number of sides (which is why Clucky’s tests showed no obvious issue); the issue is that the probability of any given result can’t be wrong by more than 1 in 4,294,967,296, so the only way to observe the problem is to have a very large number of possible results so that the tiny differences in probability can add up (one 1-in-4-billion mistake isn’t observable, a billion of them cumulatively are). Even then, some numbers are better at exposing the issue than others. One of the best examples is DICE1717986918, which has a 60% chance to roll the “more likely” half of numbers and a 40% chance to roll the “less likely” half of numbers – this number is chosen due to being (approximately) 4294967296 ÷ 2½ and thus gives over 800 million possible reroll cases, wiith half the possible outputs selectable in a reroll case and the other half not selectable when the random number generator incorrectly fails to reroll.

That said, although modulo bias usually favours low results, PHP 7.033 seems to use a different pattern for which results are the “more likely” ones, i.e. the results it returns when it’s supposed to reroll – although I initially assumed that it would favour low results (due to being a modulo-bias bug and due to the way those normally work), this particular bug doesn’t follow that trend. In the case of DICE1717986918, the “more likely” values are the values that give a remainder of 2 or 3 when dividing by 4, and the “less likely” values are the values that give a remainder of 0 or 1 when dividing by 4. This is a more complex pattern than I was expecting, and it’s hard to tell how it would generalise to other numbers (it’s also almost impossible to determine a pattern experimentally, without already knowing it, because the amounts by which the probabilities are incorrect is so small).

Further reading about the specific bug in PHP, including some simulations, can be found in this offsite forum post that I found via an Internet search.

Add a new dynastic rule, called Imperator Pick:

As a Lacunaic Action, the Imperator may make a single post in the Story Posts category whose title contains the phrase ‘Imperator Pick’ and whose body contains the name of a single Nomicer and no other content. That Nomicer has achieved Victory.

When making an Imperator Pick, the Imperator is encouraged but not required to consider who they think deserves to win the dynasty on the basis of merit.

The Imperator must, in the comments to the Imperator Pick post, disclose the fact and content of any private communications they have received from active or idle Nomicers since the proposal that instituted this rule was posted, with the sole exception of communications from the Nomicer called SingularByte that relate entirely to the game of Diplomacy that they are playing unrelated to BlogNomic.

In the core rules, in “Resolution of Proposals”, change

It has been open for voting for at least 12 hours.

to

It has been open for voting for at least 24 hours.

Create a new dynastic rule, “ais523 won”:

The Nomicer named “ais523” has achieved victory.

The Nomicer named “ais523” may post a Declaration of Victory even if less than 72 hours have passed since a Declaration of Victory with the same author was failed with at least one AGAINST vote.

I made the post as required by enacting Lacunexit, using the Equity at the time of enactment and of the post (regardless of ais’ further activities). ais won the dice roll when I performed the steps of the enactment.

If ais wishes to contest it due to his performing Reinitialisation at the same time, he may do so via CfJ.

If anyone wishes to render illegal my enactment of Lacunexit, or the performance of any actions of the steps of that enactment, they may do so via CfJ.

Please do not edit the actual Lacunexit enactment status nor the Lacunexit Enactment Proposal post. Comment on it if you wish.

Otherwise, post all the CfJs. Have the debates. But follow the process. No flip-flopping states you disgree with at this point, please.

Thanks, and enjoy the pure Nomic bliss.

I am Reinitialising.

At the time of this post, the Equity of each Nomicer was:

• ais523: 33
• Clucky: 21
• Darknight: 20
• DoomedIdeas: 22
• JonathanDark: 32
• Kevan: 23
• Lulu: 22
• Raven1207: 17
• SingularByte: 25
• Zack: 22

Sum of all Equities for dice roll: 237

Creating a range of dice roll results within DICE237 for each Nomicer that is equivalent to amount of Equity they hold as a proportion of 237 results in the following list. The result of my roll of DICE237 with the comment “Lacunexit” in the Dice Roller after I make this post will determine which Nomicer is selected according to the result of that roll falling into the inclusive range indicated below for each Nomicer, at which point I will comment on this post as to the result, and the Nomicer thus selected and named in that comment will have achieved victory:

• ais523: 1-33
• Clucky: 34-54
• Darknight: 55-74
• DoomedIdeas: 75-96
• JonathanDark: 97-128
• Kevan: 129-151
• Lulu: 152-173
• Raven1207: 174-190
• SingularByte: 191-215
• Zack: 216-237

I am reinitialising! Everyone else is doing it, so it must be cool.

In the rule “Fair Play” after “or Appendix rules scam to directly or indirectly cause a Nomicer to achieve victory” add “, or directly or indirectly prevent a Nomicer from achieving victory”

So, there is a rule that states ““Nomicers may correct obvious spelling, punctuation, typographical, and/or formatting mistakes in the Ruleset, the Building Blocks page, and their own Pending Votable Matters at any time, including replacing Spivak and gender-specific pronouns that refer to Nomicers with the corresponding forms of the singular ‘they’.”

I have asserted that the proposal Lacunexit is illegal, on the basis that the first such edit was Make->Madke, which cannot meaningfully be considered to be correcting a typo. I rendered the post illegal, but it was said to be rendered legal again under the fair play rule “A Nomicer should not use a Core, Building Blocks, or Appendix rules scam to directly or indirectly cause a Nomicer to achieve victory.”

This call for judgement is to assertain two things:
1. Whether the proposal Lacunexit is in fact illegal.
2. Whether or not fair play has been broken.

The changes that will be made upon enactment are that Lacunexit will be rendered illegal, even if it has been resolved, and any DoV that was made as a result of the victory granted by it will be made Illegal.
If this fails, and a significant number of people believe I have broken fair play, I will be happy to discuss what is required in order to make it right.

Randomly select a player out of ais523, DoomedIdeas, JonathanDark, Kevan, Raven1207,SingularByte to achieve victory.

Inform that individual that they have achieved victory.

Unidling.  Quorum is still 6.

I am also Reinitialising. (It’ll up my score from 14 to 22, so I might as well!)

First: what version of PHP is being used to run the blog software at the moment? (In my DoV, Josh brought up the possibility that the dice roller might be returning unfair results. This prompted me to look into the matter, and apparently versions of PHP before 7.2 had a mistake in their random-number-generation code that slightly biased dice rolls towards low results unless the number of the sides of the dice was a power of 2; PHP 7.2 fixed the bug. So if we’re concerned with dice roll fairness, it’d be useful to know whether our version of PHP was newer or older han that.)

Second: I first joined BlogNomic in 2009, and have been making extensive use of the private messaging feature since then to discuss, e.g., pooling agreements. I’ve been trying to keep all the information in those old messages around, in order to help keep a record of BlogNomic’s history. However, even after going through my messages to look for redundant messages that could be deleted (e.g. because they were entirely quoted within other messages), I’m still close enough to the private message list that it might cause problems if I needed to, e.g., run a dynasty where the Emperor managed private information. As such, I’d like to suggest that it might make sense to increase the PM storage limit (unless there’s some easy method of backing up PMs that I’m unaware of that might let me save the history whilst freeing up space for messages).

I am also Reinitialising

Append a new paragraph to the Appendix rule “Random Generators”:

If a rule requires that a value is selected “weighted randomly” from a set of options, each of which has an integer weight, the choice is made by posting a Dice Roller comment that contains a list of the options with positive weights (with each option’s weight specified alongside the option itself) and a roll of DICEN (where N is the total of the positive weights). Nothing else that could be confused for a list of options with weights, or for the dice roll, may be included in the comment. The selected option is determined from the dice roll result and list as follows: if the sum of the weighs of the first x-1 options on the list is strictly less than the dice roll, but the sum of the weights of the first x options on the list is greater than or equal to the dice roll, then the xth option is selected. (The sum of the weights of the first 0 options is 0.) It is not possible to make a weighted random selection unless at least one of the options has a positive weight.

I am Reinitialising.

(presuming I’m doing this right)

I wish to Reinitialising

Roll DICE115, then select the Nomicer from the list below where result of that dice roll falls within the inclusive number range listed next to that Nomicer’s name. The Nomicer thus selected has achieved victory.

• ais523: 1-33
• DoomedIdeas: 34-44
• JonathanDark: 45-73
• Kevan: 74-93
• SingularByte: 94-115

Make a post to the blog establishing how the result of a roll of DICE N, where N is the total amount of positive Equity held by Nomicers, will indicate an individual Nomicer, with each Nomicer having a chance of being selected that is equivalent to amount of Equity they hold as a proportion of N.

Roll DICE N. The result of that dice roll will indicate an individual Nomicer as set out in the post made in the first step of the resolution of this Proposal. That Nomicer has achieved Victory.

Make a comment to the post announcing the result identified in the second step of the resolution of this proposal.

If the CFJ “Roll Off Off” failed, do nothing. Otherwise, enact it if it still pending, then retitle the rule “No Rolling” to “Endgame Lockdown” and change its text to:

The Roll Off atomic action may not be performed. The rule “Golden Rule” is flavour text. Jokers cannot be spent.

Revert any changes made to Nomicer’s Equities this dynasty since 23:56:00 UTC on 03 Apr 2025.

Add a subrule to “Announcements of Attainment” called “No Rolling”:-

The Roll Off atomic action may not be performed.

Wiktionary gives the following three meanings for “heuristic”:

1. (of an approach to problem solving, learning, or discovery) That employs a practical method not guaranteed to be optimal or perfect; either not following or derived from any theory, or based on an advisedly oversimplified one.
2. (computing, of a method or algorithm) That provides a useful, but not optimal, solution to a problem. Such algorithms are typically employed either because the only known algorithms that provide optimal solutions use too much time or resources, or else because there is no known algorithm that provides an optimal solution.
3. (of an argument) That reasons from the value of a method or principle that has been shown by experimental investigation to be a useful aid in learning, discovery and problem-solving.

Merriam-Webster gives the following two meanings for “heuristic”:

1. involving or serving as an aid to learning, discovery, or problem-solving by experimental and especially trial-and-error methods
2. of or relating to exploratory problem-solving techniques that utilize self-educating techniques (such as the evaluation of feedback) to improve performance

The Cambridge English Dictionary gives the followng two meanings for “heuristic”:

1. (of a method of teaching) allowing students to learn by discovering things themselves and learning from their own experiences rather than by telling them things
2. arriving at a solution by trying different actions to see if they produce the result that is wanted, rather than using strict rules

The above definitions are for “heuristic” as an adjective, but all of them define the meaning as a noun as “an argument/method/procedure that is heuristic”.

The important thing here is that none of those definitions can be said to apply to “a description or table that plainly maps how the result of a dice roll will select a single Nomicer, such that each Nomicer has a chance of being selected equal to their Equity as a proportion of all Equity in the game.” Although such a description existed in my Roll Off post, the rule requires the victory to go to “the Nomicer selected by the dice roll as determined by the heuristic described in the post”, and as the table was not a heuristic, it’s clearly irrelevant in determining the winner of the dynasty.

To resolve this issue and allow the dynasty to end correctly, I also put something into the post that does seem to match the definition of a “heuristic” – a somewhat imperfect and biased method of rolling of by experimentally asking Nomicers if they thought they’d met a subjective victory threshold based on the dice roll. Being first in alphabetical order, I asked me first, and I replied that I did think I’d done enough. As such, the nomicer selected by the dice roll according to the heuristic was me, and thus I have achieved victory.

(The Nomicer selected according to the table is irrelevant, given that the table isn’t a heuristic – if we don’t go by the heuristic than nobody has won, and we will need a proposal or CFJ to fix the ruleset and allow the dynasty to end properly. As it happens, though, the dice roll according to the table also selected me, so this bug in the rules ended up not influencing the result.)

This is a Roll Off post.

The Equity held by each Nomicer is:

ais523: 33
Darknight: -3 (treated as 0 for Roll Off purposes)
DoomedIdeas: 11
JonathanDark: 29
Kevan: 20
Raven1207: -3 (treated as 0 for Roll Off purposes)
SingularByte: 22

Total (treating negative numbers as 0): 115

Here is table that assigns DICE115 roll results to Nomicers, with each Nomicer having a probability of victory proportional to the total Equity when Equities below 0 are treated as 0, and can be used by rolling a DICE115 and selecting the Nomicer whose result is in the specified range:

ais523: 1-33
Darknight: (no results)
DoomedIdeas: 34-44
JonathanDark: 45-73
Kevan: 74-93
Raven1207: (no results)
SingularByte: 94-115

The Roll Off rule does not disallow putting additional information into the Roll Off post. As such, I would also like to suggest an alternative, less optimal trial-and-error method of selecting a Nomicer via rolling off: roll a DICE115, then privately ask each Nomicer in alphabetical order whether, based on the dice roll result, they think they have done enough (in terms of Equity grinding and effort put into the dynasty) to win the dynasty (with low dice roll results meaning “not much effort/Equity is required” and high dice roll results meaning “a lot of effort/Equity is required, comparable to having 33 Equity and forcing a Lacuna to occur within a week of the dynasty starting”), until one of them replies that they do; then select that Nomicer as the winner of the roll off and stop there, without asking the other Nomicers. I appreciate that this method gives the wrong probabilities and is plainly biased; in particular, it is neither an optimal nor perfect method of rolling off for a winner. But it’s more interesting, especially from a scam-gameplay point of view!

Uphold Josh’s attempt to pay out bounties earlier today.

Move the dynastic rule “Bounties” to become a subrule of “Lacunaic Actions”.

If “Late Arrivals at the Nomicers’ Ball” failed, do nothing. Otherwise:

If any Nomicer has used the action defined in “Reinitialisation” this dynasty, for each such Nomicer, set that Nomicer’s Discs and Jokers to 0 and revert all dynastic actions that Nomicer has performed since then that spent Discs or Jokers.

In “Discs and Jokers”, change

These are publicly tracked and both default to 3.

to

These are publicly tracked and both default to 3 (except during Lacuna) or 0 (during Lacuna).

Replace the bracketed text in the first bullet point of “Announcements of Attainment” with:

(Nomicers with an Equity below zero, Nomicers who used the action defined in “Reinitialisation” during Lacuna, and Nomicers who were not Active when the current state of Lacuna began, are considered to have an Equity of zero for the purposes of these calculations.)

Repeal the dynastic rule “Wording Fixes” if it exists.

Add a new rule to the Building Blocks section called “Revisions Allowed” with the following text:

For use in voting, an arrow https://blognomic.com/images/vote/arrow.gif shall represent a Vote of REVISE, which is treated the same as an AGAINST voting icon with respect to all other rules except when a rule explicitly describes other uses or effects of the REVISE voting icon. Nomicers should use an AGAINST voting icon when voting against a proposal due to disagreement with the general idea behind the proposal and should use a REVISE voting icon when voting against a proposal for which they agree with the general idea behind the proposal, but disagree with the details or with the exact wording.

If a proposal’s author withdraws it using REVISE, and there were at least as many votes REVISE as votes AGAINST among the other (non-author) Nomicers’ Votes on that proposal at the time, then the proposal ceases to count against that author’s limit of 2 pending proposals and can be failed by any Admin, even if it is not the oldest pending proposal, and the author should submit a corrected version. If a proposal’s author is planning to withdraw a proposal, but not to submit a corrected version, they should withdraw it by voting AGAINST.

Add a new rule to the Building Blocks section called “Official Posts Required” with the following text:

If BlogNomic has not been on Hiatus for at least the past 168 Hours (7 days), Nomicers who have been Active Nomicers continuously during the past 168 Hours (7 days) but have not posted at least one Official Post within that same time frame do not count as Active Nomicers for the purpose of determining if BlogNomic should be put on Hiatus as described in the rule Dormancy. Nomicers are encouraged but not required to propose a dynastic way of associating Official Posts with public tracking on the gamestate tracking page to make it easier to determine when Dormancy should apply.

If the proposal “A Dark Night” enacted, replace the bracketed text in the first bullet point of “Announcements of Attainment” with:-

(Nomicers with an Equity below zero, and Nomicers who were not Active when the current state of Lacuna began, are considered to have an Equity of zero for the purposes of these calculations.)

If the proposal “A Dark Night” failed, add the above bracketed text to the end of that first bullet point instead.

Add the following as a subrule to the rule Announcements of Attainment, called Lacuna Protocols:

If the game is in Lacuna, and the Nomicer who posted the Announcement of Attainment no longer meets the criteria to make such a post, then as a Lacunaic Action any Nomicer may spend a Joker to make the following atomic action, called a Lacunaic De-escalation:

* Increase the numeral between the words “least” and “times” in the first sentence of the rule Announcements of Attainment by one
* Set the Jokers of all Nomicers to 3
* Make a post to the blog announcing that the game has exited Lacuna.

Once that action has been completed, the game is no longer in a state of Lacuna.

To the first bullet point in “Announcements of Attainment”, add:-

(Nomicers with an Equity below zero are considered to have an Equity of zero for the purposes of these calculations.)

Add the following to the end of the top-level text in the Building Blocks section:

Whenever the text of a Building Block rule is changed in the ruleset, or a new Building Block rule is added to the ruleset, those changes are also made to the Building Blocks page of the wiki.

In the core rule “Victory and Ascension”, change:

The Imperator’s Imperial Style, which if specified is a set of nonbinding guidelines that the Imperator is encouraged to follow, using the terms defined on the wiki page Imperial Styles.

to

The Imperator’s Imperial Style, which if specified is a set of nonbinding guidelines that the Imperator is encouraged to follow (possibly using terminology from the wiki page [[Imperial Styles]]).

(where the double square brackets represent a hyperlink to a wiki page).

In the definition of “Gamestate” in the subrule “Other” of the Appendix rule “Keywords”, change:

(except for the FAQ, the dynastic histories and discussion pages)

to

(except for the FAQ, the Imperial Styles page, the dynastic histories and discussion pages)

My Equity is 24, at least three times greater than the Float of 8.

In the rule “Actions”, add a subrule named “Peacekeeping” with the following text:

As Daily Action named Peacekeeping, a Nomicer who has exactly 1 Disc, and in the most recent 2 instances of performing an action that required spending a Disc that Nomicer did not reduce the Equity of another Nomicer as part those actions, may spend a Disc and immediately increase their Equity by the Standard Reward.

Add a new subrule “Sinful Proposals” to “Actions”, placing it immediately after “Ladder Combo”:

The author of a proposal that was enacted within the previous 48 hours may spend 1 Disc to increase that author’s Equity by the number of Sins that appeared as words in that proposal minus 4. This action cannot be performed twice for the same proposal.

In rule “Discs and Jokers”, add a subrule called “Love Perspex” with the following text:

As a daily action, a Nomicer may remove 1 of their white perspex Discs and 1 of their red perspex Jokers from their Spendables, and then add 1 pink perspex Heart to their Spendables. As a weekly action, a Nomicer may remove may remove 5 pink perspex Hearts form Spendables to increase their Equity by 1.

Add a new dynastic rule to the ruleset, called The Troll:

At any time, up to one Nomicer may be a Troll, with the existence and identity of the Troll being privately tracked by the Imperator. If there is no Troll then the Imperator may randomly select a Nomicer to be the Troll and commuicate that fact privately to the selected Nomicer.

The Troll’s objective is to generate negative Equity. Whenever a Nomicer ceases to be the Troll through any means other than an Accusation, any negative Equity they earned while they were the Troll is both reverted and then added to their Equity.

As a Daily Communal Action, provided that they have not done so within the preceding 72 hours, any Nomicer who is not the Troll may post an Accusation, which is a post with a title comprised of the [Accusation] tag and the name of a single other Nomicer, and optionally body text setting out their reasons for believing that the named Nomicer is the Troll. All Nomicers may vote on an Accusation; if the number of FOR votes exceed the number of AGAINST votes on the Accusation after 48 hours, or if the number of FOR votes on the Accusation exceed Quorum at any time, then it is Enacted, may be marked as Enacted by any Admin, and the named Nomicer, if they were the Troll, ceases so to be so without their Equity being adjusted as per the second paragraph of this rule. If an Accusation has been open for 48 hours and has not been Enacted then it is Failed and may be marked as such by any Admin.

In the rule “Numbers and Variables” in the Appendix section, after the text “blank (for a text string or list that may be blank),” insert the following text:

false (for variables or states that may only be either true or false),

Reword “Precondition Unidling” (both in the ruleset and in Building Blocks) to:-

Idle Nomicers may submit Calls for Judgement as if they were not idle; such CfJs are known as Precondition Calls, and should suggest terms (in the form of amendments to the ruleset and/or gamestate) on which the proposer would be willing to join the current dynasty. The proposer of a Precondition Call is not considered to have a vote on that CfJ while they remain idle.

If a Precondition Call enacts, the enacting admin must unidle its raiser before applying the Call’s effects. As an exception, this requirement does not apply where such an unidling would be impossible.

Add a new dynastic rule to the ruleset, called The Troll:

At any time, up to one Nomicer may be a Troll. If there is no Troll then the Imperator may randomly select a Nomicer to be the Troll and commuicate that fact privately to the selected Nomicer.

The Troll’s objective is to generate negative Equity. Whenever a Nomicer ceases to be the Troll through any means other than an Accusation, any negative Equity they earned while they were the Troll is both reverted and then added to their Equity.

As a Daily Communal Action, provided that they have not done so within the preceding 72 hours, any Nomicer who is not the Troll may post an Accusation, which is a post with a title comprised of the [Accusation] tag and the name of a single other Nomicer, and optionally body text setting out their reasons for believing that the named Nomicer is the Troll. All Nomicers may vote on an Accusation; if the number of FOR votes exceed the number of AGAINST votes on the Accusation after 48 hours, or if the number of FOR votes on the Accusation exceed Quorum at any time, then it is Enacted, may be marked as Enacted by any Admin, and the named Nomicer, if they were the Troll, ceases so to be so without their Equity being adjusted as per the second paragraph of this rule. If an Accusation has been open for 48 hours and has not been Enacted then it is Failed and may be marked as such by any Admin.

I will pay out bounties for proposals that successfully resolve any High Priority matters on the Laundry List, as it stands at 08h42 on 1 April 2025.

For each attempt to claim a Ladder Combo this dynasty whose target did not appear on the EFF Wordlist wiki page with 5 digits preceding it on the same line of that page, revert any gain of Equity and any addition to the list of Sins that resulted from the claim, and revert the reduction in Discs that occurred when spending a Disc to make that claim attempt.

Create a new dynastic rule, “The Tally”:

The Enactment Tally and Failure Tally are each publicly tracked numbers defaulting to 0.

Whenever a proposal is enacted, the Enactment Tally is increased by 1. Whenever a legal proposal is failed, the Failure Tally is increased by 1, unless the proposal was withdrawn using an arrow AGAINST icon.

The Nomicer Count is a number equal to the number of Nomicers (not including the Imperator), which is continuously calculated (rather than being publicly tracked).
Whenever the Enactment Tally is equal to or greater than the Nomicer Count, any Nomicer can reduce the Enactment Tally by the Nomicer Count and increase every Nomicer’s Equity by 1.
Whenever the Failure Tally is equal to or greater than the Nomicer Count, any Nomicer can reduce the Failure Tally by the Nomicer Count and reduce every Nomicer’s Equity by 1.

Reorder the ruleset by moving “Wording Fixes” to a location immediately after “The Tally”.

Add the following text to the (currently empty) dynastic rule “Actions”:

The Standard Reward is a publicly tracked number that can only be 1, 2, 3 or 4, and defaults to 2.

Add a new subrule, “Reward Manipulation”, to the dynastic rule “Actions”:

As a weekly action, a Nomicer can spend 1 Joker to increase or decrease the Standard Reward by 1.

In each of the dynastic rules “Golden Rule”, “Heightened Mill” and “Bounties”, replace all uses of the number “2” with “the Standard Reward”.