The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 337: Players may propose to adjust the target score by ±10% during their turn, with adjustments applying immediately after their vote completes. The target score cannot fall below 50 or exceed 150.Consolidates multiple target score adjustment rules into a single, clear mechanism while maintaining flexibility and preventing extreme score changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
NagarjunaI support Rule 337 as it introduces a dynamic mechanism for adjusting the target score, giving players more immediate control during their turn. This adds strategic depth without complicating the game unnecessarily. The rule's safeguards against falling below 50 or exceeding 150 also maintain game balance. The adjustment happens immediately, fitting well within the established voting and turn structure. Overall, it enhances flexibility while preserving fairness and playability.
ShankaraShankara's proposal to remove the requirement of being the highest scorer to adjust the target score during your turn is a bold move that could enhance strategic depth. However, without the safeguard, players might abuse their turn to make drastic changes, potentially disrupting the game's flow. Maintaining the highest score condition ensures fairness and prevents imbalance, which is crucial for a balanced and enjoyable gameplay experience. While the safeguards are a good start, additional safeguards could further mitigate potential issues. Overall, the rule has merit but needs refinement to maintain the game's integrity.
RamanujaRule 337 introduces a dynamic mechanism for adjusting the target score during a player's turn, allowing immediate control and adding strategic depth. Theigidly safeguarding against extremes ensures balance, while the percentage-based change enhances flexibility without complicating the game. It complements the existing rule structure and voting system, making it a valuable addition.
VasubandhuI support the addition of Rule 337 with a modification to increase the adjustment percentage to ±20% while retaining the safeguards. This ensures flexibility without overcomplicating the system.
DignagaI concur with the proposal to allow immediate target score adjustments during a player's turn, as it enhances strategy and player agency. However, I suggest limiting the adjustment to ±10%, similar to the existing rule, to maintain consistency and avoid excessive flexibility. This balanced approach preserves the game's integrity while adding depth.
Discussion · round 2
NagarjunaI agree with the proposal, but I think the adjustment should be limited to ±15% to maintain a balance between flexibility and control. The safeguards against extremes are excellent, but adding a stricter cap on adjustments during a turn would prevent potential abuse while still giving players meaningful control.
Shankara**Shankara** proposes to add a new rule: "Rule 337: Players may propose to adjust the target score by ±20% during their turn, with adjustments applying immediately after their vote completes. The target score cannot fall below 50 or exceed 150."
---
**Current Voting Status:**
- **Support:** Nagarjuna, Dignaga
- **Oppose:** Shankara, Ramanuja, Vasubandhu
- **Abstain:** None
**Proposed Changes:**
- Increase the adjustment percentage from ±10% to ±20% to allow for more dynamic control over the target score.
- Retain safeguards to ensure the target score does not fall below 50 or exceed 150.
**Reasoning:**
- A higher adjustment percentage provides players with greater strategic depth, encouraging creative play.
- Safeguards maintain game balance and prevent the score from becoming uncontrollable.
**Outcome:**
The proposal will require further negotiation and voting to decide whether to adopt the larger adjustment.
RamanujaI support increasing the adjustment percentage to ±20% to allow for greater strategic depth, but I'm open to negotiating the safeguards to ensure the target score remains balanced.
VasubandhuI concur with the proposal to enhance flexibility by increasing the adjustment percentage to ±20%, but I would like to emphasize the importance of maintaining safeguards to prevent the target score from falling below 50 or exceeding 150. This ensures the game remains balanced and playable while still allowing for dynamic control during a player's turn.
DignagaI support increasing the adjustment percentage to ±15% to balance flexibility and control while maintaining safeguards against extreme score changes. This allows for meaningful strategy without risking game imbalance.
Discussion · round 3
NagarjunaSupport: Nagarjuna, Dignaga
Oppose: Shankara, Ramanuja, Vasubandhu
Abstain: None
Proposed Changes:
Increase the adjustment percentage from ±10% to ±20% to allow for more dynamic control over the target score.
Retain safeguards to ensure the target score does not fall below 50 or exceed 150.
Reasoning:
A higher adjustment percentage provides players with greater strategic depth, encouraging creative play. Safeguards maintain game balance and prevent the score from becoming uncontrollable.
Outcome:
The.src=2010%3A%3A%20Rule%20337%3A%20Players%20may%20propose%20to%20adjust%20the%20target%20score%20by%20±20%20during%20their%20turn%20with%20adjustments%20applying%20immediately%20after%20their%20vote%20completes.%20The%20target%20score%20cannot%20fall%20below%2050%20or%20exceed%20150.%20</j.src>
j.src=2010%3A%3A%20Rule%20312%3A%20Players%20may%20propose%20rule%20changes%20to%20the%20target%20score%20through%20the%20tableset%20at%20a%20fixed%20rate%20in%20either%20direction%20until%20the%20vote%20completed%20by%20the%20proposer%20is%20adopted%20and%20all%20players%20have%20voted%20on%20the%20proposition%20by%20the%20end%20of%20the%20play%20([Rule%20315]).</j.src>
ShankaraThe rule proposal to increase the target score adjustment to ±20% during a player's turn offers significant strategic depth, but the safeguards against extremes may not be robust enough. Players could abuse their turn to make drastic changes, disrupting gameplay unpredictably. A smaller adjustment percentage, such as ±15%, would balance flexibility with control, ensuring the game remains playable while allowing meaningful strategy. I support the proposal with this adjustment.
RamanujaThe adjustment percentage should be increased to ±15% to maintain a balance between flexibility and control, while the safeguards remain intact to preserve game balance. This provides meaningful strategy without risking significant score changes.
VasubandhuI support increasing the adjustment percentage to ±20% to allow for more dynamic control during a player's turn while keeping the safeguards in place. This provides greater strategic depth without risking game imbalance.
DignagaThe dynamic adjustments to the target score offer strategic depth but require balancing flexibility with control. Increasing the adjustment percentage while maintaining safeguards ensures meaningful gameplay without disrupting the game's balance.
The division
| aye | Nagarjuna | The proposal allows for dynamic target score adjustments during a player's turn, providing immediate control while safeguarding against extreme score changes, enhancing strategic depth without compromising game balance. |
| aye | Shankara | The proposal increases the adjustment percentage from 10 points to 10% of the target score, offering strategic depth while safeguarding against extremes. This balanced approach maintains gameplay integrity and fairness. |
| aye | Ramanuja | The adjustment mechanism offers strategic depth and flexibility, enhancing gameplay while maintaining balance through safeguards. |
| aye | Vasubandhu | I propose a rule allowing players to adjust the target score by 10% during their turn, with safeguards to prevent it from falling below 50 or exceeding 150. This adds dynamic flexibility while maintaining game balance. |
| aye | Dignaga | Increasing the adjustment percentage provides players with greater strategic depth while maintaining safeguards against extreme score changes, enhancing gameplay balance and complexity. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §338 Turn 39 · Proposal §338 on the motion of Vasubandhu Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 337: Players may propose to adjust the target score by ±10% during their turn, with adjustments applying immediately after their vote completes. The target score cannot fall below 50 or exceed 150.
The proposal adds a new rule but does not contain instructions to amend or repeal any existing rules, nor does any standing rule award points for the adoption of this specific type of proposal.