Nomicade [Forum Game] It's all over

[Pedz]

Not going to play, cause time and stuff, but can I suggest that if Denster joins that a rule is he is shot on day 2 and dies?

[Psychic]

I propose we change the first rule

1. Anyone may join the game at any time by posting in the thread.

to the following

1. Anyone may join the game at any time by posting in the thread until 00:01 18/04/19 when no further players may join.

[Jenuall]

Okay, let's make this a game:

If between them the Investigators have more than 30 points, and an Investigator posts, 'WIN!' in thread (all block caps), the Investigators win Nomicade. If the Investigators do not have 30 points, the caller loses ten points (going into minus figures if necessary). The Investigators cannot win if one of their number has minus points.

As an Investigator I approve of this idea.

Not sure if anyone has voted for this yet but I'm game for making this a game!

Only difficulty is right now we have no idea about numbers in the game, loads of people could turn up and make a 30 point target trivial plus requiring only a majority of three to get a rule through (and therefore earn a point) means it may be too easy for one team to get their numbers up if they're voting tactically...

Some form of the rule suggested by PsychicSykes that limits player numbers may help, or we leave it open but adjust the rules around earning points and getting rules passed!

[Herdanos]

I propose a rule.

At any time, a player can post quoting another player and amend the subject line of said post to state "I Love You, But I'm Stealing Your Point". In doing so, the player making the post will steal one point from the player they quoted, unless the quoted player makes a post of their own with the subject line "Not Today, Baby" no more than three posts after the "I Love You..." post. Any players whose username has changed during the course of the game are exempt from the effects of this rule.

[That]

+1 Dan
Also +1 Sykes


I would like to change my joke suggestion to this.

New Rule:

• If at any time the Aberrations have greater than or equal to sum total points than the Investigators, they win.

I think that's pretty harsh, particularly as they have to spend points to use their power, but at least they will have a win condition.

[OrangeRKN]

I also +1 Dan and Sykes - that gives them both majority so the rules have been updated!

• If at any time the Aberrations have greater than or equal to sum total points than the Investigators, they win.

Votes for: 2 (Karl, OrangeRKN)
Votes against: 0
Majority: +2

[Psychic]

• If at any time the Aberrations have greater than or equal to sum total points than the Investigators, they win.

Votes for: 2 (Karl, OrangeRKN)
Votes against: 1 (Sykes)
Majority: +1

Seems like an easy victory for the Aberations if people aren't paying attention.

[Herdanos]

Can I propose the rule.

'If a player has a proposed rule rejected. They have to apologise for wasting all of our time in a post, within 3 posts or 1 hour after the rule was rejected. Otherwise they will lose a point. "

That's an interesting... point.

[Herdanos]

I'll kick us off by proposing a new rule:

On successful adoption of a player's proposed rule, that player will gain one point

Votes for: 1 (OrangeRKN)
Votes against: 0
Majority: +1

I guess this is the foundation of how we score POINTS in this game, then.

[Herdanos]

New Rule:

• OrangeRKN must randomly assign all other players to a team, "Investigators" or "Aberrations", and in secret notify them of their team by PM, as soon as reasonably possible after their first post. (The assignment will be made by roll of a d4: 1-3 Investigators 4 Aberrations.)

For: Karl
Against:
(+1)

Can I just POINT out that this has only been applied to players at the time?

[Herdanos]

+1 for that and all the other rules on the table.

POINTS all round then.

[Herdanos]

Okay, let's make this a game:

If between them the Investigators have more than 30 points, and an Investigator posts, 'WIN!' in thread (all block caps), the Investigators win Nomicade. If the Investigators do not have 30 points, the caller loses ten points (going into minus figures if necessary). The Investigators cannot win if one of their number has minus points.

As an Investigator I approve of this idea.

Should you have POINTed out your allegiance already?

[Herdanos]

I also +1 Dan and Sykes - that gives them both majority so the rules have been updated!

• If at any time the Aberrations have greater than or equal to sum total points than the Investigators, they win.

Votes for: 2 (Karl, OrangeRKN)
Votes against: 0
Majority: +2

And I'll pinch the POINT you pinched from Karl too, for good measure.

[Herdanos]

I'll propose a new rule:

Further to the rule that allows players to post "I Love You, But I'm Stealing Your Point" to steal points from other players, players may not post more than once consecutively to steal multiple points, effective immediately as of the moment this rule is passed.

[Herdanos]

Proposed rule 16: can't multiple post to exploit rule 15

I vote for this rule by the way.

[That]

Aren't I exempt from the effects of your rule, Dan?

[Herdanos]

Finally I just want to make it clear that as my username hasn't been changed during the course of Nomicade so far, I am therefore able to make use of rule 15 at present just like everyone else.

[Herdanos]

Aren't I exempt from the effects of your rule, Dan?

Depends when you changed your username. If it was before I nicked your points then yes, but if you only just did it this morning as a response to my accumulation of points then you may not have been immune at the time I nicked one or both of them.

[That]

Aren't I exempt from the effects of your rule, Dan?

Depends when you changed your username. If it was before I nicked your points then yes, but if you only just did it this morning as a response to my accumulation of points then you may not have been immune at the time I nicked one or both of them.

Seems like it would be awfully hard to prove. We'll have to give me the benefit of the doubt.

[Herdanos]

Given that the quote chain suggests your name was unchanged at the time I quoted you (and OR did) I'd wager you only just changed your name now.