proposed rules - some remarks/suggestions
Draw a clear line between in-game rules and the council of wyrms, and (outside) players decisions.
Atm, both is mixed up, and twenty years experience of board- and PC-MP-gaming tells me that is begging for trouble.
Big trouble.
E.g.:
Code:
Rule 6.
A proposal must gain at least a tie vote
abstentions do not count) in the Council
to succeed. The only exception is turning
a player to AI. Because this is irreversible,
AI votes require 80% of the votes to suceed.
So a player who did not choose (for whatever role- or gameplay reasons) a wyrm as a pretender, can't even vote against himself thrown out of the game?? You must be joking !
Furthermore, there are some rules which can't be enforced, as there will be no evidence if someone broke them. That isn't that bad, if they are only 'in-game' rules, as it may lead to some serious and interesting role-playing and strategic decisions.
E.g. what if some casts "Ghost Riders" on his neighbours province, whom he is not at war with and whom he cannot attack without council ruling:
Code:
Rule 15.
Attacks that convert an owned province
to neutral (such as Ghost Riders) are
not allowed without a Council ruling.
As long as everything stays 'in-game', there will be some suspicions, and (maybe wrong) accusations, but no wyrm will ever know for sure.
But if you'll have the 'referee' check the turn files, you're taking it out of the game, and in between the players. And thing will get very personal then, and the game will be over before it has really begun.
So,
please, give this another look and devide the rules into 'game rules' and 'council rules', just to make a clear distinction between what is role-playing and what is real-world code of conduct.
Stefan
PS: And, o.c., wyrms should not be allowed into Death Match !