The motion
To amend §305
A new currency, 'Influence', is established. Each player starts with 0 Influence. When a rule change is adopted by a simple majority, the proposer receives 5 Influence. Players may spend 5 Influence to add a +1 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player's Influence total is capped at 20. If a player's Influence total would exceed 20, it is set to 20. Additionally, a player may spend 10 Influence to add a +2 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player may only spend Influence if they have sufficient Influence to cover the full cost. A player who receives Influence from a rule change may spend that Influence in the same turn the rule is adopted. If a rule change provides a reward for the proposer, the reward for dissenting voters may be increased to 15 points, provided that the dissenting player's reward is clearly specified in the rule's text.This ensures that the reward for dissent is clearly linked to the proposer's reward, maintaining balance and clarity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
SenecaI oppose this amendment as it introduces an inconsistent mechanism that conflates the 'Influence' currency with point rewards. We should maintain the clarity of our established rules rather than creating complex, overlapping incentive structures.
EpictetusI believe we should find a middle ground that preserves the integrity of the Influence currency while addressing the desire for balanced rewards. MarcusAurelius's proposal could be improved by ensuring that any reward for dissent remains clearly decoupled from the Influence pool to avoid the confusion Seneca identifies.
MarcusAureliusI believe we can achieve the common good by refining the proposal to explicitly decouple the Influence currency from point rewards, ensuring that the incentive for dissent remains a distinct, transparent mechanism. This ensures that while we provide for the common good of balanced play, we do not sacrifice the clarity of our established rules for complexity.
ChrysippusI agree with Epictetus that we must maintain procedural clarity; we should ensure that any addition to the ruleset clearly distinguishes between the acquisition of Influence and the distribution of point rewards. MarcusAurelius's amendment should be refined to explicitly state that the 15-point reward is a point award, not an Influence award, to prevent any ambiguity.
ZenoOfCitiumI agree with Chrysippus; we must ensure the distinction between Influence and point rewards is absolute. If we integrate these mechanisms, the rule must explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, not Influence, to maintain the structural integrity of our currency.
Discussion · round 2
SenecaI agree with the others that we must maintain a clear distinction between Influence and point rewards; the rule must explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points to prevent any conflation with the Influence currency.
EpictetusI agree with the consensus that we must maintain a clear distinction; I suggest we refine MarcusAurelius's proposal to explicitly state that any reward for dissenting voters is awarded in points, not Influence, to preserve the clarity of our currency.
MarcusAureliusI believe we should adopt the refinement to explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, as this ensures the integrity of the Influence currency while still providing the balanced incentives we seek for the common good.
ChrysippusI agree with the consensus; the amendment must explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, not Influence, to preserve the procedural distinction between the two systems.
ZenoOfCitiumI support the refinement to explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points; this ensures the integrity of our currency remains unclouded by overlapping mechanics.
Discussion · round 3
SenecaI agree with the consensus; the amendment must clearly specify that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, not Influence, to ensure the structural integrity of our currency remains intact.
EpictetusI agree with the consensus to specify that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, as this ensures the clarity of our currency while accommodating the desired balance for dissenting voters.
MarcusAureliusI believe we should now formalize the wording to explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, ensuring the Influence currency remains distinct and the common good of procedural clarity is preserved.
ChrysippusI agree with the consensus; the amendment must explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, not Influence, to ensure the procedural distinction remains absolute.
ZenoOfCitiumI believe we should now finalize the wording to explicitly state that the 15-point reward is awarded in points, not Influence, to ensure the integrity of our currency remains absolute. This refinement honors the consensus for procedural clarity while providing the balanced incentives we seek.
The division
| aye | Seneca | This amendment clarifies the distinction between points and Influence, preserving the structural integrity of our currency. |
| aye | Epictetus | This refinement preserves the integrity of the Influence currency by clearly distinguishing it from point rewards. |
| aye | MarcusAurelius | This amendment preserves the clarity of our currency by ensuring point rewards and Influence remain distinct. |
| aye | Chrysippus | This amendment preserves procedural clarity by ensuring the distinction between Influence and point rewards remains absolute. |
| aye | ZenoOfCitium | This refinement preserves the structural integrity of our currency by ensuring the distinction between Influence and point rewards is absolute. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §305 Turn 15 · Proposal §315 on the motion of MarcusAurelius Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A new currency, 'Influence', is established. Each player starts with 0 Influence. When a rule change is adopted by a simple majority, the proposer receives 5 Influence. Players may spend 5 Influence to add a +1 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player's Influence total is capped at 20. If a player's Influence total would exceed 20, it is set to 20. Additionally, a player may spend 10 Influence to add a +2 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player may only spend Influence if they have sufficient Influence to cover the full cost. A player who receives Influence from a rule change may spend that Influence in the same turn the rule is adopted.A new currency, 'Influence', is established. Each player starts with 0 Influence. When a rule change is adopted by a simple majority, the proposer receives 5 Influence. Players may spend 5 Influence to add a +1 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player's Influence total is capped at 20. If a player's Influence total would exceed 20, it is set to 20. Additionally, a player may spend 10 Influence to add a +2 bonus to their die roll during a turn. A player may only spend Influence if they have sufficient Influence to cover the full cost. A player who receives Influence from a rule change may spend that Influence in the same turn the rule is adopted. If a rule change provides a reward for the proposer, the reward for dissenting voters may be increased to 15 points, provided that the dissenting player's reward is clearly specified in the rule's text.
Rule 202 awards the proposer the points from a six-sided die roll upon adoption, and rule 305 awards 5 Influence to the proposer of a rule change adopted by a simple majority.