Subject: MN: Game 10 - Buzz on PaulWay

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@U...>
Date: 21 Oct 98 10:59:13 +0100

>PaulWay : [LV+3] [Eating Chocolate Bar] Monument (for Bank) (NT via EL, DS) 
> [Power Failure! NT] 

> 20mins -2Re : Power failure, stranding Dunx and Julie (tokens on Bank) 

Your final location is Bank. You can't place the Tokens there. 

In fact, you can't place the Tokens *anywhere* since Bank is Quadrant Zero 
and all Quadrants are adjacent to it (Rule 1.4.19). 

It's rather a trivial buzz and not really worth a repost, perhaps just a 
bit of Token Stack obliteration from the next Player (Kevan). I can't 
find anything wrong with the actual Play (to start using my terminology 
early). 

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

---

From: kenningd@w...
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:31:04 +0100

>and all Quadrants are adjacent to it (Rule 1.4.19). 

Am I the only one that finds the idea of five quadrants a bit weird? Ah well,
such is the way language evolves...

dave

---

From: Kevan Davis <kdavis@i...>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 13:59:27 +0100 (BST)

>find anything wrong with the actual Play (to start using my terminology 

I'd rather not, in case Paul was relying on those two Red for a future
strategy. Perhaps we need a rule clarifying this, but I think there's
a limit to the things you can say "Oh, I'll just alter that, you forgot
to"; removing an eaten but undeleted Baguette is permissible, but
destroying a newly created Token Stack because the creator "probably
forgot that he couldn't do that" seems a step too far.

Arguably I should just delete the Tokens and play on, it being Paul's
tough luck for getting it wrong, but such isn't a million miles from
"You can't actually move to Brent Cross; I'll assume you meant Golders
Green." If it was covered by the ruleset, I'd be alright with it, but
it isn't and I'm not.

Kevan

--
kdavis@i... - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/kevan - UIN: 5998366
"Stay home, be bored - it's crap, I know."
-- The Smiths, "Death At One's Elbow"

---

From: "Dunx (Duncan Ellis)" <DELLIS@U...>
Date: 21 Oct 98 14:14:10 +0100

>strategy. 

Fair enough - can't argue with that. 

>Perhaps we need a rule clarifying this, but I think there's 

Um - yes, I suppose so. 

>Green." 

I disagree, but not strongly enough to start a fight. I would contend that 
Token Stacks are a lot less significant than Piece position or Player 
possessions (since the Tokens have already passed out of Paul's hands), 
but as you say they can be important from a tactical point of view. 

>If it was covered by the ruleset, I'd be alright with it, but 
>it isn't and I'm not. 

In the absence of any such clarifying rule I think that's a reasonable 
position. 

Unfortunately, I can't think of any way of drafting any such Rule...

---

From: Kevan Davis <kdavis@i...>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 15:27:15 +0100 (BST)

>Unfortunately, I can't think of any way of drafting any such Rule... 

Well, the only time you'd really ever fiddle the previous Player's
GSD would be if they'd neglected to update the data at the top of it,
in light of something that was explicitly altered in either the Play
(an inspired and useful piece of jargon, there, incidentally) or
comments. And, I suppose, to add the Line Code to a Move where only
one Code could be possible.

I think that probably covers it, and wouldn't be too hard to phrase
into a Rule... Can anyone think of any other cases (or exceptions to
the above)?

Kevan

--
kdavis@i... - http://www.innotts.co.uk/~elusive/kevan - UIN: 5998366
"I have to carve the gargoyles, because I can carve nothing else;
I leave to others the angels and the arches and the spires."
-- G.K. Chesterton