[DRAFT] Blackacre's Coup De Grace

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

[title] Blackacre's Coup De Grace

[desc] An international tribunal has been called against @@NAME@@, as the Blackacre Dossier, a clear forgery, has been released, listing human rights violations, crimes against humanity and a "Lilliputian Genocide", with the death toll being listed as over 7 million. Both your allies and enemies have attended the tribune, preparing to make their case.

[validity] Valid for everyone.

[option] "The Blackacre Dossier is clear proof of guilt. I ask the defence, is there any opposing evidence?" The Secretary-General of the World Assembly Johann Drake, who is the brother of Blackacrean Dictator Valeria Drake. Your allies mumble, as the Secretary-General proclaims "No? Oh well, case closed. @@LEADER@@, your sentence shall be determined by your peers. Any objections?"

{effect] The @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ leadership is the international head of the bootlicking committee

[validity] Valid for all.

[option] "OBJECTION!" yells the Bigtopian delegate, Big Wig, "There was no Lilliputian Genocide and even if there was, they deserved it! But yeah, @@LEADER@@'s still gotta hang for the human rights violations."

[effect] murder is only illegal against the ethnic majority

[validity] Valid for all.

[option] "OBJECTION!" proclaims the United Federation delegate, James Rothvelt, "@@NAME@@ is a valuable ally of ours, and so we shall not let you do this! We veto your decision!" Rothvelt then goes below the table: "Look, @@LEADER@@, we like you and all, but can you consider, loosening your economic policy a bit? We wouldn't mind some low tariffs here, y'know?"

[effect] tariffs are abolished in order to excuse genocide along with crimes against humanity

[validity] Valid for capitalist nations.

[option] "OBJECTION!" declares the East Lebuktese delegate, Vailoslav Marov (of whom the Marov cocktail is named after), "@@NAME@@ is a fellow socialist state and a wonderful ally. We hereby use our veto to overturn your decision!" Marov then goes under the table: "Look, @@LEADER@@, we can make deal, yes? Our leader, Leonard Chernobikov, has asked me to make request of you. We want you to be better socialist, yes? Do we agree? Good."

[effect] @@NAME@@ vetoes WA bills through making the country more socialist

[validity] Valid for socialist nations.

[option] "OBJECTION!" trumpeted the Despojanbourgish delegate, @@RANDOMNAME@@ "First off, before I begin, I'd like to tell the Secretary-General to initiate sexual relations with himself. Secondly, this tribunal is nothing more than a show trial designed to attack our great ally, the esteemed @@LEADER@@ of @@NAME@@. This is a corrupt tribunal and therefore shall be struck null and void."

[effect] insulting people is how @@NAME@@ gets its way

[validity] Valid for all.

[option] After being insulted, the Secretary-General calls forth a break. The Manamanan delegate approaches you as you leave the hall. "Hello, @@LEADER@@. Look, to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't attend this meeting in my sleep. However, I must say that we are currently supporting you. And so, I would like to extend you an offer: we are willing to bribe and control the tribune if you give us some cash and a trade treaty with Manamana. What do you say?"

[effect] trade is above the law

[validity] Valid for capitalist and corrupt nations.

[option] After being insulted, the Secretary-General calls forth a break. An East Lebucktese man in a black suit approaches you as you leave the hall. "Hello, @@LEADER@@. I am from the State, East Lebucktese's spy agency. We are willing to make the Secretary-General and those opposing you...disappear, so to speak. All we need is your backing, guns and domestic access. What do you say?"

[effect] foreign operatives often kill @@DENONYM@@ citizens on a regular basis

[validity] Valid for socialist and corrupt nations.

[option] "Screw 'em." says your gruff Foreign Secretary. "We'll just flip them off, walk out of this trial and then be done with it. They can invade us if they dare. Let's just leave."

[effect] @@NAME@@ no longer attends international meetings

[validity] Valid for all.

Any suggestions or further options?

[Bears Armed]

'tribunal', not 'tribune'.

Probably more comments later.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

'tribunal', not 'tribune'.

Probably more comments later.

Alright thanks.

[USS Monitor]

If it's a clear forgery, why are people taking it seriously? Maybe say that while many of the dossier's accusations are false, the international community is unsure what's true and what's not.

And then the options need some work to make them sound more like something that would actually be said at an international tribunal dealing with something as serious as genocide.

Also, sentencing @@LEADER@@ to death poses a narrative problem because issues can't force @@LEADER@@ out of office.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

If it's a clear forgery, why are people taking it seriously? Maybe say that while many of the dossier's accusations are false, the international community is unsure what's true and what's not.

And then the options need some work to make them sound more like something that would actually be said at an international tribunal dealing with something as serious as genocide.

Also, sentencing @@LEADER@@ to death poses a narrative problem because issues can't force @@LEADER@@ out of office.

What alternative would you suggest for the 'sentence to death' thing?

[Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners]

Also, sentencing @@LEADER@@ to death poses a narrative problem because issues can't force @@LEADER@@ out of office.

That, and since the player has to select those options, they imply that @@LEADER@@ is voluntarily agreeing to @@HIS@@ own execution.

In fact, that's kind of a general problem with an issue that seems to be a debate among foreign officials. Presumably, an issue is over a policy debate internal to @@NATION@@, whereas debate amongst nations is more appropriate to WA roleplay. Perhaps having an issue concerning some international incident where some options describes @@NATION@@'s allies makes sense, but including @@NATIONS@@ enemies just seems strange.

I'd suggest re-framing the issue so that foreign opinions/participation are completely confined to the description, and then the issue options are @@LEADER@@'s cabinet/advisors/cousin/motley-crew deciding how to respond:

[description] @@NATION@@ has been accused of genocide!

[option] Maybe we should cooperate with an investigation as a gesture of good will...
[option] We should remain silent and neither acknowledge or deny...
[option] The accusations are absurd and we should spread propaganda Glorioius Truth (TM) to that effect...
[option] HOW DARE THEY ACCUSE US! KILL THEM ALL!...

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

Also, sentencing @@LEADER@@ to death poses a narrative problem because issues can't force @@LEADER@@ out of office.

That, and since the player has to select those options, they imply that @@LEADER@@ is voluntarily agreeing to @@HIS@@ own execution.

In fact, that's kind of a general problem with an issue that seems to be a debate among foreign officials. Presumably, an issue is over a policy debate internal to @@NATION@@, whereas debate amongst nations is more appropriate to WA roleplay. Perhaps having an issue concerning some international incident where some options describes @@NATION@@'s allies makes sense, but including @@NATIONS@@ enemies just seems strange.

I'd suggest re-framing the issue so that foreign opinions/participation are completely confined to the description, and then the issue options are @@LEADER@@'s cabinet/advisors/cousin/motley-crew deciding how to respond:

[description] @@NATION@@ has been accused of genocide!

[option] Maybe we should cooperate with an investigation as a gesture of good will...
[option] We should remain silent and neither acknowledge or deny...
[option] The accusations are absurd and we should spread propaganda Glorioius Truth (TM) to that effect...
[option] HOW DARE THEY ACCUSE US! KILL THEM ALL!...

The choice was supposed to be what side the nation takes, and so defining your pick depends on whose side you pick. I could move the Dossier to be on Despojanbourg, and then reframe the issue as a matter of who it follows.

[Australian rePublic]

My country does not comnit genocide in the 21 lst Century

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

My country does not comnit genocide in the 21 lst Century

It says forgery on the label.

[Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners]

The choice was supposed to be what side the nation takes, and so defining your pick depends on whose side you pick.

Yeah, again, I've always understood issue options to be about what @@LEADER@@ wants. And we cannot really assume that @@LEADER@@ and @@NATION@@ wants the same thing, necessarily, cause not all players are playing (direct) democracies.

The player is effectively @@LEADER@@ and therefore the option the player chooses is what @@LEADER@@ chooses. Ergo, an option where @@LEADER@@ chooses to be executed is...problematic.

[USS Monitor]

The choice was supposed to be what side the nation takes, and so defining your pick depends on whose side you pick.

Yeah, again, I've always understood issue options to be about what @@LEADER@@ wants. And we cannot really assume that @@LEADER@@ and @@NATION@@ wants the same thing, necessarily, cause not all players are playing (direct) democracies.

The player is effectively @@LEADER@@ and therefore the option the player chooses is what @@LEADER@@ chooses. Ergo, an option where @@LEADER@@ chooses to be executed is...problematic.

Yeah, this is a fair point.

[Chan Island]

Could the accusation in the document maybe be a *little* less extreme? 7 million dead would be a very noticeable sudden disappearance, surely something that would strongly point against it being valid?