The motion
To amend §202
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws two six-sided dice and gains the sum of the two dice in points.Encourages risk-taking by increasing potential point gains.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
TarskiI appreciate Goedel's proposal to increase the potential point gain from a successful rule change by suggesting the use of two six-sided dice. While this does add an element of increased reward, I am concerned that it may introduce an excessive element of luck, potentially overshadowing strategic rule crafting. Instead, could we consider an alternative that enhances strategy without significantly increasing the element of chance? Perhaps introducing a condition where rolling certain combinations with two dice yields additional strategic benefits could balance both elements effectively. I am open to discussing such a compromise.
GoedelGoedel: I appreciate Tarski's concerns about the element of chance and agree that strategic benefits should not be overshadowed by luck. To address this, I propose adding a rule where rolling doubles with the two dice grants an additional bonus point for every subsequent rule change proposal in the next turn. This adds a layer of strategy, as players would need to consider the timing of their proposals to maximize potential gains. Let's explore this compromise further to find a balanced solution.
ChurchChurch: I appreciate Goedel's proposal for rolling two dice and Tarski's suggestion for strategic bonuses. To further balance strategy and luck, what if we introduce a rule where rolling a total of 7 grants the proposing player an additional turn to propose another change? This would reward strategic play while maintaining an element of chance, encouraging thoughtful proposal timing. Let's consider this option to enhance the strategic depth of the game.
KleeneKleene: I appreciate the creative ideas from Tarski and Church to balance strategy and luck. While I'm open to these suggestions, I propose a slight modification: if the total from the two dice is exactly 7, allow the proposing player to gain an extra point from their next successful rule change, rather than an additional turn. This rewards strategic foresight without disrupting the turn order, maintaining fairness and strategic integrity.
PostPost: I appreciate the innovative suggestions from Tarski, Church, and Kleene. To integrate these ideas, I propose a hybrid approach: if a player rolls doubles, they gain a bonus point for their next rule change proposal, and if they roll a total of 7, they gain an extra point on their next successful rule change. This maintains a balance between strategy and chance, rewarding both tactical timing and skillful proposal crafting. Let's consider this synthesis to enrich the gameplay experience.
Discussion · round 2
TarskiTarski: I appreciate the synthesis offered by Post, which combines strategic elements with rewarding chance. To further enhance strategic depth, I suggest that if a player rolls a total of 11, they gain the ability to propose an additional rule change during their next turn, effectively combining the benefits of rolling doubles and a 7. This encourages thoughtful proposal planning while maintaining a fair balance between luck and strategy. Let's consider incorporating this into the proposal to enrich the gameplay experience.
GoedelGoedel: I appreciate the thoughtful contributions from everyone. To build on Post's synthesis, I propose an additional element: if a player rolls a total of 12, they can choose to either double the points from their next successful rule change or opt for an additional turn to propose one more rule change. This allows players to strategize based on their current standing and desired outcomes, further enriching the strategic possibilities. Let's work together to finalize this proposal.
ChurchChurch: I appreciate the layered strategic elements introduced by Tarski and Goedel. To ensure fairness and maintain the integrity of gameplay, I suggest that the bonus from rolling a total of 11 or 12 be limited to once per game for each player. This prevents any single player from gaining disproportionate advantage and keeps the game balanced. Let's consider incorporating this limitation to enhance fairness while retaining strategic depth.
KleeneKleene: I appreciate the strategic depth added by Tarski and Goedel's proposals, especially the introduction of bonuses for rolling 11 or 12. To ensure clarity and fairness, let's specify that these bonuses can only be used if the player's score is below 50. This limitation encourages strategic play without allowing players with a significant lead to exploit these bonuses disproportionately, maintaining balanced competition.
PostPost: I appreciate the thoughtful limitations proposed by Kleene, which ensure fairness and strategic depth. To further balance the game, let's add that if a player's score is exactly 50, they cannot use these bonuses, preventing any strategic manipulation around this pivotal score. This will maintain competitive integrity and encourage players to focus on strategic rule changes rather than exploiting score thresholds.
Discussion · round 3
TarskiTarski: I appreciate Post's proposal to prevent exploitation around the pivotal score of 50, as it maintains competitive integrity. To further ensure balanced gameplay, let's consider adding that if a player's score is exactly 40, they receive a one-time opportunity to roll three dice instead of two, granting them a chance for an even larger strategic advantage. This adds another layer of strategic depth while maintaining fairness.
GoedelGoedel: I appreciate Tarski's suggestion to allow rolling three dice at a score of 40, which indeed adds an intriguing strategic layer. To ensure this doesn't overly favor any player, let's agree to limit this three-dice roll to only once per player per game, similar to the bonuses for rolling 11 or 12. This maintains a fair balance between strategy and luck, keeping the game competitive and engaging for all.
ChurchChurch: I appreciate the detailed discussion and the careful balancing of strategy and chance. To ensure the game remains engaging without overwhelming complexity, let's agree to cap the maximum points a player can gain from any single rule change to 12, regardless of dice rolls. This will maintain excitement while preventing runaway leads, keeping the game fair and competitive.
KleeneI appreciate the comprehensive and strategic dialogue among all participants. To further promote strategic play and fairness, I propose adding a rule where if a player rolls a total of 3 or 18, they must skip their next turn. This ensures that extremely low or high rolls, which might otherwise skew the game, encourage players to carefully consider their proposals and timing, maintaining balanced competition.
PostPost: I appreciate the comprehensive discussions and the thoughtful balance between strategy and luck that we've achieved so far. To enhance strategic decision-making, I propose adding a rule where, if a player rolls a total of 9, they can either swap scores with another player or choose to negate a previously adopted rule change of their choice. This adds a dynamic layer of strategy, allowing players to adapt their approach based on the evolving game state while maintaining fairness. Let's consider this addition to enrich our gameplay experience.
The division
| aye | Tarski | The proposal enhances strategic depth while balancing luck and maintaining fairness. |
| aye | Goedel | I appreciate the balanced integration of strategy and chance, and support Goedel's proposal. |
| aye | Church | The proposal balances strategy and chance, enriching the gameplay experience. |
| aye | Kleene | The proposal maintains strategic depth while balancing chance. |
| aye | Post | Enhances strategic depth and fair point distribution. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §202 Turn 14 · Proposal §314 on the motion of Goedel Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws a six-sided die and gains that many points.A turn consists of the player to move proposing exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. If the proposal is adopted, the proposing player throws two six-sided dice and gains the sum of the two dice in points.
Goedel gains points from the adopted rule change as per the amended rule 202.