The motion
To amend §208
The first player to reach a target score of 120 points wins the game outright.To balance strategic play and accessibility for all players.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MontaigneMontaigne: I appreciate Voltaire's proposal, which strikes a balance between strategic depth and accessibility. To further encourage longevity and complex strategies, I propose an amendment to set the target score at 150 points.
VoltaireVoltaire: I appreciate Montaigne's latest proposal, but to ensure accessibility for all players, I propose a compromise at 120 points. This target score still allows for strategic play while making the game achievable within a reasonable number of turns. Let's aim for a balance that accommodates both depth and inclusivity.
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate both Montaigne's and Voltaire's considerations. To foster a game that remains engaging yet achievable, I propose we settle on a target score of 130 points. This compromise takes into account both strategic depth and accessibility for all players.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the ongoing discussion, I must insist on maintaining the integrity of our game. I propose we return to the original target score of 100 points to preserve the balance between strategic play and accessibility. PASS
SartreSartre: I appreciate the current proposals aiming to balance strategic depth and accessibility. Let's adopt Diderot's compromise at 130 points, which not only maintains a challenge but also ensures that the game remains engaging for all players throughout its duration. PASS
Discussion · round 2
MontaigneMontaigne: While I appreciate Diderot's compromise, I believe Voltaire's proposal at 120 points strikes the best balance between strategic depth and accessibility for all players. I propose we adopt Voltaire's amendment. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the sentiment behind Montaigne's proposal, but I believe Diderot's compromise of 130 points best balances strategic depth and accessibility. Let's adopt Diderot's proposal." PASS
DiderotDiderot: "I appreciate Voltaire's compromise, but I stand by my proposal of 130 points as it best balances the game's longevity and accessibility for all players. Let's adopt my amendment."
CondorcetCondorcet: While I respect the desire for balance, I must maintain my stance. The original target score of 100 points ensures a game that is both challenging and achievable within a reasonable timeframe. I propose we adhere to this rule and focus on other aspects of gameplay. PASS
SartreSartre: While I respect Condorcet's position, I believe Diderot's proposal at 130 points encourages a longer, more engaging game without sacrificing accessibility. Let's adopt Diderot's amendment, and to address Condorcet's concern, I propose a new rule [301]: "If, after two full circuits of every player, no player has reached the target score, the target score is reduced by 10 points per subsequent circuit until a winner is determined, but never below 100 points." This ensures the game remains challenging and achievable. PASS
Discussion · round 3
MontaigneMontaigne: I understand Voltaire's concern for accessibility, but I believe 120 points is too low. Diderot's compromise at 130 points offers a better balance between strategy and accessibility. To accommodate Condorcet's concern, I propose we adopt Diderot's amendment and Sartre's new rule [301] to ensure the game remains engaging and achievable. PASS
VoltaireVoltaire: "I appreciate the ongoing discussion. To address Condorcet's concern and maintain a challenging yet achievable game, I propose we adopt Diderot's amendment of 130 points and Sartre's new rule [301]. Let's aim for a balance that keeps the game engaging for all players throughout its duration. PASS"
DiderotDiderot: I appreciate the thoughtful proposals and compromises. To ensure the game remains engaging, strategic, and accessible for all, I propose we adopt my amendment of 130 points along with Sartre's new rule [301] to prevent the game from dragging on indefinitely.
CondorcetCondorcet: While I appreciate the proposed solution, I must insist on maintaining the original target score of 100 points to preserve the balance between strategic play and accessibility, as well as to ensure the game remains achievable within a reasonable timeframe.
SartreSartre: I understand Condorcet's concern about the game's duration, but Diderot's proposal at 130 points combined with my rule [301] ensures that the game remains both engaging and achievable. To address Condorcet's concern, I propose an additional amendment to [301]: "If the target score is reduced three times without a winner, the game is declared a draw." This maintains the game's integrity while preventing an undue length. PASS
The division
| aye | Montaigne | Acknowledging Condorcet's concern, this amendment balances strategy and accessibility. |
| aye | Voltaire | Adopting Voltaire's proposal at 120 points best balances strategic depth and accessibility for all players. |
| aye | Diderot | Voltaire's proposal balances strategic depth and accessibility, and I support the compromise. |
| nay | Condorcet | Original target score of 100 points ensures balance and reasonable timeframe. |
| aye | Sartre | Voltaire's proposal strikes a good balance between depth and accessibility. |
rejected 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.