Talk:The First Dynasty of naught
5 May 2020
I'm gonna try something new with my commentary. Instead of one huge commentary post at the end of a dynasty after I can't remember the whole history anymore, I'm going to do updates at various times during the dynasty, journaling my thoughts as events in the game happen (almost like a blog or something).
It's been about eight hours since the AA went live. Looks like the plan is a hidden-role dynasty with the twist that we don't know what our role even is. The initial burst of posts are from lots of different players, which include ways to uncover bits about your past that will lead to eventually finding out your role. I'm a bit apprehensive because I think that so many players starting out with their own ideas might lead the game into lots of different directions (i.e. the proposals Psychic Adventures and Pocket Lint are two different ways of unraveling information about each others' pasts), but I'm sure a unified path forward will manifest itself soon enough. Don't make me eat those words. --Trigon (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
13 May 2020
It's been about a week since the dynasty started and, honestly, I got a bit lost along the way. There are some interesting things happening, though. There are now several rule-defined ways information leaks out (Recollections, Recognitions, and Mementoes) as well as extralegal information trading. I was apprehensive about the wide range of methods that people were proposing for information leaking, but it actually seems to be nicely balanced.
I also really like the variation on the classic location system where you go to a location and do an action there then go to another location to perform a different action. Instead, you just specify where you do the action that requires a location. It's a lot simpler and I really like it.
One thing I don't understand, though, are the Role Actions. There are actions that can be taken by players who asserts their roles. This is fine, but there's also a mechanic where players can be penalized for performing actions that do not pertain to their asserted role (like in the game Coup). This works in Coup because players know their roles and can choose to play the part of a different role to attempt deception. Whereas here, people had already asserted roles without any knowledge of their actual role. Now they're stuck playing the part of a role they likely aren't, and can't take any actions because they will be penalized for it. Role actions are a fun idea for hidden role games, but I don't think this was the best way to add them here. Then again, I don't know how else they could possibly work in this setting.
Anyway, I guess that's all I really wanted to say. I still do enjoy this dynasty, despite my complaining. I will check in in another unspecified time interval. --Trigon (talk) 20:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- I think there's scope for a game where we're initially unsure about our roles, and become more confident through deduction, and can then boldly assert "I am the Sheriff!", intimidating the other players into thinking that maybe we'd worked it out. (Faidutti's Mascarade is a nice spin on Coup where you aren't always sure which cards you've got, so can gamble on taking an action that you're only 75% sure about.) It may get a bit tricky here in BlogNomic that Roles currently never change, but there's still plenty to bluff about. --Kevan (talk) 09:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
23 May 2020
It looks like this dynasty has pretty much died. Naught has all but idled out and they are the keeper of all the dynastic information, so unless they come back miraculously, I don't think much is going to happen from here.
That being said, this dynasty was decently fun while it lasted. For once, the ruleset of the dynasty actually grew further than I think the emperor imagined. It changed pretty much constantly, improving each step of the way. It seems that people even figured out a few ways to make better the mechanics I previously had complaints about.
As I stated in my previous entry, though, I am still a little lost on the gamestate and ruleset. Apparently there's been a lot of uncertainty about whether or not some actions were effective in the past. There's been discussion about wrongly-applied changes to the ruleset and how long the effects of those applications should stick around. It's an interesting discussion that merits consideration. My instinct is to codify in the rules some kind of ratification feature like in Agora, but then again, not everyone thinks like an Agoran.
In closing, I suppose I'll just say that no matter what happens, this dynasty has been fun, regardless of whether it ends now or later. Thanks, naught!