Era of Ideologies: Playtest from 1928

[10centjimmy]

@MrPotatoTed @vcczar

Flagging that there is no definition of "Qualifying offense," so I am rolling for all 25 members for all 13 potential offenses? Or is each Player on the House Judicial supposed to propose an article for impeachment?  It seems odd that both Blue and Red players would try to take down someone from their own party (especially if they're not "controversial").  There's also a note for CPU to use a percentage, but there is none listed beyond dice rolls of 1-2, depending on the offense.

I'm going to put some suggested fixes in the 2022 post, with the understanding that we will not make any changes until after the game is in Alpha.

Shoutouts to @Cal @Rezi @ebrk85 or really anyone who has come across an impeachment in game before.

[matthewyoung123]

1 hour ago, 10centjimmy said:

Alright, so according to 3.05 (ignoring it notes only a politician with "controversial " may be impeached) and the language of the Gen Event "Improper SC Justice," Justice Sanford goes directly to an impeachment trial - now to House Judicial Committee to determine articles of impeachment. I'm rolling for all committee members to determine what  articles Justice Sanford will be charged with before we move to a committee vote. 

 

If I'm supposed to roll individuals for the various offenses, Articles are:

Public Indecency x2

Obstruction of Justice x3

Bribery x2

Abuse of Power x6

Contempt of Congress x4

Treason

Perjury

Unethical Private Behavior

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow what did this dude do? 

[MrPotatoTed]

5 minutes ago, matthewyoung123 said:

Wow what did this dude do? 

"I'll tell you what he did, man.  Two chicks at once."

[10centjimmy]

9 minutes ago, matthewyoung123 said:

Wow what did this dude do? 

He was...improper 😈 

[matthewyoung123]

17 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

He was...improper 😈 

With a treason charge to boot! Who was he improper with, J Edgar Hoover? 

[10centjimmy]

4 hours ago, 10centjimmy said:

If I'm supposed to roll individuals for the various offenses, Articles are:

Public Indecency

Obstruction of Justice

Bribery

Abuse of Power 

Contempt of Congress

Treason

Perjury

Unethical Private Behavior

Now the rules state the articles will go to the full House for a vote. I'll note @matthewyoung123 can choose to have Justice Sanford resign if he wishes to avoid impeachment and possible conviction in the Senate.  There is no note on what happens to a statesman/non-president when they resign, so I'll make a GM move and say if Sanford resigns: 1) He goes back to the faction, 2) a 25% roll to be auto-retired, and if he stays in the game 3) does a dice roll to gain controversial (1-2), illicit (3), controversial+teflon (4) or integrity (6). 

 

I'll let Matthew make his decision first before tasking the House.

Edited April 1, 2023 by 10centjimmy

[ebrk85]

4 hours ago, 10centjimmy said:

Alright, so according to 3.05 (ignoring it notes only a politician with "controversial " may be impeached) and the language of the Gen Event "Improper SC Justice," Justice Sanford goes directly to an impeachment trial - now to House Judicial Committee to determine articles of impeachment. I'm rolling for all committee members to determine what  articles Justice Sanford will be charged with before we move to a committee vote. 

 

If I'm supposed to roll individuals for the various offenses, Articles are:

Public Indecency x2

Obstruction of Justice x3

Bribery x2

Abuse of Power x6

Contempt of Congress x4

Treason

Perjury

Unethical Private Behavior

 

20 charges including 8 different kinds. That seems crazy.

Can't say I know the rules for impeachment. I haven't had to do one yet.

[ebrk85]

4 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

Now the rules state the articles will go to the full House for a vote. I'll note @matthewyoung123 can choose to have Justice Sanford resign if he wishes to avoid impeachment and possible conviction in the Senate.  There is no note on what happens to a statesman/non-president when they resign, so I'll make a GM move and say if Sanford resigns: 1) He goes back to the faction, 2) a 25% roll to be auto-retired, and if he stays in the game 3) does a dice roll to gain controversial (1-2), illicit (3), controversial+teflon (4) or integrity (6). 

 

I'll let Matthew make his decision first before tasking the House.

Not the same case since this is impeachment but I know when a Supreme Court Justice resigns there is a 5 of 6 die roll chance he's retired from the game.

[Euri]

This Justice Sanford must have had one hell of a weekend

[10centjimmy]

1 minute ago, ebrk85 said:

Not the same case since this is impeachment but I know when a Supreme Court Justice resigns there is a 5 of 6 die roll chance he's retired from the game.

Is that you roll 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and he's retired or a 33% chance he retires?

[ebrk85]

11 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

Is that you roll 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and he's retired or a 33% chance he retires?

Oh sorry the first. Then retire on a 1-5 and remain in the game only on a 6.

[matthewyoung123]

51 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

Now the rules state the articles will go to the full House for a vote. I'll note @matthewyoung123 can choose to have Justice Sanford resign if he wishes to avoid impeachment and possible conviction in the Senate.  There is no note on what happens to a statesman/non-president when they resign, so I'll make a GM move and say if Sanford resigns: 1) He goes back to the faction, 2) a 25% roll to be auto-retired, and if he stays in the game 3) does a dice roll to gain controversial (1-2), illicit (3), controversial+teflon (4) or integrity (6). 

 

I'll let Matthew make his decision first before tasking the House.

Sanford will fight the ridiculous charges arrayed against him. 

[10centjimmy]

4 minutes ago, matthewyoung123 said:

Sanford will fight the ridiculous charges arrayed against him. 

Man. If you resigned you could just appoint a young justice and there's no point loss. 

[matthewyoung123]

4 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

Man. If you resigned you could just appoint a young justice and there's no point loss. 

If I was playing for points, that's what I would do. 

However, we are "testing" this system, right?  To see if it works as it's intended to for the game.  That means doing things like impeachments just to see how they turn out and find out if the rules, as they are, would work for it.  That's the only reason I'm going down this road.

I mean, if he's "convicted" then Hoover appoints a replacement anyway (even if there is a point loss).  If he's not impeached, then he's retained, albeit with a possible trait of controversial.

I encourage all my fellow Republicans, and Conservative Democrats, to vote against this sham!  (I'm hopeful the House won't vote to go to trail, but if they do, Republicans hold a majority in the Senate).

[jnewt]

1 hour ago, ebrk85 said:

20 charges including 8 different kinds. That seems crazy.

Can't say I know the rules for impeachment. I haven't had to do one yet.

I thought you took over before President Warner’s impeachment in the 2016 playtest? That must have happened really quickly into the playtest, if not. 

Edited April 1, 2023 by jnewt

[10centjimmy]

59 minutes ago, matthewyoung123 said:

However, we are "testing" this system, right?  To see if it works as it's intended to for the game.  That means doing things like impeachments just to see how they turn out and find out if the rules, as they are, would work for it.  That's the only reason I'm going down this road

Fair point,  but the rules as they are are really confusing. Like why did he get 20 counts of impeachment? Why did red faction members implicate him and now are likely to acquit based on strategy? Why would he be impeached to begin with? There's too many unknowns for this situation. I'm drafting my thoughts but I think this is broken as is. 

[10centjimmy]

That being said.  Action to House to vote whether to impeach Justice Sanford (Iassume on all charges, even though it doesn't state, and has no bearing or weight despite multiple charges for some) and send it to the senate. 

@jnewt @Umbrella @MrPotatoTed @Largo833 @ShortKing @ebrk85 @matthewyoung123 @Murrman104

[10centjimmy]

15 minutes ago, jnewt said:

I thought you took over before President Warner’s impeachment in the 2016 playtest? That must have happened really quickly into the playtest, if not. 

Maybe it was rodja?

@Rodja do you recall how the impeachment process went for Warner?

[matthewyoung123]

9 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

That being said.  Action to House to vote whether to impeach Justice Sanford (Iassume on all charges, even though it doesn't state, and has no bearing or weight despite multiple charges for some) and send it to the senate. 

@jnewt @Umbrella @MrPotatoTed @Largo833 @ShortKing @ebrk85 @matthewyoung123 @Murrman104

My faction votes NO to send to the Senate for Impeachment.

[MrPotatoTed]

2 hours ago, ebrk85 said:

Oh sorry the first. Then retire on a 1-5 and remain in the game only on a 6.

Mostly because there's little precedent for retired Supreme Court Justices going on to run for congress, etc. ;c)

[MrPotatoTed]

1 hour ago, 10centjimmy said:

Fair point,  but the rules as they are are really confusing. Like why did he get 20 counts of impeachment? Why did red faction members implicate him and now are likely to acquit based on strategy? Why would he be impeached to begin with? There's too many unknowns for this situation. I'm drafting my thoughts but I think this is broken as is. 

Agreed, this was written a long time ago, probably as a placeholder.  I look forward to seeing your thoughts on it, as it hasn't really been played with since.

[Umbrella]

What the heck, I'm on team chaos.  AYE for impeachment.

[MrPotatoTed]

I'll vote nay -- we don't want to see Hoover appoint a new younger Justice.

[matthewyoung123]

11 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

I'll vote nay -- we don't want to see Hoover appoint a new younger Justice.

4D Chess move...nice

[MrPotatoTed]

Just now, matthewyoung123 said:

4D Chess move...nice

Better the enemy I know than the enemy I don't.  ;c)