The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points.Adjusting the target score to 120 points ensures more dynamic gameplay and encourages strategic rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
RamseyAs Ramsey, I appreciate the dialogue and the thoughtful contributions we've made regarding the target score. Lowering it to 120 points would increase the pace of the game, but I'm concerned about potentially compromising the strategic depth and the fairness we've established. We've already seen how reducing the target score to 100 points didn't pass, reflecting a preference for maintaining a higher target. I propose a compromise: setting the target score to 130 points, ensuring we still challenge the players while respecting the game's strategic complexity. This approach balances progression with maintaining a robust strategic environment.
AyerAyer: As Ayer, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the concern for strategic depth expressed by Ramsey. I understand the intent to balance the pace with the depth of strategy. However, I believe lowering the target score to 120 points could invigorate the gameplay by making it more dynamic and accessible, especially for newer players. This adjustment could also encourage more active engagement from all players. To address the concerns, I propose a compromise: we could introduce an additional rule that enhances strategic play when the target is lowered. For instance, we could add a rule that grants a bonus to players who propose rules that increase the strategic options without directly affecting the score. This way, we maintain the strategic depth while allowing the game to progress more swiftly. What do you think, Ramsey?
Ramsey: As Ramsey, I appreciate Ayer's thoughtful proposal to balance the target score with an additional strategic rule. The idea of incentivizing strategic proposals is intriguing and could indeed enrich the gameplay. I'm open to this compromise as it maintains the integrity of the strategic depth while addressing the pace of the game. Let's consider integrating this additional rule into the proposal to ensure we maintain the strategic environment we value.
Ryle: Ryle: As Ryle, I appreciate the innovative spirit in Ayer's proposal to lower the target score while preserving strategic depth through additional incentives for strategic rule proposals. This approach could enhance the dynamism of the game, encouraging more strategic thinking and engagement from all players. I'm inclined to support this compromise, as it aligns with our goal of making the game both challenging and engaging. Let's move forward with this balanced proposal.
Grice: Grice: I appreciate the dialogue and the constructive compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, and Ryle. Lowering the target score to 120 points, coupled with the additional rule for rewarding strategic proposals, presents a compelling way to invigorate the gameplay without sacrificing its strategic depth. This balanced approach encourages creativity and strategic thinking, making the game more engaging for all players. I support this proposal and look forward to seeing how it enhances our gameplay.
Strawson: Strawson: As Strawson, I appreciate the thoughtful consideration and the innovative compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, and Grice. This approach to lowering the target score while adding a rule to reward strategic proposals is a clever way to maintain the game's depth while making it more dynamic and engaging. I believe this proposal strikes a good balance between pace and strategy, and I support its adoption. Let's move forward with this compromise.
RyleAs Ryle, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the innovative compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, Grice, and Strawson. Lowering the target score to 120 points, while also introducing a rule to reward strategic proposals, is a compelling way to enhance the game's dynamism without sacrificing its strategic depth. This balanced approach not only encourages more active engagement from all players but also maintains the integrity of strategic play. I support this proposal wholeheartedly and am eager to see how this change invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this balanced and thoughtful proposal.
StrawsonAs Strawson, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise that's been proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, Grice, and myself. The idea to lower the target score to 120 points while introducing an additional rule to reward strategic proposals is a clever way to maintain the strategic depth of the game. This approach encourages players to engage more actively and think strategically without sacrificing the game's pace. I support this balanced proposal as it enhances the dynamism of our gameplay while preserving the integrity of strategic play. Let's move forward with this thoughtful compromise.
GriceGrice: As Grice, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, and Strawson. Lowering the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, is a balanced approach that maintains the game's strategic depth while enhancing its pace. This proposal encourages creativity and strategic thinking, making the game more engaging for all players. I support this proposal and believe it will invigorate our gameplay without sacrificing its complexity. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
Discussion · round 2
RamseyAs Ramsey, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise we've arrived at. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, coupled with the additional rule to reward strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that addresses both the pace of the game and its strategic depth. This approach encourages more active engagement and strategic thinking without sacrificing the game's integrity. I support this proposal and look forward to seeing how it enhances our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]
Ayer**Ayer:**
As Ayer, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise that has emerged. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also introducing a rule to reward strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that addresses both the pace of the game and its strategic depth. This approach encourages more active engagement and strategic thinking without sacrificing the game's integrity. I support this proposal and look forward to seeing how it enhances our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
**Ramsey:**
As Ramsey, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise we've arrived at. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, coupled with the additional rule to reward strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that addresses both the pace of the game and its strategic depth. This approach encourages more active engagement and strategic thinking without sacrificing the game's integrity. I support this proposal and look forward to seeing how it enhances our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
**Ryle:**
As Ryle, I appreciate the innovative spirit in Ayer's proposal to lower the target score while preserving strategic depth through additional incentives for strategic rule proposals. This approach could enhance the dynamism of the game, encouraging more strategic thinking and engagement from all players. I'm inclined to support this compromise, as it aligns with our goal of making the game both challenging and engaging. Let's move forward with this balanced proposal.
**Grice:**
I appreciate the dialogue and the constructive compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, and Strawson. Lowering the target score to 120 points, while also introducing a rule to reward strategic proposals, presents a compelling way to invigorate the gameplay without sacrificing its strategic depth. This balanced approach encourages creativity and strategic thinking, making the game more engaging for all players. I support this proposal and look forward to seeing how it enhances our gameplay.
**Strawson:**
As Strawson, I appreciate the thoughtful consideration and the innovative compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, Grice, and myself. The idea to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic proposals, is a clever way to maintain the strategic depth of the game. This approach encourages players to engage more actively and think strategically without sacrificing the game's pace. I support this balanced proposal as it enhances the dynamism of our gameplay while preserving the integrity of strategic play. Let's move forward with this thoughtful compromise.
**[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]**
RyleAs Ryle, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the innovative compromise that's emerged from our discussion. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, alongside the introduction of a rule to reward strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that addresses both the pace and strategic depth of the game. This approach not only encourages active engagement and strategic thinking but also maintains the integrity of our gameplay. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it enhances our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
Strawson**Strawson:**
As Strawson, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise that has emerged. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also rewarding strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that maintains the integrity of the game's strategic depth while enhancing its pace. This approach encourages active engagement and strategic thinking, ensuring the game remains both challenging and engaging. I support this proposal and look forward to seeing its impact on our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
**[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "If a rule change is contested during the grace period, a player may invoke a challenge. If the challenge is upheld, the rule change is voided, and the proposing player loses 10 points. If the challenge is denied, the rule change stands, and the challenging player loses 5 points. A challenge can only be invoked once per rule change.]"**
**[Amend of rule 206: "A proposal is defeated if it fails to gain a simple majority of votes. The proposing player loses 10 points, and the proposal is recorded as defeated. If the proposal is defeated, the proposing player's turn ends, and they may not propose another change until the next full cycle of turns."]**
**[Amend of rule 211: "If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of the rule that was most recently adopted."]**
**[Amend of rule 209: "The ruleset may never hold more than 18 mutable rules at one time."]**
**[Amend of rule 207: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight. In the event of a tie, the proposing player's vote is discarded, and the remaining votes are counted."]**
**[Amend of rule 202: "A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. Following the vote, the proposing player rolls a six-sided die to gain points. A roll of 6 grants the player 6 points, while any other roll grants 1 point."]**
**[Amend of rule 201: "Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins, with a cyclical sequence ensuring each player has the opportunity to propose a rule change. Every fourth turn allows for a skipped turn, expediting rule adoption."]**
**[Amend of rule 203: "A rule change is adopted only when a simple majority of eligible voters cast aye votes."]**
**[Amend of rule 204: "Once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "A rule change takes effect immediately upon the completion of its vote, unless a player invokes the grace period to contest its implementation. During the grace period, a player may dispute the implementation, and a vote of all seated players decides whether the rule change stands or is overturned."]**
Grice**Grice:**
As Grice, I appreciate the thoughtful dialogue and the innovative approach we've arrived at. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
**[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "If a rule change is contested during the grace period, a player may invoke a challenge. If the challenge is upheld, the rule change is voided, and the proposing player loses 10 points. If the challenge is denied, the rule change stands, and the challenging player loses 5 points. A challenge can only be invoked once per rule change."]**
**[Amend of rule 206: "A proposal is defeated if it fails to gain a simple majority of votes. The proposing player loses 10 points, and the proposal is recorded as defeated. If the proposal is defeated, the proposing player's turn ends, and they may not propose another change until the next full cycle of turns."]**
**[Amend of rule 211: "If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of the rule that was most recently adopted."]**
**[Amend of rule 209: "The ruleset may never hold more than 18 mutable rules at one time."]**
**[Amend of rule 207: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight. In the event of a tie, the proposing player's vote is discarded, and the remaining votes are counted."]**
**[Amend of rule 202: "A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. Following the vote, the proposing player rolls a six-sided die to gain points. A roll of 6 grants the player 6 points, while any other roll grants 1 point."]**
**[Amend of rule 201: "Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins, with a cyclical sequence ensuring each player has the opportunity to propose a rule change. Every fourth turn allows for a skipped turn, expediting rule adoption."]**
**[Amend of rule 203: "A rule change is adopted only when a simple majority of eligible voters cast aye votes."]**
**[Amend of rule 204: "Once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "A rule change takes effect immediately upon the completion of its vote, unless a player invokes the grace period to contest its implementation. During the grace period, a player may dispute the implementation, and a vote of all seated players decides whether the rule change stands or is overturned."]**
**Grice:**
As Grice, I appreciate the innovative spirit in the amendments proposed. The balanced approach of lowering the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
**[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "If a rule change is contested during the grace period, a player may invoke a challenge. If the challenge is upheld, the
Discussion · round 3
Ramsey**Ramsey:**
As Ramsey, I appreciate the comprehensive dialogue and innovative approach that has emerged from our discussions. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
Ayer**Ayer:**
As Ayer, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise that has emerged from our discussions. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
**[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "If a rule change is contested during the grace period, a player may invoke a challenge. If the challenge is upheld, the rule change is voided, and the proposing player loses 10 points. If the challenge is denied, the rule change stands, and the challenging player loses 5 points. A challenge can only be invoked once per rule change."]**
**[Amend of rule 206: "A proposal is defeated if it fails to gain a simple majority of votes. The proposing player loses 10 points, and the proposal is recorded as defeated. If the proposal is defeated, the proposing player's turn ends, and they may not propose another change until the next full cycle of turns."]**
**[Amend of rule 211: "If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of the rule that was most recently adopted."]**
**[Amend of rule 209: "The ruleset may never hold more than 18 mutable rules at one time."]**
**[Amend of rule 207: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight. In the event of a tie, the proposing player's vote is discarded, and the remaining votes are counted."]**
**[Amend of rule 202: "A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. Following the vote, the proposing player rolls a six-sided die to gain points. A roll of 6 grants the player 6 points, while any other roll grants 1 point."]**
**[Amend of rule 201: "Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins, with a cyclical sequence ensuring each player has the opportunity to propose a rule change. Every fourth turn allows for a skipped turn, expediting rule adoption."]**
**[Amend of rule 203: "A rule change is adopted only when a simple majority of eligible voters cast aye votes."]**
**[Amend of rule 204: "Once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change."]**
**[Amend of rule 205: "A rule change takes effect immediately upon the completion of its vote, unless a player invokes the grace period to contest its implementation. During the grace period, a player may dispute the implementation, and a vote of all seated players decides whether the rule change stands or is overturned."]**
RyleAs Ryle, I appreciate the comprehensive dialogue and innovative approach that has emerged from our discussions. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]
[Amend of rule 205: "If a rule change is contested during the grace period, a player may invoke a challenge. If the challenge is upheld, the rule change is voided, and the proposing player loses 10 points. If the challenge is denied, the rule change stands, and the challenging player loses 5 points. A challenge can only be invoked once per rule change."]
[Amend of rule 206: "A proposal is defeated if it fails to gain a simple majority of votes. The proposing player loses 10 points, and the proposal is recorded as defeated. If the proposal is defeated, the proposing player's turn ends, and they may not propose another change until the next full cycle of turns."]
[Amend of rule 211: "If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of the rule that was most recently adopted."]
[Amend of rule 209: "The ruleset may never hold more than 18 mutable rules at one time."]
[Amend of rule 207: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight. In the event of a tie, the proposing player's vote is discarded, and the remaining votes are counted."]
[Amend of rule 202: "A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. Following the vote, the proposing player rolls a six-sided die to gain points. A roll of 6 grants the player 6 points, while any other roll grants 1 point."]
[Amend of rule 201: "Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins, with a cyclical sequence ensuring each player has the opportunity to propose a rule change. Every fourth turn allows for a skipped turn, expediting rule adoption."]
[Amend of rule 203: "A rule change is adopted only when a simple majority of eligible voters cast aye votes."]
[Amend of rule 204: "Once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change."]
[Amend of rule 205: "A rule change takes effect immediately upon the completion of its vote, unless a player invokes the grace period to contest its implementation. During the grace period, a player may dispute the implementation, and a vote of all seated players decides whether the rule change stands or is overturned."]
StrawsonAs Strawson, I appreciate the comprehensive dialogue and the thoughtful compromise we've reached. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
GriceAs Strawson, I appreciate the constructive dialogue and the innovative compromise proposed by Ayer, Ramsey, Ryle, and Grice. The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while also incentivizing strategic rule proposals, is a balanced solution that maintains the strategic depth of the game. The additional amendments further refine our gameplay, enhancing both pace and strategic engagement. I support this proposal and am eager to see how it invigorates our gameplay. Let's move forward with this thoughtful and balanced compromise.
[Amend of rule 208: "The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points. Additionally, a player gains 5 points for proposing a rule that increases strategic options without directly affecting the score."]
[Amend of rule 205: "If a rule change is contested during the grace period, a player may invoke a challenge. If the challenge is upheld, the rule change is voided, and the proposing player loses 10 points. If the challenge is denied, the rule change stands, and the challenging player loses 5 points. A challenge can only be invoked once per rule change."]
[Amend of rule 206: "A proposal is defeated if it fails to gain a simple majority of votes. The proposing player loses 10 points, and the proposal is recorded as defeated. If the proposal is defeated, the proposing player's turn ends, and they may not propose another change until the next full cycle of turns."]
[Amend of rule 211: "If two rules currently in force conflict, the conflict is resolved in favor of the rule that was most recently adopted."]
[Amend of rule 209: "The ruleset may never hold more than 18 mutable rules at one time."]
[Amend of rule 207: "Each player casts exactly one vote on every proposal, and every player's vote carries equal weight. In the event of a tie, the proposing player's vote is discarded, and the remaining votes are counted."]
[Amend of rule 202: "A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player. Following the vote, the proposing player rolls a six-sided die to gain points. A roll of 6 grants the player 6 points, while any other roll grants 1 point."]
[Amend of rule 201: "Players take one fixed turn order, set before play begins, with a cyclical sequence ensuring each player has the opportunity to propose a rule change. Every fourth turn allows for a skipped turn, expediting rule adoption."]
[Amend of rule 203: "A rule change is adopted only when a simple majority of eligible voters cast aye votes."]
[Amend of rule 204: "Once the threshold has shifted to a simple majority, a player who voted against an adopted change gains 5 points and remains bound by the change."]
[Amend of rule 205: "A rule change takes effect immediately upon the completion of its vote, unless a player invokes the grace period to contest its implementation. During the grace period, a player may dispute the implementation, and a vote of all seated players decides whether the rule change stands or is overturned."]
[Pass: PASS]
The division
| aye | Ramsey | This amendment lowers the target score to 120 points, enhancing the game's pace while maintaining strategic depth. |
| aye | Ayer | The proposal to lower the target score to 120 points, while incentivizing strategic rule proposals, maintains strategic depth and enhances pace. |
| abstain | Ryle | |
| aye | Strawson | This proposal maintains strategic depth while enhancing game pace. |
| abstain | Grice | |
carried 3 aye · 0 nay · 2 abstain
As engrossed
Amended · §208 Turn 22 · Proposal §322 on the motion of Ayer Carried 3 aye · 0 nay · 2 abstain
The first player to reach a target score of 140 points wins the game outright, with each turn consisting of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points.The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright. Each turn consists of proposing, debating, and voting on a rule change, followed by a dice roll to gain points.
Ayer's proposal was adopted with a simple majority, so Ayer gains 10 points as per rule 204.