Subject: MN: Year 2, Week 11: Proposals

From: Kevan Davis <c94kd@d...>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 13:57:55 +0100 (BST)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MORNINGTON NOMIC

Proposals for Voting on in Year Two, Week Eleven
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 429 - Shunted Down [Amendment]

{ Comment: 
One more go, then... 

I've reworked Shunts for the Memory (Prop 419 from Week 9) to remove the 
ban on shunting through blocks on the assumption that this is what killed 
it last time. The 'same line' requirement on shunting is still there, 
though. 
} 

Amend Rule 1.10.1 (A Shunting We Will Go) as follows: 

Make the first paragraph read as follows - 

"If a Player Moves to a Station that is already occupied, e can elect to 
Shunt to that Station. Any Players who are currently located at the Target 
Station and have the same Line Code as the Shunting Player are Shunted to a

single Station with a specified Line Code of the Shunting Player's choice, 
which fits the following criteria:-" 

Delete the condition for a valid shunt which refers to the target station 
being on the same line as the shunted player, and add the following 
criterion: 
"* the Line Code of the Station to which the Shunted Players are Shunted 
is the same as one of the Lines which serves the Target Station" 

Add the following paragraph after the criteria: 

"No penalties or bonuses for line changes, Interchange play, or other 
effects which would be applicable if the movement of the Shunt had been 
achieved through normal Piece movement shall be applied to the Shunted 
Players during the Shunt." 

{ Comment: 
A broader definition than was present in the previous two attempts, the 
justification being that any tolls applied to a shunted player seem 
unfair, not just those for line change. 
} 

Replace the example as follows - 
"Brooke-Taylor : Euston (VC) 
Cryer : Finsbury Park (PD) 
Garden : Euston (VC) 
Rushton : Euston (VC) [Shunting Brooke-Taylor and Garden to 
Moorgate (NT)] 

{ Comment: 
This is my last try on this amendment. Granted that the two elements 
within it are not indivisible, but they are nicely balanced: being 
given the ability to shunt another player onto another line has the 
price that the shunter and the shuntee(s) must be one the same line at 
the point of the shunt. 

Anyway, I'm not prepared to split these two elements. If this fails and 
someone else wants to propose something similar then good luck to them, 
but I'm done on this. 
} 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 430 - The Stork Cometh [enactment]

1. It's a boy! [enactment] 

Upon enactment of this rule each player shall be given one Cigar, to be added
to their list of possessions in the Game State Document for a maximum of one
game in which they are currently playing.

If no player has a cigar, this rule shall be repealed.

2. Smoking/No Smoking [enactment, action]

Action: Smoking Cigar
Type: neutral
Duration: none
Cost: none

Any Player who owns a Cigar possession may perform the action "Smoking Cigar".
On doing so the Player is awarded 1 Gold Token and the cigar is removed from
eir list of possessions.

{Comment: the reason for my recent inactivity is that I was on paternity leave
after the birth of my son. Hence cigars all round.}

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 431 - Piece of Cake [Other, Multiple]

1. We Get The Idea [Amendment]

Reword Rule 1.5.1 (Keeping the Piece) to:-

Each Player has a Piece which may be moved around the Map. Unless a
Piece's position is modified during another Player's Turn, it does not
change between the end of its owner's Turn and the start of its owner's
next Turn.

{
Comments: Trimming all the stuff about Valid Moves, now that this is
covered elsewhere. I thought we might as well leave in the
basic explanatory paragraph.
}

2. Eye of a Needle [Amendment]

Append to Rule 1.5.0 (Valid Moves):-

Stations "passed through" during a Move are all of those along the route
which the Player's Piece has taken, excepting the Station it started and
ended the Move at.

{
Comments: This sits better here than in the Piece Rule, I think.
}

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 432 - Calling Off the Subs [Other, Multiple]

{
Comments:

Another repeal of suspect game mechanics - the Move Substitution Actions,
which are without exception better off as Post-Moves only possible after
a Pass.
}

1. Number Thirteen, Your Time Is Up [Amendment]

In Rule 1.7.1 (Action Types), remove the "Move Substitution Actions" list
element.

2. Crooked Strile [Amendment]

Reword Rule 1.7.12 (Basic Striles) to:-

If a Player's Line Velocity is six or more, e may perform a Strile via
the pre-Move Action of "[Striling]".

Upon performing this Action, all Strilable Stations become Valid Moves
for the remainder of the Actioning Player's Turn. A Station is said to
be Strilable if it has a Token Stack, and if that Token Stack is
identical to the Stack at the Player's current Piece location.

{
Comments: Oddly enough, the bit about not adding Tokens to a Stack in the
Turn which you Strile away from it is superfluous, since you
can only drop Tokens in the post-Move Phase.
}

3. Stubble [Amendment]

Reword Rule 1.4.3 (Stubbery) to read:-

If a Player owns the Ticket Stub for the Station eir Piece is situated
at, e may perform the pre-Move Action "[Stub Link]" - all Stations
which e has Ticket Stubs for are considered Valid Moves for the remainder
of eir Turn.

4. Rebuilding Blocks [Amendment]

Reword Rule 1.9.1 (Basic Blocks) to read:-

A Player may perform the post-Move Action of "[Blocking <Station>]" to
Block a Station until the end of eir next Turn, where <Station> is a
Station adjacent to eir Piece's current position.

(If a Player owns a Ticket Stub, e need pay no Tokens to perform this
Action.)

If a Station is Blocked, any Moves which pass through that Station or
end at that Station are Invalid, unless the Moving Player owns the
Ticket Stub for that Station.

{
Comments: Probably the oldest Action in the book, this needed bringing in
line with the newer wordings. It also includes the stuff from
the Ticket Stub rule, worded as people seem to think it should
be played (there was a chorus of horrified gasps when I tried to
Block a Station the other side of the Map because I had the Stub
for it, some Games ago).
} 

5. Walk / Don't Walk [Amendment]

Reword Rule 1.7.10 (Walk the Walk) to read:-

A Player may perform the Action of "[Walking]". If this Action has been
performed, the Actioning Player's LV becomes zero, all Stations adjacent to
the Actioning Player's Piece location become Valid for the remainder of the
Turn, and all other Stations become Invalid for the remainder of the Turn.

In addition, Players may Walk between the following Stations:-

* Wimbledon (DS) and South Wimbledon (NT)
* Ruislip (MP) and West Ruislip (CN)
* Sudbury Town (PD) and Wembley Central (BL)
* Northwick Park (MP) and Kenton (BL)

6. Paperwork [Amendment]

Add "Striling" with a pointer to Rule 1.7.12, "Stubbery" with a pointer to
1.4.3, and "Walking" to Rule 1.7.10, to the list of things with affect Move
Validity (all Special Moves), in Rule 1.5.0.

7. More Paperwork [Amendment]

In Rule 1.7.3 (Move Substitution Actions), move "Striling", "Stub Link" and
"Walking" to the list of pre-Move Actions (reducing their durations by ten
minutes, since they're now made *as well* as a Move, rather than in place
of), and "Visiting <Place>" to the post-Move Actions list.

8. Dive, Dive, Dive [Repeal]

Repeal Rule 1.7.3 (Move Substitution Actions).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 433 - No Wonder We're Lost [Amendment]

In Rule 1.17.1, replace the URL of the map with :-

http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/mornomic/map.html

{
Comments:

The DMU page is probably still there, but it'll be deleted before very
long - we might as well get this in as soon as possible.
}

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@U...>
Date: 07 Jul 98 15:39:43 +0100

> after the birth of my son. Hence cigars all round.} 

Congratulations! 

Better smoke it quick before some bugger shunts me and nicks it... 

> which are without exception better off as Post-Moves only possible
after 
Agreed, however (leaving aside the typo of Post- v Pre-Move) no requirement 
is made in any of the sub-Proposals that a Pass be played in combination
with 
the suggested Pre-Move Actions. 

I think the basic weakness is in the form of the rewording which all of the 
sub-Proposals share: 
"Upon performing this Action, all <Actioned> Stations become Valid Moves 
for the remainder of the Actioning Player's Turn." 

This form allows the Actioned Stations, but does *not* exclude any others.
As 
an example of correct wording in the current ruleset, let's look at Going 
Home (Rule 1.12.4): 
"If a Player performs a pre-Move Action of "[Home]" or "[Home: <Station>]", 
eir LV is set to zero and eir Home Station is treated as a Valid Move for 
the remainder of eir Turn. A Player may not adjust eir LV after performing 
a "[Home]" Action." 

The Rule succeeds where the wording in this Proposal fails, because it makes 
the Home Station valid but it also prevents any other Station from being 
valid. 

It's a shame, because most of the reworks are very sound and perceptive 
recasts of the original form, but they all suffer from this flaw. 

I was confused by this sub-Proposal... 

> 4. Rebuilding Blocks [Amendment] 

Splendid rework. 

This is coincidental bundling though - whilst I agree that the Block rule 
is a little out of date in its wording, rewording it is unrelated to the 
purpose of this Proposal. 

> line with the newer wordings. 

This is indeed the oldest Action - in fact Actions were specifically 
introduced in order to allow Blocks. 

> performed, the Actioning Player's LV becomes zero, all Stations
adjacent 
to 
> Turn, and all other Stations become Invalid for the remainder of the
Turn. 

Again a fine bit of rewording, but the new form is insufficient. The
following 
condition from the existing Walking rule is not catered for: 

"Walking may only be performed under the following circumstances: 
- to travel between two Stations of the same name on different lines 
which are not co-located on the map (eg between Waterloo Interchange 
and Waterloo (JL), or between Turnham Green (PD) and Turnham Green 
(DS))" 

Bluntly, this business of moving between stations of the same name on 
different lines was the original point of the Walking Proposal which is why 
it's the first condition. 

Hmm. I seem to have my savage head on today. Apologies. 

-- 
Dunx 
IRL: Duncan Ellis, Senior Software Engineer, Business Modelers, Oracle 
<I work for Oracle, I don't speak for them>

---

From: Kevan Davis <kdavis@i...>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 13:30:44 +0100 (BST)

>with the suggested Pre-Move Actions. 

That was me being sloppy, actually - I realised afterwards that three
of them were actually "do a pre-Move and make certain Moves legal"
rather than "pass and achieve something"; I forgot to go back and
amend the comment.

>This form allows the Actioned Stations, but does *not* exclude any others.

A well-made point, yes. It could certainly make the Game a little
confusing if people Walked and then Moved normally, or Striled...
No real effect on the Game itself, as far as I can see - people
are merely welcome to waste ten minutes performing a superfluous
Action. But it should be amended, for the sake of reason.

I'm not sure how, though. Bringing it in line with the "correct"
wording of Homing isn't really a solution, since a Player can
feasibly perform "[Home] [Walking] [Wild]" and still confuse
matters.

I concede that Move Substitution Actions had a very good point
to them, in that you could only perform one of them each Turn.
Their flaw to my eye, though, was that they made the list of
Moves look a little confusing, in that Player Moves involving
Move Subs would have no actual Piece Move portion.

I suspect the finest solution would be to mark relevant pre-Move
Actions as being "Piece Manipulation Actions" (noting them with a
mere asterisk, or somesuch) and allowing only one per Turn.
Including "[Home]", "[LV+X]" and whatnot, this would tidy up a
lot of things with little effort (such as not being able to fiddle
LV more than once, or to go Home then speed up).

>purpose of this Proposal. 

A little out of line, yes - I was altering it to include some of
the stuff from the Stubbery Rule, and just thought I'd reword it
as I went. I don't think I was being particularly controversial
in my rewordings, anyway - just bringing them in step with the
style of other Actions, rather than changing their effect.

>it's the first condition. 

How shatteringly remiss of me. I had actually had "or Stations
with the same name" in the main paragraph somewhere; I took it
out to put in a paragraph of its own, but evidently had my
attention distracted somewhere along the line.

Vote how you will on this one, anyway - if it fails to pass I'll
just repropose it next Week with corrections to the mentioned
bits. If anyone thinks we're better off keeping Move Sub Actions,
though, voice your reasons and I'll stop trying to kill them off.

>Hmm. I seem to have my savage head on today. Apologies. 

Superfluous, of course. Were you nice and polite and hesitant, I
wouldn't have bothered thinking about things enough to defend
my ideas. Such confrontation is the lifeblood of Nomic, and is
hopefully never taken personally.

Kevan

--
kdavis@i... - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/kevan - UIN: 5998366
"To make myself appear less of a soft target to any
marauding gangs, I think I spat a few times."
-- David Devant and his Spirit Wife, "Cookie the Clown"