[SUBMITTED] Winner winner, Ambassador's dinner

[Ko-oren]

Description: The annual Ambassador's Dinner is around the corner. All ambassadors in @@NAME@@ are invited to a wonderful @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ banquet. In the week leading up to the event, your various advisors and ministers have given their suggestions as to which ambassadors should be seated closest to you.

Validity: May not be isolationist

Options:

#1: "@@LEADER@@, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Bigtopia and United Federation to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner, to get some trade deals done," your Minister of Finance begins. "Hey, why don't you also invite some CEOs and investors? This is the perfect opportunity to market @@NAME@@ and its boundless potential to the entire world," writing the names of several corporations over the seating arrangement diagram.
Validity: Capitalist
Effect: ambassadors to @@NAME@@ can buy their way into good seats at state functions

#2: "Comrade, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Núi Và Sông and East Lebatuck to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner," your Minister of Finance begins. "It's important for likeminded nations to sit close together, and it's the perfect place to discuss how to lessen the workers' struggles, and what is needed to lead the revolution," writing the names of some other socialist leaders over the seating arrangement diagram.
Validity: Socialist
Effect: state functions only feature red foods while diners are only given hammers and sickles for cutlery

#3: The Minister of Defence steps in soon after. "Whoa! Isn't that ambassador's dinner coming soon? Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer, right? This is an opportunity to listen to what these cockroaches from Blackacre and Lilliputia are talking about when you can actually hear them. Of course, we'll be extra careful about your personal security, we can't be too sure. But this is too good of an opportunity to let pass by," as he takes a pencil from behind his ear, scribbles in his suggestions on the seating arrangement diagram, and then leaves you with a bulletproof vest.
Effect: official dinners exclusively use plastic cutlery

#4: As the room empties out once again, your secretary chimes in. "I've seen that face before. You want better options. You know what would make you look great on an international stage? Leading peace talks and getting things done! How about, say, two nations at war with one another? Sure, the entire event could turn into a brawl, but think of the best case scenario! @@LEADER@@ of @@NAME@@ achieves peace between Marche Blanche and Marche Noire - I can see the headlines now!" as he, too, helpfully corrects the seating arrangement diagram.
Effect: the only thing colder than desserts at state functions are the icy glares of those invited

#5: On the day of the event, the Master of Ceremonies nearly breaks down in tears, holding a crumpled, crossed out, rewritten, crossed out again seating arrangement diagram. "I've been planning this for months and it's just not coming together! Why... don't we, uh, cancel the event? If your seating choice has the potential to let down allies or alienating enemies, well, maybe we shouldn't have the dinner altogether? @@NAME@@ can survive in this world alone! Quite frankly, this event was always my least favourite evening of the year, to the point where we're better off closed off than involved in these terrible dinners."
Effect: the best decisions are those taken in an emotional fit

Description: The annual Ambassador's Dinner is around the corner. All ambassadors in @@NAME@@ are invited to a wonderful @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ banquet. In the week leading up to the event, your various advisors and ministers have given their suggestions as to which ambassadors should be seated to your immediate right and left - the most important seats in the house.

Validity: May not be isolationist

Options:

#1: On Monday your Minister of Finance began. "@@LEADER@@, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Bigtopia and United Federation to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner, to get some trade deals done. Hey, why don't you also invite some CEOs and investors? This is the perfect opportunity to market @@NAME@@ and its boundless potential to the entire world," writing the names of several corporations over the seating arrangement diagram.
Validity: Capitalist
Effect: ambassadors to @@NAME@@ can buy their way into good seats at state functions

#2: On Monday your Minister of Finance begins. "Comrade, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Núi Và Sông and East Lebatuck to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner. It's important for likeminded nations to sit close together, and it's the perfect place to discuss how to lessen the workers' struggles, and what is needed to lead the revolution," writing the names of some other socialist leaders over the seating arrangement diagram.
Validity: Socialist
Effect: state functions only feature red foods while diners are only given hammers and sickles for cutlery

#3: On Tuesday, the Minister of Energy follows. "Oh, about that ambassador's dinner that's coming up... I don't know if anyone talked to you about those valuable seats to your side yet, but there are some things our nation just can't do alone. Without Althaniq and Maxtopia we would have no oil or natural resources, so we need to maintain these vital trade routes. It's best to have them sit closest to you so you can sweeten up negotiations for the next contract renewal," @@HE@@ takes a pencil from behind @@HIS@@ ear and crosses out yesterday's suggestions, replacing them with @@HIS@@ own.
Effect: co-dependency in international relations is seen as a good thing

#4: An anonymous e-mail from the @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ Intelligence Agency finds you on Wednesday. "We know you've been getting advice about seating arrangements. Don't worry about how we know that, we just know. About Tuesday's conversation: we might rely on others, but some rely on us. This event is perfect to remind them of that fact. Haptu and Kawandaland, for instance. Make sure they remember their nation's survival is entirely in our - your - hand." Glancing over to the seating arrangement, you see that yesterday's additions have already been neatly erased.
Effect: bullies all over playgrounds nationwide are prepared for leadership positions

#5: The Minister of Defence catches up with you on Thursday. "Whoa! Isn't that ambassador's dinner coming soon? Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer, right? This is an opportunity to listen to what these cockroaches from Blackacre and Lilliputia are talking about when you can actually hear them. Of course, we'll be extra careful about your personal security, we can't be too sure. But this is too good of an opportunity to let pass by," as he leaves you with a bulletproof vest.
Effect: official dinners exclusively use plastic cutlery

#6: While wrapping up on Friday, your Minister for Friendly Affairs approaches you. "The ambassador's dinner! Right! Isn't it supposed to be an fun night for all, including you? How about we have our long-time allies to sit next to you? I like @@RANDOMNAME@@, the ambassador from Ausblic, and the representative from Brancaland is great company too! You don't want to be stuck for an evening with horrible company," and before @@HE@@ steps out, @@HE@@ quickly takes a marker to vandalise the seating arrangement diagram once again, this time with both ambassadors' first names.
Effect: @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ officials forget to do their job sometimes

#7: Your worldly niece interrupts your deliberations on Saturday. "Yeah, yeah, I get it, you want better options. You know what would make you look great on an international stage? Leading peace talks and getting things done. How about... say, Marche Blanche and Marche Noire? Sure, the entire event could turn into a brawl, but think of the best case scenario! @@LEADER@@ of @@NAME@@ achieves peace between lifelong enemies - I can see the headlines now!"
Effect: the only thing colder than desserts at state functions are the icy glares of those invited

#8: On Sunday, the day of the event, the Master of Ceremonies nearly breaks down in tears, holding a crumpled, crossed out, rewritten, crossed out again, seating arrangement diagram, including all helpful additions from the week. "I've been planning this for months and it's just not getting together! Why... don't we, uh, cancel the event? If your seating choice has the potential to let down allies or alienating enemies, well, maybe we shouldn't have the dinner altogether? @@NAME@@ can survive in this world alone! Quite frankly, this event was always my least favourite evening of the year, to the point where we're better off closed off than involved in these terrible dinners."
Effect: the best decisions are those taken in an emotional fit

Description: The annual Ambassador's Dinner is around the corner. All ambassadors in @@NAME@@ are invited to a wonderful @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ banquet. This provides an opportunity to discuss everything under the sun, or, as is always a risk at events like these, under the table. In the weeks leading up to the event, your various advisors and ministers have recommended which ambassadors should be seated to your immediate right and left - the most important seats in the house.

Validity: May not be isolationist

Options:

#1: On Monday your Minister of Finance began. "@@LEADER@@, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Bigtopia and United Federation to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner. It would be a great time to deepen our mutual relations, and most importantly, get some trade deals and investments done. Hey, why don't you also invite some CEOs and investors? This is the perfect opportunity to market @@NAME@@ and its boundless potential to the entire world," writing the names of several large corporations over the seating arrangement diagram.
Validity: Capitalist
Effect: ambassadors to @@NAME@@ can buy their way into good seats at state functions

#2: On Monday your Minister of Finance begins. "Comrade, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Núi Và Sông and East Lebatuck to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner. It would be a great time to deepen our mutual relations, and it's important for likeminded nations to sit close together. After all, we would expect the same from them if they had a tradition like this. And what better forum to discuss how to lessen the workers' struggles as much as possible and what is needed to lead the revolution," writing the names of some other socialist leaders over the seating arrangement diagram.
Validity: Socialist
Effect: state functions only feature red foods while diners are only given hammers and sickles for cutlery

#3: On Tuesday, the Minister of Energy follows. "Oh, about that ambassador's dinner that's coming up... I don't know if anyone talked to you about those valuable seats to your side yet, but there are some things our nation just can't do alone. Without Althaniq and Maxtopia we have no oil or natural resources. We rely on them. We don't want to, but we need to maintain these vital trade routes. It's best to have them sit closest to you so you can sweeten up negotiations for the next contract renewal. If not..." @@HE@@ takes a pencil from behind @@HIS@@ ear and crosses out yesterday's suggestions, replacing them with @@HIS@@ own.
Effect: co-dependency in international relations is seen as a good thing

#4: An anonymous e-mail from the @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ Intelligence Agency finds you on Wednesday. "We know you've been getting advice about seating arrangements. Don't worry about how we know that, we just know. About your Tuesday conversation: we rely on others, some rely on us. This event is perfect to remind them of that fact. Haptu and Kawandaland, for instance. You can make them feel special at the dinner, by letting them know their nation's survival is entirely in our - your - hand." Glancing over to the seating arrangement, you see that yesterday's additions have already been neatly erased.
Effect: bullies all over playgrounds nationwide are prepared for leadership positions

#5: The Minister of Defence catches up with you on Thursday. "Whoa! Isn't that ambassador's dinner coming soon? Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer. This is an opportunity to listen to what these cockroaches from Blackacre and Lilliputia are talking about when you can actually hear them. Of course, we'll be extra careful about your personal security, we can't be too sure. But this is too good of an opportunity to let pass by," as he leaves you with a bulletproof vest.
Effect: official dinners exclusively use plastic cutlery

#6: While wrapping up on Friday, your Minister for Friendly Affairs approaches you. "The ambassador's dinner! Right! Isn't it supposed to be an entertaining night for all, including you? What about our long-time allies sitting next to you? I like @@RANDOMNAME@@, the ambassador from Ausblic, and honestly, the representative from Brancaland isn't a bad person either. You don't want to be stuck for an evening with horrible company," and before @@HE@@ steps out, @@HE@@ quickly takes a marker to vandalise the seating arrangement diagram once again, this time with both ambassadors' first names.
Effect: @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ officials forget to do their job sometimes

#7: Your worldly and studied niece interrupts your deliberations on Saturday. "Yeah, yeah, I get it, you want better options. You know what would make you look great on an international stage? Leading peace talks and getting things done. How about... say, Marche Blanche and Marche Noire? Sure, the entire event could turn into a brawl, but think of the best case scenario! @@LEADER@@ of @@NAME@@ achieves peace between lifelong enemies - I can see the headlines now!"
Effect: the only thing colder than desserts at state functions are the icy glares of those invited

#8: On Sunday, the day of the event, the Master of Ceremonies nearly breaks down in tears, holding a crumpled, crossed out, rewritten, crossed out again, seating arrangement diagram, including all helpful additions from the week. "I've been planning this for months and it's just not getting together! Why... don't we, uh, cancel the event? If your seating choice has the potential to let down allies or alienating enemies, well, maybe we shouldn't have the dinner altogether? @@NAME@@ can survive in this world alone! Quite frankly, this event was always my least favourite evening of the year, to the point where we're better off closed off than involved in these terrible dinners."
Effect: the best decisions are those taken in an emotional fit

Title: Winner winner, Ambassador's dinner

Description: The annual Ambassador's Dinner is around the corner. Each nation that has an embassy in @@NAME@@ is invited to join in a wonderful @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ banquet with possibilities to discuss everything under the sun, or, as is always a risk for events like these, under the table. Your scheming, underhanded Minister of Foreign Affairs, @@RANDOMNAME1@@, has supplied you with @@HIS1@@ recommendations for which ambassadors should be seated to your immediate right and left - by far the most important seats in the house.

Validity: May not be isolationist

Options:

#1: "@@LEADER@@, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Bigtopia and United Federation to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner. It would be a great time to deepen our mutual relations, and most importantly, get some trade deals and investments done. Hey, why don't you also invite some CEOs and investors? This is the perfect opportunity to market @@NAME@@ and its boundless potential to the entire world!"
Validity: Capitalist
Effect: ambassadors to @@NAME@@ can buy their way into good seats at state functions

#2: "Comrade, it's in our best interest to invite the ambassadors from Núi Và Sông and East Lebatuck to sit next to you at the Ambassador's Dinner. It would be a great time to deepen our mutual relations, and it's important for likeminded nations to sit close together. After all, we would expect the same from them if they had a tradition like this. And what better forum to discuss how to lessen the workers' struggles as much as possible and what is needed to lead the revolution!"
Validity: Socialist
Effect: state functions only feature red foods while diners are only given hammers and sickles for cutlery

#3: "Also, and I just can't lie here, there are other interests we should think about. There are some things our nation just can't do alone. Without Althaniq and Maxtopia, there is no way we could fuel our economy. To make sure that we can rely on their oil and natural resources, in return for our exports, and to maintain these vital trade routes, it's best to have them sit closest to you."
Effect: co-dependency in international relations is seen as a good thing

#4: "But, it's possible that we can think bigger. Sure, we might rely on others sometimes, but there are nations that can't do without us. This event is perfect to remind them of that fact," as he draws two lots from a hat with the text "Nations poorer than us" on it. "Ah, perfect! Haptu, for one, and Kawandaland, on the second. You can make them feel special at the dinner, by letting them know their nation's survival is entirely in your hand."
Effect: bullies all over playgrounds nationwide are prepared for leadership positions

#5: "And here's yet another option. It's no secret that not all nations are our friends, and you know what they say. Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer. This is an opportunity to listen to what these cockroaches from Blackacre and Lilliputia are talking about when you can actually hear them. Of course, we'll be extra careful about your personal security, we can't be too sure. But this is too good of an opportunity to let pass by!"
Effect: official dinners exclusively use plastic cutlery

#6: Before @@RANDOMNAME1@@ can continue, you interrupt: "Sure, we could take any of those roads, but this event is meant as a positive experience. What about our long-time allies sitting next to me? I like @@RANDOMNAME2@@, the ambassador from Ausblic, and honestly, the representative from Brancaland isn't a bad person either. I just don't want to be stuck in a full evening of horrible company. Oh, and we could discuss, well, I don't know... agriculture? They're good at it, at least. We could learn something."
Effect: @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ officials forget to do their job sometimes

#7: "Yeah, yeah, I get it, you want friendlier options. You know what would make you look great on an international stage? Leading peace talks and getting things done. How about... say, Marche Blanche and Marche Noire? Sure, the entire event could devolve into a brawl, but think of the best case scenario! @@LEADER@@ of @@NAME@@ achieves peace between lifelong enemies - I can see the headlines now!"
Effect: the only thing colder than desserts at state functions are the icy glares of those invited

#8: Forseeing that the Minister launches into another group of mediocre suggestions, you say the first thing that pops into your mind: "Why... don't we, uh, cancel the event? If we're only letting down allies and only risk alienating our enemies further, well, maybe we shouldn't have the dinner altogether? @@NAME@@ can survive in this world alone! Quite frankly, this event was always my least favourite evening of the year, to the point where we're better off closed off than involved in these terrible dinners."
Effect: the best decisions are those taken in an emotional fit

---

This is a very early draft. If this has potential, I'll make the options a little more verbose, and the minister's recommendations should be snarkier given I've called him 'scheming and underhanded' in the description.

I know there's a better way to phrase #7's effect line, but I couldn't find the correct expression anywhere.

#8 should be an isolationist option, but I don't know if it's worded strongly enough for that right now?

[Lelscrep]

with the text. "Nations

I think effect line seven is perfectly fine. If you want option eight to be more isolationist, probably insult the surrounding nations a tad. I also think this is the right type of issue to have a high option count!

Now, I don't remember reading any issues where the leader actually speaks, so this may be not accepted on those grounds. Though, if I'm wrong I'm more than happy to be corrected, as this issue is entertaining. I also think the first and third option have some overlap, since they're both economically thinking options. Obviously three isn't based on private industry, but if a capitalist nation gets this I feel there's not enough difference between the two.

[Australian rePublic]

Are they really gonna be talking about work at dinner? Wouldn't leader sit next to the ambassador that he always sits next to? Why is this dinner different? Also, can't he communicate with all ambassadors? Assuming they do talk about work, isn't the very point of this dinner? The only logical option would be the sitting next to the enemies one, all things considered. Until those ambassadors decide to use the toilet of the opposite gender of leader, then, when talking in there, it's a free-for-all

[Electrum]

I like the idea, it's a play on the "What's your favourite colour?" issue

I suggest rewording the "best interest" part, given that the Minister provides other suggestions -- why would the leader choose anything but what's supposedly their best interest?

Instead of one person and the leader talking, perhaps you could have various ministers giving each suggestion, each with their own humorous quirks? The minister right now doesn't read as scheming like you say in the description.

[Ko-oren]

A lot to unpack, thanks for reading! Don't read my responses as an argument against what you've written, they mostly just present my thought process when I was writing this.

with the text. "Nations

I think effect line seven is perfectly fine. If you want option eight to be more isolationist, probably insult the surrounding nations a tad. I also think this is the right type of issue to have a high option count!

Now, I don't remember reading any issues where the leader actually speaks, so this may be not accepted on those grounds. Though, if I'm wrong I'm more than happy to be corrected, as this issue is entertaining. I also think the first and third option have some overlap, since they're both economically thinking options. Obviously three isn't based on private industry, but if a capitalist nation gets this I feel there's not enough difference between the two.

I'll get rid of the leader as a speaker. Actually, I'll get rid of the foreign minister doing all of the talking, too. I'll revise the options and let all kinds of different ministers (probably) present their favourite option for tablemates.
Option 1 was meant as getting trade deals done with nations, seeing them as equals, while option 3 recognises @@NAME@@ as a nation with flaws that relies on other nations. I'll make that a little stronger. Option 3 should be a far more vulnerable option ("oh no, they wouldn't cut off our oil/resources, would they?" while trembling in fear), a lot like some European nations' dependency on Russian oil/gas.

Are they really gonna be talking about work at dinner? Wouldn't leader sit next to the ambassador that he always sits next to? Why is this dinner different? Also, can't he communicate with all ambassadors? Assuming they do talk about work, isn't the very point of this dinner? The only logical option would be the sitting next to the enemies one, all things considered. Until those ambassadors decide to use the toilet of the opposite gender of leader, then, when talking in there, it's a free-for-all

A lot of questions here, thanks! Yeah, I think they would definitely be talking about work at least to some extent. Even if they wouldn't, choosing which nations you see as important enough to sit close to @@leader@@ as the organiser and host of the event is absolutely an important choice to make, even if just for the photographers. I don't think a normal seating arrangement is in place, so why wouldn't leader sit next to different ambassadors every now and again (and also, I'm removing leader as a speaker for the last few options). He could communicate with everyone, but there's always a special relationship with the ones sitting very close by (again, think of the press opportunities and photographers). Sure, sitting next to your enemies is a valid strategy, but I'm expecting a lot of nations would take this issue ICly, in which case there are options for economy, for peace, for friends, rather than defensive options. All things considered, these are very useful things for when I'm revising this issue. I will try to keep the options balanced as much as possible.

I like the idea, it's a play on the "What's your favourite colour?" issue
I suggest rewording the "best interest" part, given that the Minister provides other suggestions -- why would the leader choose anything but what's supposedly their best interest?
Instead of one person and the leader talking, perhaps you could have various ministers giving each suggestion, each with their own humorous quirks? The minister right now doesn't read as scheming like you say in the description.

Yeah, I've decided to have the options presented by different people instead of just the one minister, hopefully with some humour if the options don't get too long because of it. Also, the 'best interest' is presented by an unreliable narrator - the minister thinks it's the best option, but the leader might (and should!) disagree.

I will make #8 more isolationist, and might even add another option, for keeping international relations alive but instead of ambassadors, host some sort of charity/homeless dinner.

[Ko-oren]

Massively revised version 1.0 is up!

What's a good word for #6 "Friday end-of-week informalities"? English lacks the word vrijmibo to be honest.

[Pythaga]

Massively revised version 1.0 is up!

What's a good word for #6 "Friday end-of-week informalities"? English lacks the word vrijmibo to be honest.

“While wrapping up on Friday,”
It’s not that much more compact, but it’s a more natural way to say it.

[Ko-oren]

Added some lines to (hopefully) make it more colourful. Additions in red.

[Ko-oren]

Selfish bump

Are my changes a step in the right direction? Is it ready for last call/to submit?

[Electrum]

It's good, but it is way too wordy. Here are my suggested edits. I'm not sure about the inclusion of dates - why can't this all happen simultaneously (except for the last option)? It's an unnecessary (in my view) complication. There are also general grammatical problems with the issue - I've fixed the intro as an example.

Description: The annual Ambassador's Dinner is around the corner. Each nation that has an embassy All ambassadors in @@NAME@@ is are invited to join in a wonderful @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ banquet hosted by @@LEADER@@with possibilities to discuss everything under the sun, or, as is always a risk for events like these, under the table. Over the course of In the weeks leading up to the event, your various advisors and ministers have recommended which ambassadors should be seated to your immediate right and left - by far the most important seats in the house., with all the opportunity to strengthen ties and discuss matters privately.

Some other notes:

For options with speaking marks and flavour text added, you need to put a comma before the quote, e.g. "... with horrible company," says @@RANDOMNAME@@

For Options 1 and 2, you say 'Minister of Finance begins' but at the end you add 'he says'. Delete one of the references since you've already made it clear who is talking.

Option 2 - not sure why you are inviting large corporations if you're being friendly with socialist nations

Option 3 - Needs to be 'On Tuesday.' Also, 'state department of Energy' is not a person that can speak. Needs to be a minister or a secretary.

Option 4 - "Don't worry about how we know that, we just know." I'm also not sure about the wording of Option 4 in general. The expression seems off.

Option 5 - Capitalise 'Minister'. If they're enemy nations, why would they have an embassy in @@NAME@@?

Option 6 - Use @@RANDOMNAME@@ since you haven't used that macro yet.

Option 7 - What complaints? You might want to reword to say that leader has been complaining about how many options there were. I also think 'friendlier' is not the right word, since she suggests you have the two warring ambassadors next to each other.

Option 8 - 'If you're only letting down allies or only risk alienating our enemies further' - I suggest rewording to 'If your seating choice has the potential to let down allies or alienating enemies...'.

[Ko-oren]

It's good, but it is way too wordy. Here are my suggested edits. I'm not sure about the inclusion of dates - why can't this all happen simultaneously (except for the last option)? It's an unnecessary (in my view) complication. There are also general grammatical problems with the issue - I've fixed the intro as an example.

Description: The annual Ambassador's Dinner is around the corner. Each nation that has an embassy All ambassadors in @@NAME@@ is are invited to join in a wonderful @@DEMONYMADJECTIVE@@ banquet hosted by @@LEADER@@with possibilities to discuss everything under the sun, or, as is always a risk for events like these, under the table. Over the course of In the weeks leading up to the event, your various advisors and ministers have recommended which ambassadors should be seated to your immediate right and left - by far the most important seats in the house., with all the opportunity to strengthen ties and discuss matters privately.

Some other notes:

For options with speaking marks and flavour text added, you need to put a comma before the quote, e.g. "... with horrible company," says @@RANDOMNAME@@

For Options 1 and 2, you say 'Minister of Finance begins' but at the end you add 'he says'. Delete one of the references since you've already made it clear who is talking.

Option 2 - not sure why you are inviting large corporations if you're being friendly with socialist nations

Option 3 - Needs to be 'On Tuesday.' Also, 'state department of Energy' is not a person that can speak. Needs to be a minister or a secretary.

Option 4 - "Don't worry about how we know that, we just know." I'm also not sure about the wording of Option 4 in general. The expression seems off.

Option 5 - Capitalise 'Minister'. If they're enemy nations, why would they have an embassy in @@NAME@@?

Option 6 - Use @@RANDOMNAME@@ since you haven't used that macro yet.

Option 7 - What complaints? You might want to reword to say that leader has been complaining about how many options there were. I also think 'friendlier' is not the right word, since she suggests you have the two warring ambassadors next to each other.

Option 8 - 'If you're only letting down allies or only risk alienating our enemies further' - I suggest rewording to 'If your seating choice has the potential to let down allies or alienating enemies...'.

Thanks for these, that was very helpful! A few mistakes I somehow didn't see earlier, and a lot of issues I was thinking about but couldn't find a decent solution.

The description is changed a lot now, the grammar should be much better. I've kept the 'under the sun, under the table' thing for now, unless it makes the entire thing too long. I think I'm good on the punctuation now, but I might still have overlooked a few instances of ," or !". Option 2 (Socialist edition) was a mistake on my part, that's been changed.

I'll think about how to make the options a bit shorter, including how I want option 4 to be worded. For option 5, there's no reason why enemies wouldn't have an embassy, right? There are plenty of RL examples of nations that don't get along but still want a representative there. Again, if that's not the case, I'll reword it.

Still looking for help to get the wording better, which I recognise is still a bit clunky in places.

[Ko-oren]

Finally got back to this one, spoilered Draft 1.0 and trimmed the options a little. I tried to get rid of all unnecessary details.

[SherpDaWerp]

Finally got back to this one, spoilered Draft 1.0 and trimmed the options a little. I tried to get rid of all unnecessary details.

It's still very long - 7 options is quite a hefty issue. I like the theme of someone approaching you every day of the week, but the issue can survive without it and it's contributing a lot to bloating the issue. I would cut down the options - you might even be able to keep the daily option theme by leaving it as Monday-Friday (and just assuming you have the weekend off)

5 options of this length should be a good length.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Nice premise.

However, instead of presenting a whole list of nations who could sit to the left or right, I would suggest giving a more generalised approach.

Option 1: Seat your allies together, with yourself in the middle, as a show of strategic solidarity.
Option 2: Diplomacy is about building bridges. Surround yourself by enemies and hostile nations, and put everyone as close to rivals as possible, to try to broker greater peace.
Option 3: Different approach
Option 4: Different approach

And then done.

Name drop various NPC nations, for sure, but don't make specific identities the focus.

[Ko-oren]

I finally got around to this one. It's down two options, and given the validity, players will see only 5 options. I've also edited the text here and there, getting rid of the week theme. Hopefully it's a lot more manageable now.

If it's still too long, I think option 4 has to go. That said, I think the 5 options right now are varied enough (economy, defence, friendly affairs, brokering peace, isolationism).

[Ko-oren]

On closer inspection, I did remove option 4 (the friendly nations option).