MitD XII: This Space Intentionally Left Dark

[lio45]

That assumes the bucket is full, rather than just being one serving, which is far more likely.

Grey Wolf

? Is there any doubt that regardless of the level of the bucket, it's going to be gulped down as one serving by MitD anyway? To me, a full bucket is one serving :P

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Ah. I'll have to revise, then.

By all means.

? Is there any doubt that regardless of the level of the bucket, it's going to be gulped down as one serving by MitD anyway? To me, a full bucket is one serving :P

Precisely my point: if the circus didn't want MitD to eat all their profits, they probably kept him on a thin diet.

Grey Wolf

[Squire Doodad]

By the way, does anyone know how size is applied to snakes and the like?
The Reticulated Python, the world's largest snake, caps out at like 30 or so feet long, I think the record is near 40. Titanoboa, history's largest known snake, is estimated to be about 42 feet long. While thickness grows alongside length, if a creature is twice the length of a bus that makes more sense than twice the thickness of one. It might just boil down to the DM's interpretation though.
Of course, either situation would result in MitD moving very strangely or off-screen in order to fit the darkness without leaving his tail out, and he would be coiled up tightly the whole time. Colossal would be virtually impossible no matter what, and Gargantuan would be quite improbable. So it doesn't actually change much for the Ha-Naga, though it might have an effect on the next scrutinized serpentine candidate, assuming there is one.

[Squire Doodad]

Precisely my point: if the circus didn't want MitD to eat all their profits, they probably kept him on a thin diet.

Grey Wolf

Yes, they didn't allow him to eat anything thicker than five inches

[3Power]

I am choosing to vote solely so that choosing not to is not thrown in my face. I haven't accepted the validity of the FBS until now and I highly doubt that will change anytime soon.

I am posting my vote publicly so if my PM mysteriously never reaches the curator's inbox, it will be known publicly.

First, in accordance with adding additional options:
A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40
G) Reduce Strength Requirement to 23.
H) Monster must not be a non-D&D copyrighted Creature.

PV 1: H, G, B, D
PV 2: B, G
PV 3: B
PV 4: H, D
PV 5: D

The existence of any character from another webcomic being in the FBS is a disservice to the mystery. It shows that it's not being taken seriously and it cheapens the category.

Nailing down a specific number for STR is dangerous when we don't know what number Rich had in mind. Play it safe.

The MitD is smaller than normal. We don't know why, all we know is that he's supposed to be bigger.

The amount of alignment flexibility displayed by MitD is at a much greater extent than what we've seen from other fiends, including the roaches.

[Ruck]

Of the creatures proposed so far, I like the Athasian Nightmare Beast the most, but I haven't submitted a guess because I don't think we have the creature in this thread yet. It would perhaps be better to call it my least unlikely answer.

Yeah, I don't think anything is perfect, but I also don't have a lot of faith in my ability as a not-really-even-a-DnD-player, so I don't think I'm going to find a better answer. ANB is my second choice but the whole "wasn't released at the time yet" is a pretty big hangup for me.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

My reasoning for my vote:
In general, I think the FBS list is pretty fine as is, so I’ve put down A as my top preference. If pressed, I’d be fine with adding a “no embodiments of Evil rule”, but I don’t think it’s an essential and I’ll admit part of it is because the Glabrezu isn’t my favorite option and I won’t lose much sleep over it leaving. Beyond that, the size categories I think as fine as they are—It makes sense to not let the MitD be too large, and I’m not worried about tiny proposals either. Similarly, I think it’s important to have a strength bar, but I think 40 is high enough it won’t be a terribly useful bar.

[lio45]

Collected voting options:
A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40


Collected votes:

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
Grey Wolf	A	D	D, F	F
Kish	D	A
Qwertystop	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Squire Doodad	A	C
The Aboleth	A	B
Peelee	D	D, F	F	A
Vulkos	B, C	B	C	A
Jaxzan Proditor	A	D

I'm assuming each other-than-A letter gets runoff rounds against A and any letter that beats A gets implemented while any letter that gets beaten by A does not?

For the sake of the example here, after you add my vote (where D>A) and 3Power's (my vote was cast by PM a long time ago, but it's fine for GW to go to sleep at some point), let's say the voting stops there, D is implemented, and nothing else. The closest contender would be C, but for C to get implemented, it would need several more votes to beat A (as Kish and Peelee vote A over C).

I didn't bother to cast a vote for A, but normally, I gather that people do it to put a stop to whatever isn't on their list. Actually, now that I think about it, given that there are suggestions I don't like and would oppose, it's always a good idea to vote A after voting for all the letters you think you'd support.

Also, there's something that clearly makes no sense - if for example you look at Qwertystop's votes, he's ranking both B and C before A, so each of these letters will get his vote in their run against their implementation adversary (A) until either the non-A or the A gets an absolute majority in each of the two cases (B and C), but the exact manner in which he casts these votes is irrelevant.

His line could say : B,C then A
Or it could also say: C then B then A
Or it could also say: B then C then A

and all of those would be the exact same thing. Basically, the one and only "reality" here is that Qwertystop is voting for B, C, D, F.

[The Aboleth]

Guess I'll give my reasoning for my votes, too:

I think the rules are fine as-is: however, if pressed to remove something it would be the Size limit because it has been lampshaded pretty thoroughly. I still think a Colossal creature is too big, but I think that's something we can mentally make a note of without having it be a barrier to the FBS list.

Full disclosure: My guess is the ANB, and removing the Size limit would strengthen its case; that did NOT factor into my vote, but I want to acknowledge it in case someone tries to call me out on it later.

[lio45]

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
Grey Wolf	A	D	D, F	F
Kish	D	A
Qwertystop	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Squire Doodad	A	C
The Aboleth	A	B
Peelee	D	D, F	F	A
Vulkos	B, C	B	C	A
Jaxzan Proditor	A	D

Reframed for clarity:

Kish votes for D;
Qwertystop votes for B, C, D, F;
Peelee votes for D, F;
Vulkos votes for B, C;`
3Power (as per his post) votes for B, D, G, H;
lio45 (I know what I voted for) votes for B, D;

and Grey Wolf, Squire Doodad, The Aboleth, and Jaxzan Proditor don't vote for anything (i.e. "no changes").

(Makes zero sense to vote for anything behind an A, it will never get counted!)

Now, some of the people didn't actively end their lists with an A, but that should always be automatically assumed to (i.e. anything not listed in their personal list, we assume they don't want those).

Right now, D would almost pass (tie), B and C are the closest that may pass but each would require several votes (since anyone not listing those letters by default votes A against them).

This is the first time I witness a vote in this thread, but from deduction, what I described is basically the one and only way to run this kind of voting. And it could be greatly simplified by having each participant simply state which of the statements/letters they'd be in favor of implementing. Each statement that gets more yes than no gets implemented (by an absolute majority); each statement that doesn't, doesn't (again by an absolute majority).

[The Aboleth]

(Makes zero sense to vote for anything behind an A, it will never get counted!)

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the way the votes are tallied, but my reasoning was as follows: Option A is my first choice, but if that is defeated then my next pick would be Option B. The allowance to cast multiple votes seems to indicate a runoff-type of scenario could be in play, so I wanted to be clear what my preferences were in such a situation.

Grey_Wolf_c: If I have fundamentally misunderstood the voting process, please let me know.

[Jasdoif]

This is the first time I witness a vote in this thread, but from deduction, what I described is basically the one and only way to run this kind of voting.

I'm guessing you haven't heard of instant-runoff voting.

[lio45]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the way the votes are tallied, but my reasoning was as follows: Option A is my first choice, but if that is defeated then my next pick would be Option B. The allowance to cast multiple votes seems to indicate a runoff-type of scenario could be in play, so I wanted to be clear what my preferences were in such a situation.

Grey_Wolf_c: If I have fundamentally misunderstood the voting process, please let me know.

But that makes absolutely no sense. The options aren't in competition against each other. It's not like we have to elect one, and only one. We can choose several, or none.

Think about it... you'll see.

In your case, Option A - which BTW will never "be defeated" especially given how everyone's allowed random combinations of letters - is your first choice, so you're not voting for anything. You're opposing every letter: B, C, D, E, all the way to the end of the alphabet.

The fact that there's a B in your voting...... is completely senseless. If you prefer implementing B to not implementing B, then vote B. But you don't; you prefer Not-B to B, as you stated. So you're voting against B, which is perfectly fine.

You guys are trying to apply a voting system that is designed to elect ONE choice, not zero, not several. Makes no sense.

I'm guessing you haven't heard of instant-runoff voting.

On the contrary, it seems that I'm the only one (so far) who's familiar with it, given that no one else has yet noticed it can't be applied here since we're not trying to elect one and only one option with the support of an absolute majority.

(Give me a few minutes and I'll drive the point home with an example.)


Here's the example, a fictional scenario. Let's say that's final. How do you resolve this? You guys' misapplication of IRV would resolve that with "A", while appropriate resolution would have D implemented and nothing else.

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
Grey Wolf	A	D	D, F	F
Kish	B, D	A
Qwertystop	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Squire Doodad	A	C
The Aboleth	A	B
Peelee	D	D, F	F	A
Vulkos	B, C, D	B	C	A
Jaxzan Proditor	D, E	C	A

[Peelee]

Y'all know GW posted a link to a video explaining it pretty well, right? Alternative vote system

I'm sad that it contained no wolves, but amused the guy who made it was named Grey.

On the contrary, it seems that I'm the only one (so far) who's familiar with it, given that no one else has yet noticed it can't be applied here since we're not trying to elect one and only one option with the support of an absolute majority.

.... We are though? Each PV is a set. Most sets have a sight object, some have more, but we are definitely voting on one set to win.

[The Aboleth]

But that makes absolutely no sense. The options aren't in competition against each other. It's not like we have to elect one, and only one. We can choose several, or none.

Think about it... you'll see.

In your case, Option A - which BTW will never "be defeated" especially given how everyone's allowed random combinations of letters - is your first choice, so you're not voting for anything. You're opposing every letter: B, C, D, E, all the way to the end of the alphabet.

The fact that there's a B in your voting...... is completely senseless. If you prefer implementing B to not implementing B, then vote B. But you don't; you prefer Not-B to B, as you stated. So you're voting against B, which is perfectly fine.

You guys are trying to apply a voting system that is designed to elect ONE choice, not zero, not several. Makes no sense.



On the contrary, it seems that I'm the only one (so far) who's familiar with it, given that no one else has yet noticed it can't be applied here since we're not trying to elect one and only one option with the support of an absolute majority.

(Give me a few minutes and I'll drive the point home with an example.)

I prefer there to be no change to the rules; however, if a change must be made, my preference would be for Option B. This is all I'm trying to convey; people much smarter in math than I am can tally the votes and tell me the final result.

[lio45]

Y'all know GW posted a link to a video explaining it pretty well, right? Alternative vote system

Yes, and I even started by watching it to make sure (and didn't learn anything, as I was already familiar with all that).

Again - let's see how you resolve the above scenario. ("we implement D and only D" is the correct answer, supported by an absolute majority of the participants in the fictional scenario.)

[Peelee]

Yes, and I even started by watching it to make sure (and didn't learn anything, as I was already familiar with all that).

Again - let's see how you resolve the above scenario. ("we implement D and only D" is the correct answer, supported by an absolute majority of the participants in the fictional scenario.)

I edited my post a bit late to already address this. Sorry!

[lio45]

I prefer there to be no change to the rules

Yes, which is why all the weight of your vote goes to "I oppose all the suggested modifications".

however, if a change must be made, my preference would be for Option B.

Why would we ever find ourselves in the scenario "a change must be made"? If a majority of people want a change that isn't Option B but rather something else, you'll be powerless to stop it; if a majority of people want Option B, it'll happen; if a majority of people don't, it won't. Don't support Option B if you actually oppose Option B. All the letters are actually running against A, which is their one and only adversary.

This is all I'm trying to convey; people much smarter in math than I am can tally the votes and tell me the final result.

That would be me, and that's also what I'm trying to do.

[Peelee]

All the letters are actually running against A, which is their one and only adversary.

Are all candidates running for Prince of the Principality of Peelee running against the incumbent who is their one and only adversary?

[lio45]

.... We are though? Each PV is a set. Most sets have a sight object, some have more, but we are definitely voting on one set to win.

That is soooooo ridiculous it makes the Centaur look like a FBS entry in comparison. Of course if that's how you guys (completely mis-)apply IRV, then obviously, "Single A alone" is basically guaranteed to win, because when people support things and are allowed to randomly mix and match, the odds of such a combination possibly managing to beat Single A are zero.

Take a look again at my example. A clear majority (5 out of 8) wants D to happen, but because they, by pure chance, happen to ALSO support various unrelated things, A would (totally steal) the victory, and in this "travesty of democracy" scenario, D would be denied.

[The Aboleth]

Why would we ever find ourselves in the scenario "a change must be made"? If a majority of people want a change that isn't Option B but rather something else, you'll be powerless to stop it; if a majority of people want Option B, it'll happen; if a majority of people don't, it won't. Don't support Option B if you actually oppose Option B. All the letters are actually running against A, which is their one and only adversary.

I don't oppose Option B; I just prefer Option A more. EDIT: If people prefer something other than Options A or B, that's their deal, but at that point I choose to bow out of the voting as the other options don't appeal to me enough to vote for them.

That would be me, and that's also what I'm trying to do.

Wow. I bet you're fun at parties.

[Peelee]

That is soooooo ridiculous it makes the Centaur look like a FBS entry in comparison. Of course if that's how you guys (completely mis-)apply IRV, then obviously, "Single A alone" is basically guaranteed to win, because when people support things and are allowed to randomly mix and match, the odds of such a combination possibly managing to beat Single A are zero.

The solution, for D fans, then, is to not mix and match (at the very least not for the first pick, and certainly not more than one mix/matched in a set). That said, that's my reading of it, while the vote counter could disagree.

[lio45]

I don't oppose Option B; I just prefer Option A more.

...

........ "Option A" is "we don't implement Option B".

Clearly, you oppose Option B more than you favor it.

[The Aboleth]

...

........ "Option A" is "we don't implement Option B".

I am aware of this.

Clearly, you oppose Option B more than you favor it.

I favor Option A slightly more than I favor Option B. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

[lio45]

I am aware of this.



I favor Option A slightly more than I favor Option B. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying: you oppose Option B slightly more than you favor it.

If you and I and the rest of our party take a prisoner, and Option A is "slitting his throat" and Option B is "not slitting his throat", your position is that you're slightly in favor of slitting his throat, while still generally okay with either outcome. But you can't have both at the same time (unless we put the prisoner in a box, and it's the state of a quantum system that causes the slitting to be triggered.....)

[The Aboleth]

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying: you oppose Option B slightly more than you favor it.

If you and I and the rest of our party take a prisoner, and Option A is "slitting his throat" and Option B is "not slitting his throat", your position is that you're slightly in favor of slitting his throat, while still generally okay with either outcome. But you can't have both at the same time (unless we put the prisoner in a box, and it's the state of a quantum system that causes the slitting to be triggered.....)

I don't want both to be implemented. I want one of them implemented, and have ranked my preferences accordingly. I don't know how much more clear I can be on this.

[lio45]

I don't want both to be implemented. I want one of them implemented [...]

Your first choice is "I don't want any of them implemented", so clearly, you don't want any one new thing implemented.

No need to cast votes for things to be implemented, given that you're opposing all of them.

Again, in the analogy, we're a group voting on what to do with the prisoner, and you're casting your vote for "slitting his throat", which is your right and it's fine, but then you go on to add that you want to register a second, lesser vote for "not slitting his throat", and that's the part that doesn't make any sense.

[The Aboleth]

Your first choice is "I don't want any of them implemented", so clearly, you don't want any one new thing implemented.

No need to cast votes for things to be implemented, given that you're opposing all of them.

Again, in the analogy, we're a group voting on what to do with the prisoner, and you're casting your vote for "slitting his throat", which is your right and it's fine, but then you go on to add that you want to register a second, lesser vote for "not slitting his throat", and that's the part that doesn't make any sense.

*sigh* Look, I voted the way I intended. If it doesn't make sense to you, then it doesn't make sense to you. I don't have any desire to further explain my choices.

[Jasdoif]

Here's the example, a fictional scenario. Let's say that's final. How do you resolve this?

What, you mean like if I'm asked to resolve this without Grey_Wolf_c to explain what exactly is meant given the alternate/preferential/IRV/STV terminology clash? Well, let's see.

---

Spoiler

Show

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

D has a majority at 5 of 8.

D necessarily excludes A. There are no A-contingent sets.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

None exceed half....E is last at 1, so E is eliminated. E-contingent sets are eliminated.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

None exceed half (C's exact half is insufficient)....F is last at 2, so F is eliminated. F-contingent sets are eliminated (to little effect, since both are paired with already-chosen D)

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

None exceed half (C's exact half is insufficient)....B is last at 3, so B is eliminated. B-contingent sets are eliminated as well.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

C does not exceed half....So C is eliminated.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

And thus, the only change that comes to pass is adding "must not be an embodiment of Evil" as a requirement.

---

All that said, I think Grey_Wolf_c explaining what the process is, would be more fruitful than assuming it's what I'd do (especially since we're clearly not doing an approval-voting-esque series that resolves mutual exclusions by priority in ranked order).

[lio45]

What, you mean like if I'm asked to resolve this without Grey_Wolf_c to explain what exactly is meant given the alternate/preferential/IRV/STV terminology clash? Well, let's see.

---

Spoiler

Show

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

D has a majority at 5 of 8.

D necessarily excludes A. There are no A-contingent sets.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

None exceed half....E is last at 1, so E is eliminated. E-contingent sets are eliminated.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

None exceed half (C's exact half is insufficient)....F is last at 2, so F is eliminated. F-contingent sets are eliminated (to little effect, since both are paired with already-chosen D)

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

None exceed half (C's exact half is insufficient)....B is last at 3, so B is eliminated. B-contingent sets are eliminated as well.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

Voter	PV 1	PV 2	PV 3	PV 4	PV 5	PV 6
That Vampire	D, E	C	A
Darth Zannah	B, D	A
Darth Bane	A	C
That Dragon	D	D, F	F	A
Darth Vader	C, D	C	D	B	F	A
Darth Tyranus	A	B
Only Zuul	B, C, D	B	C	A
Darth Sidious	A	D	D, F	F

C does not exceed half....So C is eliminated.

---

A) No change
B) Remove Upper Size Limit
C) Add minimum Size Limit: Large
D) Add "must not be an embodiment of Evil" requirement
E) Remove Strength Requirement
F) Increase Strength Requirement to 40

And thus, the only change that comes to pass is adding "must not be an embodiment of Evil" as a requirement.

---

All that said, I think Grey_Wolf_c explaining what the process is, would be more fruitful than assuming it's what I'd do (especially since we're clearly not doing an approval-voting-esque series that resolves mutual exclusions by priority in ranked order).

... and you didn't notice that the whole process is just a needlessly complicated (and slightly less accurate and democratic) way of tallying the following...?

That Vampire: "I'd implement C, D, E"
Darth Zannah: "I'd implement B, D"
Darth Bane: "I'd implement nothing"
That Dragon: "I'd implement D, F"
Darth Vader: "I'd implement B, C, D, F"
Darth Tyranus: "I'd implement nothing"
Only Zuul: "I'd implement B, C, D"
Darth Sidious: "I'd implement nothing"

You can easily see that D is the only thing that will pass (supported by 5, opposed by 3). Also, something interesting, by eliminating A, you managed to produce a tie with regards to C, but in reality, more participants oppose C than favor it, so that's a bug, not a feature. C should not pass.

Having the participants bother ranking the stuff they all rank >A is absolutely useless. Same with having them suggest stuff they rank behind A. I really don't see how anyone could consider this messed-up IRV as desirable in this case, as we're clearly not trying to narrow it down to one and only one modification; we're open to several at the same time, or none.

If for some arbitrary reason we HAD to make ONE change, and only one, then yeah, okay, IRV would make sense so that we could pick the one modification that is the most desired and palatable to a majority. That's what such a system is designed to do.

But in this case, there's a bunch of possible changes. Everyone can say which ones they'd support. It's that simple. Anything requires a majority to pass.