DG4 Ruleset: Modify Or From Scratch?

[Donovan Zoi]

OK, it seems that the Permissive/ Restrictive ruleset discussion was derailed because we were not sure exactly how we wanted to go about building our new Constitution. So, do we:

1. Build one from scratch?
2. Modify the Three Books from DG2?
3. Add to the DG3 ruleset?
4. Something else?

This discussion will run for 48 hours, after which I will poll this topic.

 

[Cyc]

I vote for number 2. Modify the Three Books.

 

[Octavian X]

I am in favor of rebuilind our ruleset on the model of the Three Books. However, I do want to see substantial changes to the government itself (ex: different positions, names, etc.).

 

[ZhaoYun]

Dont change it at all

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

I am in favor of starting from scratch. With a twist. We should take bits and peices of the previous games rulesets that worked and work them into the new ruleset. Then we fix the elements that did not work.

By doing so we have a ruleset made from scratch but yet contains elemets from each of the previous games rulesets.
For example: PI procedures from the DG3 are detailed and in depth therefore we should bring those over.

 

[Bootstoots]

I'm all for option 2, modifying the three books. Obviously there are some major changes that we must implement (such as the DG3 PI system), but it's already a good framework with which to plan the next ruleset. I think we should, if option two passes, start a thread where everybody who has a proposed change could post it and we can take votes on each individual change until we had a finalized version.

 

[Fier Canadien]

Get the Three Books back. Modify them if needed.

They have been tested DG-proofed.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Don't throw out what is learned and what experience is gaind from DG1 DG2 and DG3. I have no experience with DG2, but I've heard it's a bit more restrictive than DG3 was. I like that.

So use DG2 as a base and start from there and adapt the parts that DG3 taught us can be used.

 

[DaveShack]

OK, here's my 2 gold:

1. Figure out what worked in the past
2. Figure out what didn't work in the past
3. Keep the things which worked, and change the things which didn't
   [/list=1]
   
   With a 1 January target, we have more than enough time to start from scratch, but I'm concerned that so much energy will go into trying to make it perfect, that some people will be burned out before the game starts.
   
   We need to work on:
   
   • ways to slow down or stop for discussion
   • better definitions of the government positions
   • improving participation
   • making it fun

 

[amirsan]

I realy dont want to wait until December 1st... whatever makes the start sooner...

 

[Sarevok]

i think we should make a few small modifications, but its pretty good as is.

 

[donsig]

Is there anything wrong with the DG3 constitution? NO! Carry it over as it is. Starting from scratch is plain silly. Modifying the DG2 ruleset makes me cringe. (@Rik Meleet: DG2 was NOT more restrictive than DG3.) Adding to the DG3 ruleset isn't that good an idea either if it means carrying over the PI rules. (The whole idea of PI's should be tossed.)

I vote for something else. that something else is: Carry over the DG3 constiution. Decide what areas need clarifying (like when to stop a game play session, what is a legal instruction). Write up the rules for those areas decided upon. Play DG4.

Four easy steps to the next demogame!

 

[Donovan Zoi]

I would like to modify the DG2 Three Books as well, which means that we will not necessarily carry over the same laws, but will follow the same format. It will be much easier to discuss a section of the CoL, discuss, then surgically remove and replace.

Keep in mind that at the end of this process, I still plan on us spending about a two-week period rechecking our finished ruleset and looking for loopholes.

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

Donsig i think your hatred of PI's stems from being the most person in the dg to be PI'd if im not mistaken

Personally the dg3 constitution was a permissive structure, and if im not wrong most people would rather prefer the structure we had with the DG2 ruleset. I honestly do not know why you want to keep something like it around donsig, i just dont see the point, unless you plan on running for pres next game so you can use it to your advantage. It had flaws and NO ONE i repeat NO ONE decided to improve upon it during the WHOLE game, why would we want to do so now for gods sake. Its a waste of energy. Most played with the DG2 ruleset in mind 3/4 of the time, why because it was common sense. Lets just get a new ruleset with what worked and leave this ruleset and this game in the dust. Learn from its mistakes

 

[Cyc]

Quoting Fionn McCumhall:
Donsig i think your hatred of PI's stems from being the most person in the dg to be PI'd if im not mistaken
_________________________________________________

Actually FM, Chieftess' 3 PI convictions tie donsig's, i believe.

 

[Sarevok]

i kinda liked DG 3's constitution, but i wasnt here for the other games, so i cant compare

 

[Cyc]

you missed some great games, Sarevok. Let's make DG4 as good.

 

[FionnMcCumhall]

i didnt mean just the convictions, i mean all together.

 

[Bootstoots]

Here are the Three Books, for anybody who hasn't seen them or wants to review them:

The Three Books

 

[conehead234]

Modify the 3 books.