-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MORNINGTON NOMIC Proposals for Voting on in Year One, Week Thirty-Six -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 235 - Ruleset Reorganisation [Other, Multiple] { Comments: This first bit isn't an actual Proposal, more a layout guideline which I'll bring in under Rule 212 (Keep the Ruleset Tidy). I've included it here for clarity's sake. [0] Table of Contents [Nothing] Add a Table of Contents to the start of the Ruleset, with the following categories:- 0 Nomic Mechanics 0.1 Terms of Reference 0.2 Rules and the Ruleset 0.3 Players 0.4 Proposals 0.5 Votes 0.6 The Nomic Week 0.7 Points of Order 0.8 Activity 0.9 Miscellanea 1 Mornington Crescent 1.1 The Game 1.2 The Game State Document 1.3 Turn-Taking 1.4 Moves 1.5 Line Velocity 1.6 Actions 1.7 States of Play 1.8 Tokens 1.9 Blocking 1.10 Shunting 1.11 Wild Stations 1.12 Home Stations 1.13 Game Time 1.14 The Drone 1.15 Buzzing } [1] Renumbering [Amendment] In Rule 109 (Numbering), replace "Both Rules and Proposals shall be numbered for reference purposes. New Rules which are enacted shall receive the next successive, integer number after that of the last Rule in the relevant Ruleset Subset (Basic Immutable rules are numbered from 100-199, Mutable Rules relating to the non-MC mechanics of the Nomic from 200-999, and Mornington Crescent Rules from 1000 onwards)." with "Rules shall be numbered for reference purposes, with three numbers in the format "[Section].[Subset].[Rule]" (eg. "1.3.4"), Section and Subset being defined in the Ruleset's Table of Contents, and Rule being an integer number used to distinguish between Rules within the same Subset. New Rules shall be placed in a Section and Subset of the Speaker's choice upon their Enactment. They shall have a Rule number equal to the next successive integer number after that of the last Rule in the relevant Subset." [2] Technicality [Amendment] In Rule 1017 (Crimes and Misdemeanours), replace "Any Turn made in a Game of Mornington Crescent not in accordance with any of the Rules of the Nomic numbered above 1000 is an Illegal Turn. This is in contrast with a Turn made not in accordance with a Rule numbered below 1000, which shall be considered an illegal alteration of an Official Document and treated accordingly. If a Turn satisfies both of these conditions, the latter shall apply." with "Any Turn made in a Game of Mornington Crescent not in accordance with any of the Rules of the Nomic in the Mornington Crescent Section is an Illegal Turn." { Comments:- The Rule 1000 (How to Win) bit seems a little odd, since it defines what happens when someone makes a Valid Move to Mornington Crescent; it imposes no restrictions or compulsory actions, and there is no possible Turn which would not be in accordance with it. As for Turns being illegal in the eyes of pre-1000 Rules - er, are there any that are applicable? The whole "legal GSD definition" business is dealt with in the post-1000 lot. Either way, I've cut this down to its bones. } [3] Off You Go, Then [Enactment] After all other passed Proposals for this Week have taken effect, renumber all the Rules in the Ruleset, in accordance with the Rule named "Numbering", then Repeal this Rule. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 236 - Slapping [Other, Multiple] [1] Slapping [Enactment] Proposals may be of type "Other" and subtype "Slap" or "Backslap" - such Proposals are termed "Slap Proposals". Slap Proposals may only propose to amend a Player's Kudos, and do not count towards a Player's weekly Proposal limit. Players may make a maximum of three Slap Proposals per Nomic Week. This takes precedence over Rule 117 (Proposal Limit). [2] Tinkerbell [Amendment] Reword Rule 210 (Direct Tinkering Ban) to:- "If the passing of a Proposal would directly cause any aspect of the Mornington Nomic Game State other than the Ruleset to be altered, and if it receives at least one AGAINST Vote, it may not pass. This takes precedence over all other Rules regarding the passing of Proposals." { Comments: A fairer way to attach Kudos amendments to things, I think - miKi's rather nasty attachment of an unfair Kudos penalty to a necessary and urgent amendment seemed rather poor sport. } -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 237 - Ham Sandwich [Enactment] The game state contains an attribute known as Sandwich Status. Sandwich Status may either be Ham or Marmalade. When a player moves to a station whose name contains the text "ham" in any capitalisation (which is known as a Ham station), they may make the action [Ham Sandwich] at a cost of 1 Black Token if the current Sandwich Status is Marmalade, or may make the action [Marmalade Sandwich] at a cost of 1 Black token if the current Sandwich Status is Ham. Either of the above actions toggles the Sandwich Status. When the Sandwich Status is Ham, Rule 1025 shall be interpreted as if 'Paddington' had been replaced by 'All Ham Stations', and 'Marmalade' had been replaced by 'Ham'. This rule takes precedence over Rule 1025. Slakko -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 238 - De-Activator [Amendment] Amend Rule 218 (Official Positions) to remove references to the OP of Activator. { Comment: Too hard to calculate, especially retrospectively. } -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 239 - Dogs Turn Up Everywhere (Again) [Amendment] Rule 1012 (Dogs Must Be Carried) shall be amended as follows: Append the following paragraph: 'The Moves "Bow Road (for Bow Church)", "Bow Church (for Bow Road)", "Tower Hill (for Tower Gateway)" and "Tower Gateway (for Tower Hill)" are also valid Moves in the same way.' { Comment: This is a resubmission of Proposal 94 from Week 10, because I still think this is right. At the time, the objection was raised that Escalator Links did not, in fact, exist between the Towers or the Bows, but I reckon we go by what it looks like on the map, and that's what it looks like. } -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 240 - What Does This Button Do Again? [Other, Multiple] { Comment: one to get the serious Nomickers frothing at the mouth...} [Repeal: We Don't Need Your Steenking Mutabeelity] Repeal Rule 103 (Mutability) { Comment: As discussed on the list in the past, this whole Mutable/Immutable business is never defined. And as Rule 115 says, whatever is not prohibited is permitted. Anyway, given the focus of MN as being on winning MC rather than scamming the ruleset, it seems fairly irrelevent. } [Amendment: Type Cast] Amend Rule 104 (Proposal Types) to remove references to Transmutation. [Amendment: Sorry? What Does That Mean Now?] Amend all Rules to remove their Mutable or Immutable classification. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 241 - Rationalisation [Other, Multiple] 1. 'It's a question of definition' (Amendment) In Rule 1016 (Go With The Flow) replace the list item: "Line Segment: The stretch of line between two Move Nodes. Stations along the Line Segment are said to be contained within it. with: "Line Segment: A section between and including any two given Stations on a specified Line, described by the station at either end of the Segment." {Comment: it would be useful to be able to refer to Line Segments without reference to Moves} add the list item: "Line Code A two-letter code given to each Line and Line Segment. A Line Segment has the same Line Code as the Line of which it forms a part. If a Line Segment has more than one possible Line Code, it is deemed to have the Code which is specified. The following lists the Lines and their Line Codes: Bakerloo - BL Jubilee - JL Central - CN Metropolitan - MP Circle - CL Northern - NT District - DS Piccadilly - PD East London - EL Victoria - VC Hamm & City - HC Water & City - WC DLR - DL {Comment: it started off as just an amendment to Rule 1059 and I got carried away... there are other reasons for this proposal which will be made clearer if certain other proposals pass; note that part of Rule 1059 has been discarded and the relevant bits incorporated into the above or the propsed amendment to the move format below} 2. 'Tidying Up' (Repeal) Repeal Rule 1059 (Line Code) {Comment: I think it would be useful to incorporate this Rule into the above.} 3. Pass the Buck (Amendment) Replace the following paragraph in Rule 1001 (The Game State Document): "Players are permitted to add their Move to the end of the Game State Document, in the following format: : ( via:,) [] Where is the name of the Player making the Move, is a valid Move, via, is the resulting Line of the Move with the route taken if a change of Lines has been made and is an optional Action performed by the Player. Any Action shall be enclosed in square brackets. Only Actions defined by Rules are valid. If no Action is to be performed by the Player, the square brackets are not to be written." with: "On eir Turn, Players add their Move to the end of the Game State Document, in the following format: : (, via: ) [] is the name of the Player making the Move; is a valid Move; is the Line Code of the station moved to, unless the Move is "Pass", in which case the Player shall give the name and Line Code of the station e is currently at in this space. If the station moved to has more than one possible Line Code the Player should nominate a Line Code of eir choice from those available; is the Line Code of each Line Segment that has formed part of the Move and may be omitted if the Player has passed or remained on the same Line for the whole Move; is an optional Action performed by the Player. Only Actions defined by Rules are valid. If no Action is to be performed by the Player, the square brackets should be omitted." {Comment: just wanted to propose that the previous station moved to be mentioned in a Pass, but noticed that the current wording of the Rule is very confusing, so mucked about with that too, as well as incorporating some relevant stuff from the Line Code Rule} {Comment: this has turned out to be a much bigger proposal than originally planned, and there are elements of each part that depend on the other passing, so I thought it best if it was all one proposal} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 242 - 'This was due to the earlier incompetence of London Underground' [Amendment] Amend Rule 1063 (Power Failure!) to read as follows: On eir turn, any player may perform the post-move action "Power Failure!" for a cost of three red tokens. As a result of this action, any active player currently at a Station with the same Line Code as the person performing the action is forced to play "Pass" as eir next move and eir LV is reduced to zero. No player may move on to or via the specified line on eir next turn. This rule over-rides any other rule that would make a move of "Pass" illegal. {Comment: if a basic block is one red token, then a power failure perhaps ought to cost three red tokens; also changed to make it apply to only the Line the player performing the action is on.} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 243 - Changing Line [Amendment] In Rule 1007 (Token Gesture) amend the following list items: Playing a Move with the same Line Code as | eir previous Move | +1 Black | Playing a Move with a different Line Code to eir | previous Move (excepting eir first Move) | -1 Black to read as follows: Playing a Move which involves a change of | Line as part of the Move | +1 Black | Playing a Move which does not involve a change | of Line as part of the Move | -1 Black {Comment: the current wording does not account for the fact that you may change Lines during the Move but end up on the same Line you started on, though I believe this is what we are taking it to mean. Vote against if you believe otherwise, or if you think this new wording isn't clear enough} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 244 - "To clarify the Jubilee Line Extension." [Amendment] Amend rule 1015 by adding the FUBAR delimited text to the end. FUBAR The following stations are Interchange Stations between the Jubilee Line (Extension) and the stated other lines: Westminster: Circle, Bakerloo. Waterloo: Northern, District, Waterloo and City. London Bridge: Northern. Canary Wharf: Docklands Light Railway. West Ham: Bakerloo, Hammersmith and City. Stratford: Central, Docklands Light Railway. FUBAR -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 245 - "Token Rings, and other shapes..." [Other, Multiple] For the purposes of this rule tokens will be deemed to have the following values: non-Metallic : 1 Bronze : 2 Silver : 4 Gold : 6 A player may, at any time at which they would be placing a token upon any stack or station, place that token on a station as a "Token Ring". This has a cost of one token of value at least as great as that being placed as a "Token Ring". The cost token may not be a non-Metallic token. The player must specify a terminus on any one of the lines upon which the station that the Token Ring is being placed on rests, or in the case of the Circle line either the direction "clockwise" or the direction "anti-clockwise". The player must also specify on which line this terminus is, and a route, if without changing lines, there is more than one route to the terminus. The Token Ring is then considered a player, moving after the player who placed it, and moved my that player. It always moves directly towards the specified terminus (its destination) without changing lines and has an LV equal to its value. A Token Ring ignores any restrictions caused by Game time. If the Token Ring is at a distance from its destination less than its LV then its LV is reduced to the distance from it to its destination station. If a Token Ring is shunted then its LV remains at the value specified above. If it is shunted onto a line other than that containing its destination, or if it is shunted onto branch of the same line from which it is not possible - without changing lines or direction - to move to the destination then the player who initially placed the Token Ring picks a new destination as if e had just placed the Token Ring on the station to which it has been shunted. When the Token Ring reaches its destination it stops and is added to the top of the Token stack on that station. If a Token Ring Rebounds off a blocked station then the player who originally placed it picks a new destination on the same line in the direction in which it was moving after it had been rebounded, but otherwise as if e had just placed it upon the station to which it was rebounded. Define the X crosses Y to be that (when X is a move and Y is a segment of a line) either: 1) A move segment of X physically crosses the line segment Y on the map. 2) The move X contains an interchange station on line Y. If a player makes a move which crosses the line segment between the Token Ring and its destination then he must forfeit a token at least equal in value to the one which was placed to form the Token Ring. The line segment between any Circle Line station and the Token Ring's destination is defined to be the entire Circle Line if the Token Ring is moving on the Circle Line. If a player is on the same station as a Token Ring at any time then they may pick it up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 246 - Slower Running [Amendment] In Rule 1041 (Token Running), replace:- "If a Player starts eir Turn at a Terminus Station (a Station with only one adjacent Station), with the exceptions of Edgware, Mill Hill East and High Barnet, e gains a Gold Token." with:- "If a Player Moves to a Terminus Station (with the exceptions of Edgware, Mill Hill East and High Barnet) during eir Move, e may play an Action of [Gold Running] and collect a Gold Token, provided that e has not already played an Action of [Gold Running] at this Station." { Comments:- Anyone else remember Goldrunner? } -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal 247 - "Interchanges with exactly one line..." [Amendment] Add to the table in rule 1006: Playing an Interchange with exactly one line | +1 Silver | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------