Debates take too many remote-synchronized actions for rock-paper-scissors. Seems like the prep work could be done all at once without waiting for both parties to respond.
I have to agree. I just checked my email for work-related purposes and realized that two debates practically stuffed my inbox with notifications. I could turn those off, but I like an email on my phone saying “so-and-so wants a donation.”
I’m feeling a bit rushed and flustered this year. A lot going on at once, but I am fairly certain that’s because I chose to send all three of my characters into the fray to cover every career and candidate. They haven’t interacted, there’s plenty of invites pending from others.
The game rather promotes it. The bulk of the writing assumes your character to be a snarky bugger working chiefly in his or her (or… whatever’s) own self-interest with little more than occasional pangs of conscience to sully the works. Playing a character with any significant moral integrity requires ignoring or mentally retconning a great deal of text.
[quote=Siankan]
The game rather promotes it. The bulk of the writing assumes your character to be a snarky bugger working chiefly in his or her (or… whatever’s) own self-interest with little more than occasional pangs of conscience to sully the works. Playing a character with any significant moral integrity requires ignoring or mentally retconning a great deal of text.[/quote]
My character is an incredibly ruthless mystic - I don’t consider her remotely moral, though she does have standards.
Can confirm. Although I justify it as my character having, as my signature states, "complicated" morality.
Sure I moonlight as a master thief, but I mostly steal from devils.
I am the flagship of my party, and I shall drown in a sea of agitators.
Let them come, I say.
[quote=Infinity Simulacrum]I am the flagship of my party, and I shall drown in a sea of agitators.
Let them come, I say.[/quote]
So, as someone has suggested earlier, well-known people risk at finding themselves dead, insane AND in jail in the same time. :)
I would not let my imagination tell me how and in which order this can practically happen for the saek of not joining poor fellas in their state of mind.
Proud supporter of Mayor Feducci here. Looking to debate someone!
So I just concluded my first debate and it was made fun by the attentive and well-reasoned player on the other side of it (Sam Norrey).
But it ended rather abruptly. Shouldn’t it grant me some kind of Influence-raising Change Point or a trait that can be spent on Influence? (I won, by ‘cheating’ in the setup which reflected our Roleplay funnily enough.)
edited by Shalinoth on 7/3/2017
You should have gotten “Winnings from your debates” and a new storylet around London to spend it with.
Oh yes. “The Spoils Of War” appeared as a card with a crown on it, below the other election cards. It gave me 531 / 1000. How odd!
No changes to make fixers better. Okay then.
I have encountered a bug after I had invited someone to a debate and selected the argument - I received a message telling me a decision has been made, but the only option in the resulting storylette is to go back without completing anything. I have sent a message to the support e-mail with the details I have. Any help would be appreciated.
I have issues too with the debating. Will not let me do anything at all. Ugh, to think that I have to complete five of these things…
Having won and lost a few debates I think you may actually have to complete more like between ten and fifty to get all five levels (assuming 1000 donations gives one level and you get 531 for winning and 100 for losing), which is a little horrifying.
The debate mechanics are… complex (some needlessly so).
To the best of my understanding, this is how it works:
Initiation phase (2 social actions):
- Player A sends a debate offer[/li][li]Player B accepts (sets A’s Readying Yourself to Debate to 1)[/li][li]–> Game selects venue??
Preparation phase (4 social actions):
- Player A selects tactic (sets B’s Readying Yourself to Debate to 1)[/li][li]Player B selects tactic (sets A’s Readying Yourself to Debate to 2)[/li][li]Player A selects argument style (sets B’s Readying Yourself to Debate to 2)[/li][li]Player B selects argument style (sets A’s Readying Yourself to Debate to 3)
Completion phase (2 social actions):
[ul][li]Player A engages in Debate (sets B’s Readying Yourself to Debate to 4!), and sees their results (rewards, menaces, etc.). This also applies the results to Player B, but without any message![/li][li]Player B checks the debate results (this resets all debate qualities for both parties, including A Debate Partner). No debate rewards/menaces are actually shown, since they were applied in the previous step done by Player A.
[/li][/ul]
edited by dov on 7/4/2017
I’ve received 900 twice for winning.
The exact formula is not yet known. We know that Campaigners have an option which increases the reward for both parties, and that Agitators have an option which reduced the reward for the other party.
I think the completion phase should be simplified. Especially if you’re debating someone who is not in your timezone it could take three days to complete a single debate just because someone needs to press the ‘Debate’ button, which is a pain because you can’t perform multiple debates at once.
Maybe something more like the old Knife and Candle mechanic would be useful, where you can set stances and then outcomes are somewhat random.
[quote=dov]I’ve received 900 twice for winning.
The exact formula is not yet known. We know that Campaigners have an option which increases the reward for both parties, and that Agitators have an option which reduced the reward for the other party.[/quote]
Having done a little experiment with my brother I think the maximum you can get is 1350 (two campaigners both inviting interested parties and the victor using an argument that appeals to the judges). Loser gets 100 as a baseline and Campaigners appear to add 25 to this each for a total of 150.
Two campaigners inviting guests with the loser using an argument that the judges favour (defamatory for the Victulars) appears to give the loser 225 and the victor 900 so I’d guess that’s the formula you used.