Subject: MN: Proposal musings...

From: Kevan Davis <kdavis@i...>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 10:01:21 +0100 (BST)

>Proposal 467 - Snap! [Repeal]
>
>Repeal Rule 1.4.9 (What a Banker)
>
>{Comment: I don't really know why this hasn't been repealed before -- the
>introduction of the money belt made it pretty much redundant, since the money
>belt is a more convenient way to protect tokens (provided, of course, you can
>afford to buy one)}

For some reason, I thought Money Belts had been taken out long ago - they're
still there, though. I seem to recall quite a vigourous debate of them being
far too powerful, but looking back the Proposal to get rid of them didn't
pass...

I don't know - Banking is a bit questionable in the fact that it lets people
Bank Tokens early on and pull them out to surprise people (another Game
aspect that wouldn't lend too well to showing only recent Moves). Maybe this
could use tinkering - something along the lines of being able to send Tokens
back to your Home Station's Stack, perhaps...?

>Proposal 468 - Crackle! [Repeal]
>
>Repeal Rule 1.4.10 (This Token has a Cash Value of 0.0001p).
>
>{Comment: I can't see that it is ever likely to be used}

Oh, I don't know - a few Morden paradoxes, some thoughtful Token exchanges, a
bit of careful Titheing... I quite like it as an alternative way to collect
Gold (particularly if we're doing away with Token Running); rarely used, yes,
but it's not taking up too much space in the Ruleset.

>Proposal 469 - Pop! [Repeal]
>
>Repeal Rule 1.4.11 (Token Running)

Probably a good thing, I think. We can always bring it back if it's proving
too difficult to get hold of the glittery things through other means.

>Proposal 470 - Token Alien [Amendment]
>
>Amend Rule 1.4.19 (Token Tracking) to remove the condition which reads: 
> 
> "It must be in a different Quadrant to the Player's final location" 
> 
>{ Comment: 
> No one is obeying this rule, so we might as well drop it. 
>} 

Er, aren't we? I always have been, and I think it's quite an essential
clause, if only to avoid "Putting a Player in Spoon, placing the Gold
at your location, collecting it, doing it again, etc." trickery. Maybe
it'd be easier with just something to stop Players collecting Tokens
they've placed that Turn.

Kevan

--
kdavis@i... - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/kevan - UIN: 5998366
"I was tired again, I tried again and now my heart is full, now my
heart is full, and I just can't explain so I won't even try to."
-- Morrissey, "Now My Heart Is Full"

---

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@U...>
Date: 12 Aug 98 10:17:41 +0100

>they've placed that Turn. 

I'll own up to Proposing this, which I did for shock value - I agree that 
it's an essential clause too, although we have all been guilty of breaking 
it (this includes you Kevan - think about where that token stack on Custom 
House in Game 8 came from) and buzzing one particular Player in such a 
general environment of transgression seems unfair. 

I think it's time to start applying this Rule again. 

-- 
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: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 11:26:40 +0100 (BST)

>House in Game 8 came from)

Um, I dropped it with the Dropping Action, actually.

>and buzzing one particular Player in such a 

Indeed. I think we'd be better off with a simple "A Player may not Collect
a Token which was placed on a Token Stack during eir current Turn." clause
in the Token Collection Rule, really. This doesn't really stop the "sending
all your Tokens to Stations which you know you'll be able to get to next
Turn" tactic, but that can usually be scuppered, I suppose.

Kevan

--
kdavis@i... - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/kevan - UIN: 5998366
"Pretty soon, well I'll get up and get dressed,
and go out, then come back again."
-- Jack, "Hope is a Liar"

---

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@U...>
Date: 12 Aug 98 11:43:06 +0100

>>(this includes you Kevan - think about where that token stack on Custom 

>Um, I dropped it with the Dropping Action, actually. 

You are quite right - I do apologise. I really didn't mean to tar you with 
that brush. 

>I think we'd be better off with a simple "A Player may not Collect 
>in the Token Collection Rule, really. 

I see what you mean, but I don't think that is sufficient - token 
collection is not the main benefit of dropping tokens in this context - 
setting up advantageous token stacks for straddling, striling, and the 
like is. Nominally, this is what the 'different quadrant' restriction was 
intended to prevent. 

Perhaps a more general 'A Player may not interact with any token stack 
which has been modified by placing a token penalty on it until eir 
following Turn' clause would be more accurate? 

The downside would be that this would prevent token stack completion by 
use of token penalties, although for myself I've never been terribly 
comfortable with that and so would not mourn its loss.

---

From: kenningd@w... (L'homme a tete de choux)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:54:12 +0100

>clause,

I've been obeying it too, and I agree that it should be kept, for much the same
reasons.

dave

---

From: kenningd@w... (L'homme a tete de choux)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 13:01:02 +0100

>Turn" tactic, but that can usually be scuppered, I suppose.

The problem that really needs adressing, if you ask me, is that if you're at
Piccadilly Circus, for example, you can drop a token at Covent Garden, but not
at Hatton Cross, which seems to completely go against what the rule intends .

How about changing it so that quadrants are not involved -- maybe something
like tokens may not be added to token stacks within ten stations distance of
the station moved to (except by the dropping token action, of course)

dave

---

From: Kevan Davis <kdavis@i...>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 13:34:56 +0100 (BST)

Dunx said:-

>following Turn' clause would be more accurate? 

"Interact" is a bit of a vague term. "Perform any Action which involves
that Stack", perhaps.

Thinking about it; it's quite broken as it stands - if you run from
one Quadrant to another, you can perform a load of expensive Actions,
scatter the Tokens along your route in the first Quadrant, and collect
them all back...

>comfortable with that and so would not mourn its loss. 

Arguably not - that's more a case of a triggered effect than a direct
interaction, I'd say. But yes, it is particularly broken, in that (a
scam I think I'll spare you from) you can declare a Manoeuvre with
whatever Tokens you wish, and make a nice rewarding Stack from them.

dave said:-

>at Hatton Cross, which seems to completely go against what the rule intends .

Absolutely, yes. Quite absurd.

>the station moved to (except by the dropping token action, of course)

Far more reasonable, but I don't look forward to counting the distance to
every of twelve Token Stacks to see which ones I can and can't throw
Tokens on...

Kevan

--
kdavis@i... - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/kevan - UIN: 5998366
"I don't know if I can stop my eyes from drifting slowly over holy
temples of the soul. No self-control."
-- The Divine Comedy, "Three Sisters"