------------------------------------------------------------------------------ MORNINGTON NOMIC Proposals for Voting on in Year Two, Week Fifteen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 453 - There's An Emergency Going On [Other, Multiple] 1. It's Still Going On [Amendment] Reword Rule 0.7.2 (Emergency Proposals) to:- If a Player is concerned about serious aspects of the Ruleset, e may make an Emergency Proposal. This is effectively identical to a normal Proposal, and should be emailed to the Speaker along with indication that it is an Emergency Proposal. This email should have a subject line of 'MN: Emergency Proposal' - if it does not, it may be considered invalid. Instead of being Voted upon normally, the Speaker forwards the Eprop to the mailing list. Any Player other than e who made the Eprop may submit a Vote on that Proposal, emailing it to the Speaker. After twenty-four hours have elapsed (excluding weekends) or after at least three Players have Voted, the Votes are tallied for the Emergency Proposal. The Eprop is treated as a normal Proposal for the purposes of determining enactment, with the exception that Quorum is ignored. If the Proposal passes, it takes effect immediately. { Comments : Far fairer than allowing one random Player to make the call, I think. Best of three seems a wiser course, with a 24-hour limit there just in case. We can do away with the Kudos modifiers too, really, leaving the standard "+1 FOR/-1 AGAINST" bit to deal with it. } 2. It's Still An Emergency [Amendment] Remove "Failure to Judge or refuse Judgement of..." from the Kudos table in Rule 0.9.1. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 454 - Team Shake-Up [Other, Multiple] 1. New Start [Amendment] Rename Rule 1.20.1 (Team Games) to "Starting a Team Game", and reword it to:- Whenever a Player joins a Team Game, e may choose a Colour for eir Team. This may be a Colour another Player has already chosen, if e wishes to join that Team, or a new Colour if the Player wishes to start a new Team. A new Team may not be created if it would share an initial letter with another Team, and a Player may not join a Team if another extant Team has a smaller number of Players, or if there is only one Team. Players may only join a Team Game midway through if all Players in that Game agree to the new Player's arrival and choice of Team. Team Games require a minimum of five players, including the Drone, before play may commence. { Comments : Choosing our Teams, the number of Teams and our Team Colours seems nicer than having the Speaker pick them at random. } 2. Bzzzt! Repetition. [Repeal] Repeal 1.20.2 (Team Rules). { Comments : Making this a Special Ruleset means that we needn't state this explicitly any more. } 3. Whites of their Eyes [Amendment] Rename Rule 1.20.3 (Team Colours and Players) to "Colouring", and reword it to:- The initial letter of each Player's Team shall be noted in brackets next to eir name in the Token Table in the Game State Document. 4. Come on, Gang [Amendments] Move all remaining Rules from sections 1.20, 1.21 and 1.22 to a new Special Ruleset entitled "Team Games". ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 455 - Unconsidered Trifles [Other, Multiple] { Comments : Most of the Nomic half of the Ruleset is, if you look at it, a complete bloody nightmare. I suppose we never really look at it because we've all gotten used to how that side of the game works, but the fact that we've got reams of paragraphs explaining a rather simple number of facts strikes me as rather appalling. Turning eyes just to the "Proposals" section, here's what we've got... } 1. I Know Your Type [Amendment] Rename Rule 0.4.1 (Proposal Types) to "Proposals", and reword it to:- Each Proposal submitted by a Player should have a name (typically summing up the aim of the Proposal in a few words, usually in the form of a very bad pun), a Type, any amount of text stating what the Proposal should do if it is Voted through, and any amount of commented text explaining anything the Proposer feels the need to explain. Proposals may be of the following types:- * Enactment - To create one new Rule to be added to the Ruleset. * Amendment - To change the wording of one existing Rule in the manner detailed in the Proposal. * Repeal - To remove one Rule, as specified by the Proposal, from the Ruleset. * Renumbering - To renumber all the Rule Numbers in a particular Subsection, or to renumber a single Rule. * Multiple - Any combination of any number of the above. * Special Ruleset - As "Multiple", but all Enactments are placed in a new Special Ruleset section unless otherwise specified. Commented text is signified by surrounding it with curly braces, and is entirely ignored if the Proposal passes and alters the Ruleset. { Comments : The "Action" sub-Enactment stuff is rarely used and vaguely worded, and generally easier all-round to put in as a cut-and- paste Amendment to the Action lists. Special Ruleset works better as an alternative Multiple, also, I feel, since it doesn't make very much sense as it stands . } 2. Proposal Submission [Amendment] Reword Rule 0.4.3 (Proposal Submission) to:- Players may submit up to three Proposals per Week, emailing them directly to the Speaker. This email should have a subject line of "MN: Proposals" - if it does not, the Proposals may be considered invalid. Players may, at any time prior to the Week-End, withdraw or reword Proposals they have made during that Week, by emailing the Speaker with such a request. 3. Proposal Distribution [Amendment] Reword Rule 0.4.4 (Proposal Distribution):- At the end of each Week (or at least four days before the end of the next Week), the Speaker distributes to the mailing list a copy of all Proposals submitted for that Week, numbering them sequentially. 4. Serial Repealing [Repeals] Repeal Rule 0.4.2 (Adopting Proposals), Rule 0.4.6 (Proposal Limit), Rule 0.4.7 (Proposal Names) and Rule 0.4.8 (Multiple Proposals). { Comments : Nothing that's not said in Rule 0.5.3 and - now - 0.4.3 and 0.4.1. } 5. Reenactment [Amendment] To Rule 0.4.5 (Proposal Enactment), add the paragraph:- When a new Rule is Enacted, it takes the name of the Enactment Proposal (or Proposal section) that Enacted it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 456 - Through a glass clearly [Amendment] Add the following paragraph to Rule 1.16.3 - Appeals and Judgements. "If the judgement requires a Judge to clarify an ambiguity in a Rule, the Speaker shall have discretionary powers to immediately reword the Rule at issue, in collaboration with the Judge to reflect the Judge's decision." { Comment: This is to stop newcomers to a Rule misinterpreting a rule in which an ambiguity has already been spotted and a ruling made by a Judge. The ambiguity is removed then and there. } ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 457 - Reverse Straddles... [Amendment, Enactment: Action] 1. Add the following paragraph to the end of Rule 1.7.6 - Straddling Nancy: "The Action Reverse Straddle, of form [Reverse Straddling to ] is a Pre-Move Action which occurs before all other Actions. The movement of the Piece and location of the Token Stack in the Reverse Straddle is the exact reverse to that outlined above for the Straddle. The conditions for a Straddle to be valid still apply." 2. Add the appropriate entry in the list of pre-move actions for [Reverse Straddling to ], with same duration and cost as [Straddling to ]. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 458 - Emergency Brakes [enactment, action] Action: Emergency Braking Type: Pre-move Duration: 30 mins Cost: 2 Bk A Player may perform the Pre-move action 'Emergency Braking' to reduce eir LV by 3. This action may be performed in conjunction with a normal 'LV-X' action to reduce LV by up to 7 in a single turn. {Comment: we have measures to bump LV up (eating chocolate etc), but apart from Passing or 'LV=0' we have no ways to reduce it quickly -- eg if you're hurtling along with 10 LV and want to slow down to LV 4 in a hurry, but don't want to stop completely. The long duration is to prevent this being used too frequently} ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 459 - One-man Band [amendment] {Comment: expanding the scope of the busking action -- I thought about adding a clause about getting extra tokens for busking in a silly costume, but it's too complicated. I seem to remember originally the busking action had to be preformed with a move of Pass, but that seems to be no longer the case -- intuitively it should be, but I've left it out for now to keep the proposal simple; I've deliberately lost the permission to perform the action more than once on the same turn -- this can be put back in easily enough if people feel strongly about it} 1. Add the following possessions to the list in Rule 1.4.18 (The Emporium): Posession | Cost | Qualities ----------+------+----------- Drum | 2 Br | Musical Casiotone | 3 Br | Musical Guitar | 4 Br | Musical Violin | 4 Br | Musical Saxophone | 5 Br | Musical 2. Amend Rule 1.7.20 - Busking to read as follows: A Player may perform the action 'Busking' provided that e is carrying a Musical Possession and that Game Time is currently during Peak Hours. If e has more than one Musical Possession, e must specify in eir comments which instrument e is using. A Player successfully performing this Action gains a number of Tokens depending on the type of musical instrument used, as follows: Harmonica 3 Bronze Drum 2 Black, 1 Red, 1 Bronze Casiotone 1 Black, 1 Blue, 1 Red, 1 Bronze Guitar 2 Black, 2 Blue, 1 Bronze Violin 2 Black, 2 Red, 1 Bronze Saxophone 2 Blue, 2 Red, 2 Bronze ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 460 - Red Card [other, multiple] {Comment: doing away with railcards, as previously discussed} 1. Ace of Spades [amendment] Remove following sentence from Rule 1.4.18 (The Emporium): "Railcard discounts do not apply to Possessions which cost less than three Bronze Tokens." and remove the Railcard possession from the table. 2. Nine of Diamonds [amendment] Remove the Railcards from the sample Luggage Rack in Rule 1.4.12 (The Luggage) 3. Queen of Hearts [repeal] Repeal Rule 1.4.5 (Railcard) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 461 - Rezoning [Amendment] Amend Rule 1.4.11 (Token Running) so that its last sentence reads thus: "No Player may Run a Token from the same Terminus more than once per Game, nor from any Terminus in Zone 1." { Comment: Merely correcting something which appears to have been lost. I seem to recall that the only place the Zone 1 restriction was mentioned was in the Token table, which was then reorganised... } ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 462 - Specialisation [Amendment] Amend the Section 2.1 (Special Rulesets) to remove the list of recognised Special Rulesets leaving only paragraph 1. { Comment: This is a funny one because it's not really an amendment to a Rule per se. Anyway, the list of Special Rulesets in the section header is out of date already. Since it's duplicate information from the contents section at the top and it's just another thing to remember to change, I suggest removing it. } ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposal 463 - Deny Everything! [Enactment, Action] Action: Denying Cost: 1 Re, 1 Bu Duration: none Action Type: Post Move If it can be seen that a Player is on the verge of completing a Manoeuvre, another Player may play a Move or Action that they think will prevent that Manoeuvre from being completed and may in addition explicitly Deny the Manoeuvre by playing the Action [Denying the ______ Manoeuvre by ] or [Denying the ______ Gambit by ] Such a Denial Action may only be played after the Player who is attempting to complete the Manoeuvre has played the penultimate Move in that Manoeuvre ie there is only one Move remaining before completion. The Denying Player gains half the reward for completing the Manoeuvre (rounded down to the nearest whole number). If a Denial is played and is unsuccessful (that is, the Manoeuvring Player was still able to complete the specifically Denied Manoeuvre despite the Denial) then the Player completing the Manoeuvre doubles their reward for its completion. { Comment: It occurs that, whilst it is possible to stymie a Manoeuvre, there is no reward for doing so. Naturally, there should be some risk in doing it wrong. } ------------------------------------------------------------------------------