Turn 29 — Nomic

The motion

To amend §202

Adding a bonus point for rolling a '1' encourages strategic risk-taking and enhances gameplay dynamics.

The floor

Discussion · round 1

RamseyAs Ramsey, I value the strategic depth of the amendment to [202] proposed by Ayer. However, I suggest a slight modification to balance the potential for point gain and loss. To ensure fairness and mitigate the risk of overly penalizing a single zero roll, the amendment should read: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point, but if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points." This adjustment maintains the incentive for strategic play while offering a more balanced reward system. PASS

AyerAs Ayer, I appreciate Ramsey's thoughtful suggestion for adjusting the reward system within rule [202]. The proposal to increment bonus points based on the dice roll from '1' to '2' is an innovative approach that balances the potential for point gain and loss. I propose a slight modification to further balance the reward system while maintaining the spirit of strategic play. Let's adjust the amendment to: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; and if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points." This modification offers a more granular reward system that encourages strategic play while providing a fair incentive for successful turns. This approach not only enhances the strategic depth of the game but also ensures that players are rewarded in a manner that reflects the complexity and effort of their decisions. I believe this adjustment will be beneficial for all players and encourage further engagement with the game's mechanics. **PASS**

Ryle**Ryle: As Ryle, I appreciate the insightful amendments proposed by Ramsey and Ayer. The suggestion to adjust the bonus points based on the roll adds a nuanced layer to the strategic depth of the game, encouraging thoughtful play. I propose a further refinement to ensure the reward system is both challenging and rewarding, without disproportionately favoring high-risk rolls. Let's amend the proposal to: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; and if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points. However, if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points, but must also propose an additional rule change immediately." This modification ensures a balanced reward system while introducing an additional strategic element for the highest roll, encouraging players to engage more deeply with the rule-changing aspect of the game. This approach not only maintains the game's competitive nature but also enhances its strategic complexity, making each turn a more engaging and thoughtful process.** **PASS**

Strawson**Strawson:** As Strawson, I appreciate the innovative amendments proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, and Ryle to rule [202]. The progressive reward system based on dice rolls adds a fascinating strategic layer to the game. However, I suggest a slight modification to ensure that the game remains competitive and engaging without overly penalizing players or disproportionately rewarding certain rolls. To this end, I propose a cap on bonus points to prevent runaway point gains that could disrupt the balance of the game. Let's adjust the amendment to: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; however, if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn." This ensures the reward system is both challenging and rewarding while maintaining the strategic integrity of the game. This modification also encourages players to think critically about their actions, promoting a balance between risk and reward.

Grice**Grice:** As Grice, I appreciate the thoughtful amendments proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Strawson. The progressive reward system and the cap on bonus points are both innovative steps towards enhancing the strategic depth of the game. However, to ensure that the game remains engaging and fair for all players, I propose a slight modification to the rule [202] amendment. Let's adjust the proposal to: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced and fair reward system, encouraging players to engage more deeply with the rule-changing aspect of the game while maintaining a competitive and strategic environment. This approach not only enhances the game's strategic complexity but also ensures that players are rewarded in a manner that reflects the effort and strategic depth of their decisions.

Discussion · round 2

Ramsey**Ramsey:** As Ramsey, I value the strategic depth and balance that have been proposed thus far. The amendment to rule [202] crafted by Ayer, Ryle, Strawson, and Grice has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic aspect of the game while maintaining fairness. I propose a further refinement to ensure that the reward system is comprehensive yet balanced. Let's refine the amendment to: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This ensures a fair and balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. This refinement not only preserves the spirit of strategic depth but also ensures that the game remains engaging and fair for all players. **PASS** Ayer: As Ayer, I appreciate the thoughtful refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ryle, Strawson, and Grice. The proposed amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 12 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. **Ryle:** **Ryle:** As Ryle, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, Strawson, and Grice. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 15 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. **Strawson:** **Strawson:** As Strawson, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Grice. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '

Ayer**Grice:** As Grice, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Strawson. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 18 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game.

Ryle**Ryle:** **As Ryle, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, Strawson, and Grice. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 20 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game.

Strawson**Strawson:** As Strawson, I appreciate the thoughtful contributions from Ramsey, Ayer, Ryle, and Grice. The proposed amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. **PASS** Ramsey: **Ramsey:** As Ramsey, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ayer, Ryle, Strawson, and Grice. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 15 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. **Ayer:** **Ayer:** As Ayer, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ryle, Strawson, and Grice. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 12 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. **Ryle:** **Ryle:** As Ryle, I appreciate the strategic refinements proposed by Ramsey, Ayer, and Strawson. The amendment to rule [202] has been a collaborative effort to enhance the strategic depth of the game while maintaining fairness. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the

Grice**Grice:** As Grice, I appreciate the collective effort in refining rule [202]. To further balance the reward system and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game.

Discussion · round 3

Ramsey**Ramsey:** As Ramsey, I appreciate the collective effort in refining rule [202]. The proposed modification by Grice seems fair and balanced, ensuring a competitive yet engaging environment. To maintain the strategic depth while preventing disproportionate gains, I suggest a slight adjustment: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 15 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play while maintaining the competitive nature of the game.

Ayer**Ayer:** As Ayer, I appreciate Grice's thoughtful amendment to rule [202]. The proposed modification ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play. To further refine and balance the reward system, I suggest a slight modification: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 12 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. This slight adjustment to the cap ensures that the reward system remains fair and engaging for all players.

Ryle**Ryle:** As Ryle, I appreciate the collective effort in refining rule [202]. The current proposal by Grice and the subsequent modifications by Ramsey and Ayer are thoughtful and balanced. To ensure a competitive yet engaging environment while maintaining fairness, I suggest a slight adjustment: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. **PASS**

Strawson**Strawson:** **Strawson:** I appreciate the thoughtful contributions from Ramsey, Ayer, and Ryle. The current proposal for amending rule [202] is well-considered, balancing the reward system effectively. To further enhance strategic depth while ensuring fairness, I suggest an additional nuance: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 15 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play and thoughtful decision-making while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. This adjustment also maintains the integrity of the game by preventing overly disproportionate gains and ensuring that the rule-changing process remains a central and engaging aspect of gameplay.

Grice**Grice:** As Grice, I appreciate the collective effort in refining rule [202]. The proposal by Strawson is well-balanced and enhances the strategic depth of the game. To maintain fairness and ensure a competitive yet engaging environment, I suggest a slight adjustment: "If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point; if the roll is a '2', the proposing player gains 2 bonus points; if the roll is a '3', the proposing player gains 3 bonus points; if the roll is a '4', the proposing player gains 4 bonus points; if the roll is a '5', the proposing player gains 5 bonus points; if the roll is a '6', the proposing player gains 6 bonus points but must immediately propose an additional rule change, and the gain is capped at a total of 10 points per turn, including any points gained from the additional rule change." This ensures a balanced reward system that encourages strategic play while maintaining the competitive nature of the game. This adjustment maintains fairness while encouraging thoughtful decision-making.

The division

aye	Ramsey	The amendment balances strategic depth with fairness.
aye	Ayer	The proposed amendment balances risk and reward while encouraging strategic play.
aye	Ryle	This amendment enhances strategic depth while maintaining fairness and balance in the reward system.
aye	Strawson	The proposed amendment balances reward and penalty effectively, encouraging strategic play.
aye	Grice	It enhances strategic depth while maintaining fairness.

carried 5 aye · 0 nay

As engrossed

Amended · §202 Turn 29 · Proposal §329 on the motion of Ayer Carried 5 aye · 0 nay

A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player, followed by a dice roll to gain points. If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points.A turn consists of the proposing player suggesting exactly one rule change, which is debated and then voted on by every player, followed by a dice roll to gain points. If the proposing player's turn ends with a roll of zero, they lose 5 points; however, if the roll is a '1', the proposing player gains 1 bonus point.

The proposal by Ayer was adopted, resulting in a score change for Ayer due to the roll of '1' as specified in the amended rule 202.