Change Urizen voting
Should more than two candidates be standing then the candidate with the lowest voting strength will conceded with their votes being recast.
Should it be a draw with no lowest candidate then those previously unable to vote would be granted a voting strength of one.
- This motion is in two parts; the first part addresses concerns over resolving ties during Senatorial elections.
- The second part gives a vote to those who cannot vote in Urizen senatorial elections.
- Passed unanimously.
- Advised by the Civil Service that the motion may have constitutional implications, or require the agreement of the egregore of Urizen.
- Passed Spring 377YE (Event Two 2013).
- The civil service has clarified the procedure for resolving ties during senatorial elections.
- Attempting to give a vote in the Urizen elections to non-ritualists is unconstitutional. This was struck down by magistrates.
Given the nature of voting in Empire and the fact that the Empire has been around for hundreds of years, it is difficult to imagine that draws have not occurred frequently over that time. Therefore, it was a design flaw not to notice that the system needed one or more mechanisms for trying to resolve draws, that should have formed part of the campaign setting from the outset - so that detail has been corrected.
In theory, it is perfectly possible to allow the players to try and introduce rules to decide voting ties for each nation as they occur - but in practice that stretches credibility and interest. There isn't, in practice, that much game to be had from determining the mechanisms involved - and it seemed better, on balance to adopt the majority of what the players wanted - a mechanism to move forward when draws happen - and make that part of the setting.
Generally speaking we are keen to discourage players from discussing and attempting to implement significant changes to the voting mechanisms. These mechanisms are part of the game design - and they are designed to be inequitable and unfair - partly to try and enhance the character and flavour of each nation and partly to encourage politics and play. We want players to deal with the problems that the political systems cause - not dismantle and 'fix' the political system itself. It would be trivially easy for us to have written a simple fair one-citizen-one-vote democratic system for the Empire - we spent a lot of time designing the systems that exist instead because we think that ultimately they will produce a more exciting game for people.
For this reason, any attempt to extend voting in Urizen to non-mages was always going to be struck down as unconstitutional. Such a change makes perfect sense - but it removes the strong motivation to play a magician if you are playing an Urizen character, it weakens the setting by removing the emphasis on Urizen magicians as politicians and it reduces the complexity and politics of the game by giving everyone an equal voice, rather than forcing some groups to rely on others for representation.
In the case of a tie, all save the top two candidates are eliminated and the election is re-run. If the deadlock continues, the election is tied and nobody is elected to the position.