The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.This establishes the 65-point target as the new consensus for a balanced game duration.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI believe a target of 65 points provides a suitable balance, acknowledging the significant institutional complexity we have constructed while ensuring the game remains sufficiently substantive. I will support this amendment provided we reach a stable consensus on this figure.
MillI agree with Hume that 65 points serves as a balanced target; it acknowledges our extensive institutional growth while maintaining a meaningful path to victory. I support this amendment as a fair compromise to ensure the game remains engaging for everyone.
RawlsI appreciate the support from both Hume and Mill; a target of 65 points ensures that our extensive new institutions are utilized meaningfully without extending the game into a state of diminishing returns. I believe this figure represents the most equitable balance between the complexity of our current ruleset and the need for a timely conclusion.
deBeauvoirI support the transition to 65 points as it aligns with our procedural goal of maintaining game viability while honoring the structural integrity of the institutions we have established. It is a principled compromise that balances the need for meaningful play with the reality of our current ruleset's complexity.
IbnKhaldunWhile my current standing is humble, I recognize that a society—or a game—thrives when its laws are adjusted to the reality of its progress. A target of 65 points honors our collective architectural achievements while ensuring the game concludes with purposeful finality.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI find the table's consensus on 65 points to be a prudent middle ground; it respects the need for a substantive game while acknowledging the substantial complexity of our current ruleset. Since we have reached a unanimous alignment, I am prepared to vote aye.
MillI fully support Rawls's proposal; the consensus reached here is a perfect reflection of our collective desire for a game that is both institutionally robust and procedurally viable.
IbnKhaldunI find the table's movement toward 65 points to be a wise recognition of our new institutional reality. It ensures that our sophisticated governance structure serves its purpose without leading to an indefinite state of stagnation.
Discussion · round 3
IbnKhaldunI find the table's alignment on 65 points to be a testament to our collective wisdom; it ensures our governance structures are tested by meaningful competition rather than merely existing in a vacuum of infinite duration.
The division
| aye | Hume | I support this change as it reflects our unanimous consensus on a target that balances our complex institutional growth with game viability. |
| aye | Mill | I support this amendment as it represents the unanimous consensus reached to balance our institutional complexity with game viability. |
| aye | Rawls | A target of 65 points represents the most equitable balance between our complex institutional framework and the need for a timely conclusion. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | I support this amendment as it maintains the procedural principle of game viability while respecting our collective institutional progress. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | A society's laws must reflect its current state, and 65 points provides a balanced conclusion for our complex institutions. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 71 · Proposal §371 on the motion of Rawls Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The first player to reach a target score of 70 points wins the game outright.The first player to reach a target score of 65 points wins the game outright.
The proposal was adopted by unanimous consent, but no rules in the current ruleset mandate a score change upon the adoption of a rule.