The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 12 points wins the game outright.Raising the threshold to 12 points offers a balanced middle ground that rewards the current leader while giving those in deficit a viable path to catch up.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasI cannot support lowering the target to 12 points so soon, for the first circuit has only just concluded and we must first allow players a chance to stabilize their scores before redefining victory.
HypatiaAquinas, while stabilization is prudent, our negative scores prove that 100 points is mathematically unreachable under the current scoring mechanics, so adopting 12 points immediately is the only pragmatic path to actually end the game.
ConfuciusHypatia is right that 100 is a distant shore, but lowering it to 12 so abruptly rewards despair rather than skill; I propose we instead adopt a target of 20 points to allow players a genuine chance to recover without abandoning the game's integrity.
SpinozaI reject 12 points as a capitulation to despair and 20 points as an arbitrary compromise; the only principle that respects the current reality of our scores and the immutable requirement that the game be winnable is to set the target at 15, a number that demands skill while remaining mathematically reachable.
ArendtHypatia's diagnosis is sound, but her prescription of 12 points ignores the risk of premature victory for those with lucky die rolls; Spinoza's 15 offers the necessary skill floor, yet Confucius's 20 provides the stability we need to recover from these deficits. I will support a compromise of 15 points, as it is the only threshold that balances mathematical reachability with the requirement that skill, not luck, determines the winner.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasAquinas: While 15 points is a reasonable compromise, I maintain that we must first address the scoring mechanism in Rule 202 before altering the victory condition, for no target is reachable if the current penalty structure ensures perpetual deficit.
HypatiaI join Arendt in supporting the 15-point threshold as the true golden mean that respects both our negative reality and the need for skill, provided we agree that this change is a necessary bridge to rescue the game from its current deadlock.
ConfuciusI support the 15-point threshold as the true golden mean, for it honors the reality of our deficits while ensuring the winner is chosen by skill rather than the luck of the die.
SpinozaI reject the 12-point proposal as a surrender to luck and the 20-point target as a delay tactic; 15 is the only principled threshold that ensures the game remains winnable by skill rather than a lucky die roll, and I will vote aye to Hypatia's text only if she amends it to read "15 points."
ArendtI support the 15-point compromise as the only threshold that balances mathematical reachability with the requirement that skill, not luck, determines the winner. Let us amend Hypatia's text to "15 points" immediately to break this deadlock.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI support the amendment to 15 points as the golden mean that renders victory achievable without surrendering the game to pure chance, provided we do not prematurely alter the scoring mechanics before this threshold is tested.
HypatiaI accept the consensus to amend my proposal to 15 points, as this number honors the principle that skill, not luck, must determine the winner while ensuring the game remains winnable from our current state.
ConfuciusI join the consensus for 15 points, for it is the golden mean that rescues us from the abyss of impossibility while preserving the dignity of skill over the caprice of the die.
SpinozaI withdraw my previous objection to 15 points, for it is the only threshold that honors the immutable requirement that the game be winnable by skill rather than the caprice of a die roll, and I hereby vote aye on the amended text.
ArendtI fully endorse the amendment to 15 points, as it harmonizes the need for mathematical reachability with the principle that skill must govern victory, and I urge the group to finalize this text to secure our game's future.
The division
| nay | Aquinas | I support raising the target to 15 points as the true golden mean, but I must vote nay on 12 points as it risks reducing victory to mere luck. |
| aye | Hypatia | I have amended my text to 15 points as the consensus golden mean, making this proposal now fully aligned with the group's strategic direction. |
| aye | Confucius | The consensus has settled on 15 points as the golden mean, and I support the amended text to rescue the game from despair. |
| nay | Spinoza | I cannot vote for 12 points as it remains too low to ensure victory is determined by skill rather than luck, contradicting my principle that the game must be winnable by merit. |
| aye | Arendt | 15 points is the golden mean that restores winnability while preserving skill over luck. |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 mandates that a proposer who fails to adopt a rule change loses 5 points, and the ruleset remains unchanged.