JJOCT7 R2M19 Jojolity

Judge Theodore (Logic)

As I said in my R2M18 delib, even as Judges give deference and grace to player interpretation and execution, Embodiment Jojolities need framing and ludonarrative synergy to mechanically reify the Jojolity. Many of the tactics both players use are natural to the matchup, making them integrated, but that doesn’t speak to the robustness, the importance of the Jojolity to the strat. (See also T6R1M22 Logic Jojolity: “If the difference between a 7 and an 8 Jojolity is “surprising creativity,” the difference between a 6 and a 7 is ‘robustness.’”)

Charlie’s scrappiness leads to some interesting flavor text about the struggle for survival, but this character writing isn’t as entwined with the strat actions to lend itself to higher scores: [6]. While I have similar comments about the ludonarrative synergy of her strat, the Narrative arc Helena undergoes, recognizing herself as subject to the cycle of death as any other, shows particularized consideration of the Jojolity, resulting in a [7] on balance.

Judge Foxy (Surface)

For jojolity, I'm thinking a **6** for Charlie. Much like others have said, there's a lot of fun flavor text, but jojolity is about the intertwining of mechanics and flavor. As is, the theming feels a little separated from the meat in this strat- not entirely, but I'd want to see the philosophy given be better integrated into the overall strat.

As for jojolity, Helena gets another **7**. I do think this one was slightly more involved with a stronger connection between Helena's focus on death and her tactics alongside a defined  endgame thesis on Helena's end, but I have a lot of the same criticisms for this one that I do for Charlie's. Fun execution, but I could feel the seperation between what was flavor and what wasn't.

Judge Janitor (Ceep)

Jojolity is based off of not only creating a thesis, but expanding on it in all factors of the match. There was a solid amount for both of these teams, so I don’t have too much to say. But I think that Helena did slightly better at expressing her thesis through the smaller actions she does and explaining why her actions kept things moving through the match. I’m giving Helena a 7/10 and Charlie a 6/10; good work to you both!