Staking & Bridge Proposal

Summary This proposal seeks to ratify the roadmap forward to a StarkNet migration that appears to have community consensus. The following options assume that LORDS total supply is fixed (but is to be voted on in a future proposal, along with any minimum staking period and LORDS distribution for the successful option).

---

Option 1 - Staking on L1 and earning Lords & mass migrate Realms to Starknet

A staking contract will be created on L1 where Realm holders can stake their Realms for a minimum of Y weeks, and in return earn a proportion of the LORDS token. Once the game is live on Starknet, the staked Realms will automatically be moved to Starknet with no further L1 transaction fee. Realm owners who do not stake before migration occurs will be able to move to the L2 using a traditional bridge model

Pros

• Fast to release staking element (less than 2 weeks from now)
• Fairer distribution of LORDS to those who believe in the long term vision rather than purely speculative
• Retains one version of the base asset that can be moved between layers

Cons

• More gas and is paid earlier than option 2

---

Option 2 - Mirror Realms on L2 with LORDS airdrop All realm owners are rewarded with an airdrop of X% of the total supply of LORDS on L1 from a snapshot on a future date. Once the Realms Starknet migration is live, Realm owners will be able to transact once in a ‘Mirror’ contract on L2, creating a new “StarkRealm” on L2, as well as retaining ownership of the L1 Realm

Pros

• Cheaper gas cost than option 1- as this would only require a transaction on L2 to generate the new version - overall fees will be lower than a bridge

Cons

• May create large sell pressure directly after airdrop and attract people for the wrong reasons
• There would now be two versions of the Realm (one on L1 and one on L2) that are not connected to each other, and you could not bridge the L2 version back to an equivalent L1 version and sell on a marketplace
• Most of the functionality would be on L2 (gaming etc), so it raises questions about what we actually have the purpose of an L1 Realm is going forward (e.g abandoned, used for governance etc.)
• Potential for negative experiences and confusion if people unfamiliar with the non-standard mechanics bought the wrong version of the NFT

---

Option 3 - None of the above This option is if you believe that neither of the above options is suitable - for example, if StarkNet is not the right Layer 2 selection - or that no LORDS distribution should occur until the Settling game begins

Pros

• More time to discuss alternative solutions and let ecosystems develop
• No potential to spend more Ether ….yet

Cons

• Stuck in limbo while other projects progress
• No LORDS distribution for holders and to advance further development
• Miss out on first mover advantages such as marketing and partnerships with platforms

Related Discussion https://forum.bibliothecaforloot.com/t/starknet-roadmap-and-proposal-to-reward-og-holders/29/5