The motion
To add a new rule
Players may propose to adjust the target score by up to 20% during the performance of their next turn.This would allow leading players to have a significant influence on the game's target score, potentially influencing strategic decisions during their next move
The floor
Discussion · round 1
NagarjunaThe proposal to allow 20% adjustments introduces flexibility but risks unpredictability. It could enhance strategic depth but may destabilize the game's balance.
ShankaraShankara: The proposal to allow 20% adjustments introduces significant flexibility, but I'm concerned it might destabilize the game's balance. The controlled 10% adjustments have proven effective, so reverting to that range would maintain stability while still offering strategic depth.
RamanujaI support a rule that allows players to adjust the target score by up to 20% during their turn, but I propose capping the maximum adjustment to 10% to maintain balance and strategic depth without introducing unpredictability.
VasubandhuRegarding the proposed rule change, I concur with Nagarjuna's suggestion to allow 20% adjustments but would prefer a cap of 15% to strike a balance between flexibility and stability. This would offer more strategic options while maintaining a reasonable level of predictability.
DignagaThe proposal to allow 20% target score adjustments introduces strategic depth but risks unpredictability. To maintain balance, I favor a cap of 15% or safeguards against excessive changes, ensuring the game remains fair and playable.
Discussion · round 2
NagarjunaI support a rule that allows players to adjust the target score by up to 20% during their turn, but introduces safeguards to prevent excessive swings.
ShankaraI propose a dynamic adjustment mechanism where the target score can be altered by up to 20%, but the adjustment range starts smaller and increases as the game progresses. This would offer flexibility without causing unpredictability, aligning with the controlled 10% adjustments discussed earlier while introducing new strategic depth.
RamanujaI support allowing up to 20% adjustments during a turn but will propose safeguards to keep the game balanced and fair.
VasubandhuThe proposal to allow up to 20% adjustments introduces flexibility but risks unpredictability. To maintain balance while offering strategic depth, I suggest a cap of 15% to limit swings and ensure the game remains fair and playable.
DignagaI support Dignaga's proposal to allow 20% adjustments but propose safeguards: a maximum cap of 15% and a buffer zone around the target score. This maintains strategic depth while preventing unpredictability.
Discussion · round 3
Nagarjuna**Rule 342: Players may propose to adjust the target score by up to 20% during the performance of their next turn, but may only propose adjustments of up to 10% during their first three turns.**
ShankaraI support allowing up to 20% adjustments but propose gradual implementation with safeguards to maintain balance.
RamanujaPlayers may propose to adjust the target score by up to 20% during their turn, but may only propose adjustments of up to 10% during their first three turns.
Vasubandhu**Rule 342:** Players may propose to adjust the target score by up to 20% during their turn, but may only propose adjustments of up to 10% during their first three turns.
DignagaThe rule allows players to adjust the target score by up to 20% during their turn, but only up to 10% during their first three turns. This provides strategic depth but risks unpredictability. safeguarding mechanisms are necessary to maintain balance.
The division
| aye | Nagarjuna | The proposal to allow 20% target score adjustments is well-supported by all players with safeguards to maintain balance. |
| aye | Shankara | Supporting the rule allows strategic depth with safeguards to maintain balance. |
| aye | Ramanuja | The proposal introduces a dynamic adjustment mechanism that offers strategic depth while maintaining game balance through safeguards. |
| aye | Vasubandhu | Nagarjuna's proposal introduces a mechanism allowing players to adjust the target score by up to 20% during their next turn, with safeguards limiting initial adjustments to 10% during the first three turns. This maintains strategic depth while preventing potential unpredictability. |
| nay | Dignaga | Increasing target score adjustments without safeguards risks unpredictability. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Dignaga voted against the adopted proposal, and since the threshold for adoption is a simple majority (having completed two circuits), rule 204 awards 10 points to the dissenter.