[Submitted] I know those eyes

[Singapore no2]

Info: You were having an early morning discussion with the Finance Minister about recent fluctuations in the stock market when an unhinged man rudely interrupted the conversation and challenged you to a duel to the death.

Validity: Only for nations that chose option 1 for #131, and have prisons.

[option] "I am the Count of Mount Crystal, and mighty vengeance is mine!" monologues the mentally unstable hooligan, who seems rather familiar for some reason. "I was given a life sentence for false charges of high treason, and lost my wealth, property, and custody over my children while in prison. However, I managed to escape, and I am here to settle a score. Since you, @@LEADER@@, are the one who created these laws that led to my current state, who better to exact my retribution upon? There are so many words left to say, but let's cut to the chase and spar to defend our honour! En garde!"
[effect] citizens are encouraged to voice their displeasure by fencing with their least favourite politician
[stats] safety drops, political apathy decreases, deaths by murder increase, civil rights increase slightly, crime decreases slightly, weaponisation increases, law and order funding decreases

[option] "Excuse us, 'Count', but we were in the middle of a discussion of national importance!" fumes @@RANDOMNAME@@, the Finance Minister, trying to shoo the miscreant away. "I don't know what @@LEADER@@ has done to you, and I honestly don't care. And besides, I've always thought that conflicts of interest should be settled via legal process rather than two men waving big sticks at one another. We should ban dueling of any sort, return to our riveting discussion, and avoid entertaining this cretin."
[effect] Harry Potter conventions are closely watched by the government for any signs of 'dueling'
[option] civil rights decrease slightly, safety rises, deaths by murder decreases, crime increases slightly, weaponisation decreases, law and order funding increases

[option] "Hey Count! I have an even better idea!" gushes @@RANDOMNAME@@, a relatively young aide, who seems a bit too enthusiastic for something so morbid. "How about you guys fight, but with pistols! You know, like the gunslingers in the days of old. We could cordon off a place in the centre of @@CAPITAL@@, and both of you could duke it out at high noon. In fact, why don't we permanently designate an area there for such conflict resolutions?" The aide starts imitating a cowboy, much to the amusement of everyone present.
[effect] @@CAPITAL@@ is world-renowned for its perpetual gun violence and pockmarked buildings
[stats] unbans guns if guns are banned, death by murder and accident increase, safety drops, crime decreases, weaponisation increases greatly, civil rights increase, law and order funding increases

[option] "How undignified!" reprimands @@RANDOMNAME@@, an economic advisor, tut-tutting at the aide's infantile behaviour. "Why must we insist on solving disagreements through violence? I believe that a good, safe game of chess should suffice to crown a victor. I'm not suggesting that we ban duelling, but an intellectual form could exist as well."
[effect] @@LEADER@@ has lost plenty of international respect after a losing to a lunatic at a simple game of chess
[stats] weaponisation decreases slightly, death by murder decreases slightly, intelligence increases, political apathy decreases

[option only for nations that have banned juries]
[option] "All of you are ignoring the big picture!" exclaims @@RANDOMNAME@@, a legal consultant, who was lost in thought just a moment ago. "This clearly indicates that our judicial system is in need of a major overhaul. If we allow juries again, judicial oversight would be a thing of the past, and malicious malefactors like him would receive a fair trial and wouldn't be knocking up on your door and threatening you in the hot light of morning."
[effect] citizens frequently duel to decide who gets to go for jury duty
[stats] civil rights increase, weaponisation decreases slightly, law and order funding increases

[option] Several security guards burst forcefully into your office, almost destroying your front door in the process. The 'Count' draws a firearm and ducks behind a pillar. "We are deeply sorry for our failure to protect you, Sir!" apologizes @@RANDOMNAME@@, Head of Security, grabbing your arm and hastily leading you out of the room. "That terrorist wasn't alone. He had several thugs who prevented us from getting to you for some time, and a few of them got away! We must declare a state of emergency until we apprehend all of his criminal accomplices."
[effect] @@NAME@@ is under an indefinite state of emergency as an enormous manhunt is being orchestrated
[stats] political freedom decreases, safety from crime increases, deaths by murder decrease, law and order funding increases

Referential to: The Count of Monte Cristo (Mainly the English Adaption of the musical)

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Referential to: The Count of Monte Cristo (Mainly the English Adaption of the musical)

You really don't have to spell these things out.

Nice premise, nice issue.

You maybe use "man" too many times, and could use some synonyms. Otherwise, pretty solid.

[Singapore no2]

Referential to: The Count of Monte Cristo (Mainly the English Adaption of the musical)

You really don't have to spell these things out.

Nice premise, nice issue.

You maybe use "man" too many times, and could use some synonyms. Otherwise, pretty solid.

Oh man! I guess that I'd have to amend some things, then.

P.S. Should I call him the Count of County Crystal? It sounds rather corny, which is kind of what I'm going for here.

[Canton Empire]

I think it needs a Princess Bride reference.

[Trotterdam]

Validity: Only for nations that chose option 1 for #131, and have prisons, and banned juries.

This validity is too restrictive. Legalizing duelling is already a pretty wacky choice, demanding anything beyond that would mean not many nations qualify, and would make this less fun as a "followup to allowing duelling" issue. At least having prisons is pretty standard and likely applies to most nations, although I suspect nations that already feature duelling as a method of conflict resolution are more likely than average to not also bother with prisons. Banning juries is the kind of technicality that has too little to do with this subject to be worth restricting an issue like this over.

[Singapore no2]

Validity: Only for nations that chose option 1 for #131, and have prisons, and banned juries.

This validity is too restrictive. Legalizing duelling is already a pretty wacky choice, demanding anything beyond that would mean not many nations qualify, and would make this less fun as a "followup to allowing duelling" issue. At least having prisons is pretty standard and likely applies to most nations, although I suspect nations that already feature duelling as a method of conflict resolution are more likely than average to not also bother with prisons. Banning juries is the kind of technicality that has too little to do with this subject to be worth restricting an issue like this over.

I have shifted the validity to the option itself.

I think it needs a Princess Bride reference.

Referential to: The Count of Monte Cristo (Mainly the English Adaption of the musical)

I haven't read that story yet. And I bet that I'd find it difficult to squeeze that in anyway.

[Canton Empire]

This validity is too restrictive. Legalizing duelling is already a pretty wacky choice, demanding anything beyond that would mean not many nations qualify, and would make this less fun as a "followup to allowing duelling" issue. At least having prisons is pretty standard and likely applies to most nations, although I suspect nations that already feature duelling as a method of conflict resolution are more likely than average to not also bother with prisons. Banning juries is the kind of technicality that has too little to do with this subject to be worth restricting an issue like this over.

I have shifted the validity to the option itself.

I think it needs a Princess Bride reference.

Referential to: The Count of Monte Cristo (Mainly the English Adaption of the musical)

I haven't read that story yet. And I bet that I'd find it difficult to squeeze that in anyway.

It's also a movie. I was just thinking about the Ignio Montoya reference

[Singapore no2]

I have shifted the validity to the option itself.



I haven't read that story yet. And I bet that I'd find it difficult to squeeze that in anyway.

It's also a movie. I was just thinking about the Ignio Montoya reference

Oh. That meme.

I admit that it sounds somewhat similar, I'll give you that.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I'd love to see Montoya referenced in some issue entirely unrelated to duelling, Just some random character with the surname Montoya revealing that he is not, in fact, left handed. Maybe some issue about census inaccuracies.

Hmmm. Maybe I'll write that.

[Australian rePublic]

I like the premise, but the reason for the feud seems a little vague. If as you said it was because he was interupted, that's a bit petty

[Canton Empire]

I like the premise, but the reason for the feud seems a little vague. If as you said it was because he was interupted, that's a bit petty

That's the point.

[Singapore no2]

I like the premise, but the reason for the feud seems a little vague. If as you said it was because he was interupted, that's a bit petty

The Count of Mount Crystal wanted to duel because he was put in jail due to laws that 'you', the ruler, set.*
You can select the first option and "agree to settling the feud".

However, it's just more likely that he's complete bonkers, and probably requires no explanation for his laughable behaviour.

*That's his beef with you.

[Australian rePublic]

Moving on. I like how the title suggetss that it's an issue about a burqa ban

[Singapore no2]

Moving on. I like how the title suggetss that it's an issue about a burqa ban

I could reference the prologue of the musical and rename the title "Let Justice Be Done".

[Canton Empire]

Moving on. I like how the title suggetss that it's an issue about a burqa ban

I could reference the prologue of the musical and rename the title "Let Justice Be Done".

Call it "My Shot" or "Don't Throw Away Your Shot" in reference to Hamilton.

[Singapore no2]

I could reference the prologue of the musical and rename the title "Let Justice Be Done".

Call it "My Shot" or "Don't Throw Away Your Shot" in reference to Hamilton.

But it's not referencing Hamilton.
And it's about swords, not guns.

[Canton Empire]

Call it "My Shot" or "Don't Throw Away Your Shot" in reference to Hamilton.

But it's not referencing Hamilton.
And it's about swords, not guns.

The issue should probably be changed to address both forms of dueling. And an option to settle disputes with a game of chess

[Singapore no2]

But it's not referencing Hamilton.
And it's about swords, not guns.

The issue should probably be changed to address both forms of dueling. And an option to settle disputes with a game of chess

That actually sounds pretty gud.

[Golgothastan]

Chess is a bit similar to #246-4: it's the same basic idea, replacing physical activities with "intellectual" pursuits. Not necessarily a problem, I suppose, but variety is the spice of life.

In the final option, the effect line doesn't really follow from the option: why does the reintroduction of jury trials immediately lead to citizens not enjoying being summoned?

With the Monte Cristo references, I wonder if there's a way of working a reference to a Monte Cristo sandwich!

[Singapore no2]

Chess is a bit similar to #246-4: it's the same basic idea, replacing physical activities with "intellectual" pursuits. Not necessarily a problem, I suppose, but variety is the spice of life.

I could swap the game to make it about draughts/checkers. Though of course, it wouldn't be as highly regarded as chess in some circles.

In the final option, the effect line doesn't really follow from the option: why does the reintroduction of jury trials immediately lead to citizens not enjoying being summoned?

Citizens didn't need to turn up in a dusty courtroom listening to a boring case for several consecutive hours before the option was selected, so that would make them just a tad upset.

But of course, I can appreciate the fact that some people actually enjoy turning up to decide the fate of a defendant, but I am assuming here that most people wouldn't find it a good use of their time, and find it frustrating.

With the Monte Cristo references, I wonder if there's a way of working a reference to a Monte Cristo sandwich!

Woah. This exists?! Cool!

Aside from that, I'm not sure that I can add that in without breaking the already convoluted narrative of my issue.

Though of course, I could add it in as some form of 'merchandising' in the once-in-a-lifetime Count v Leader duel of the decade. I'll probably ask for other's opinions before implementing that change, though.

[Golgothastan]

But of course, I can appreciate the fact that some people actually enjoy turning up to decide the fate of a defendant, but I am assuming here that most people wouldn't find it a good use of their time, and find it frustrating.

I'm mainly thinking about one of the existing issues on juries, 410, where option 3, to retain juries, implies the citizens like jury service. Of course issues don't have to be internally consistent, I'd just like to see more of a link between the option text and the effect line.

[Singapore no2]

I'd just like to see more of a link between the option text and the effect line.

How about "citizens frequently duel over who gets to go for jury duty"?

[Singapore no2]

Bump

[Australian rePublic]

Don't use the expression "Wild West"

[Annihilators of Chan Island]

A bit disappointed here that there's no option where a bodyguard or 6 jump on top of the madman and apologies for letting the incident happen.