Subject: MN: Year 3 Week 31 Proposals

From: "MN Speaker" <speaker@d...>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 19:42:18 -0000

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

Proposals for Voting on in Week Thirty-One
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal 936 - Flavour of the Month [Multiple]

[Amendment: Something A Bit More Interesting]
Amend Rule 2.0.0 (Definition of Normality) to add the following paragraph
at the beginning:

This Volume describes variations the standard rules, and shall be known
as the Raspberry Ripple Rules.

[Amendment: Something With A Bit More Variety]
Amend Rule 3.0.0 (Turin '57 Convention) so that the first paragraph reads
as follows:

Mornington Crescent may be played on other transport networks than the
London Underground. This Volume describes these different networks, and
shall be known as the Mint Choc Chip Rules.

[Amendment: Something With A Bit More Tang]
Amend Rule 4.0.0 (Non-MC Games) such that its first paragraph reads thus:

Other games than MC may be played on the London Underground (or
equivalent network). In these games, having a Piece end a Turn at
Mornington Crescent does not constitute a Win. This Volume describes
these different approaches, and shall be known as the Cheese and Onion
Rules.

[End of Flavour of the Month]

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

Proposal 937 - Typo Frenzy! [Multiple]

[Amendment: Volume Control]
Amend the last paragraph of Rule 0.1.2 (Terms of Reference) such that it
reads thus:

The term "Mornington Crescent" in this Ruleset refers to, according
to context, either the game described in Volumes 1 to 4, or the London
Underground Station of the same name. The term "Game" in this Ruleset
can mean either "Mornington Nomic" or "Mornington Crescent", but this
should be clear from context.

{ Comment: was "... described in Rules 1.*.*", which is out of date. }

[Amendment: This Time It's Personal]
Amend Rule 0.7.1 (Points of Order) such that its second paragraph reads
thus:

The email containing the Point of Order should have a subject
line of 'MN: Point of Order'. If it does not have this subject
line, the Point of Order may be considered invalid.

{ Comment: eliminating an inappropriate personal pronoun (was "... your
Point of Order"). }

[Amendment: Volume Control II]
Amend Rule 1.1.2 (A New Game) such that its second paragraph reads thus:

This New Game may be a Normal Game (using only the Vanilla Mornington
Crescent Rules), or a Special Rules Game (using one or more sets of
Mornington Crescent Rules from Volumes 2-4, in addition to those of the
Normal Game). Such a Game type is specified when the Speaker starts
that Game.

{ Comment: again, using obsolete section numbering. }

[Amendment: Comments Required]
Amend Rule 1.3.1 (Taking A Turn) such that the penultimate bullet point
reads thus:

* Appending to the Game State Document a Comment. Comments begin
with "{Comment:" and end with a close brace "}". Comments in no
way affect the state of play of the Game of Mornington
Crescent, but may be required to clarify aspects of Play.

{ Comment: some comments are actually needed now. }

[Amendment: Impediments Blocked]
Amend Rule 1.7.6 (Straddling Nancy) such that its penultimate paragraph
reads thus:

Although not considered to pass through any intervening Stations,
the Straddle Destination must be a valid Move with respect to Blocks and

other such impediments.

{ Comment: removinf an obsolete reference to the old Impediments section of

Rule 1.5.0.}

[Amendment: Twelve?!]
Amend Rule 1.7.47 (Gold Rush) such that its last paragraph reads thus:

After submitting eir GSD, the Actioning Player should roll a 295-sided
die to determine the location of the lode - the next Player to take eir
Turn should look up the Station which has a Venbacker Number matching
the die roll; at the start of eir Turn, any gaps in that Station's Token

Stack are replaced with Gold Tokens (a new Stack being created if none
exists).

{ Comment: removing last reference to the twelve stack limit.}

[Amendment: Courier Wave]
Amend Rule 1.11.2 (Three-Point Courier) such that its third paragraph reads

thus:

While a Player is carrying a Parcel, e may not make any Special Moves ,
and may not perform Actions which would alter eir Piece position.

{ Comment: removing obsolete reference to Move Validity checks. }

[Amendment: Off the Map]
Amend Rule 1.17.1 (The Underground Map) such that the map URL reads as
follows:

http://members.xoom.com/mornomic/london/map.html

{ Comment: it's moved. }

[End of Typo Frenzy!]

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

Proposal 938 - The Third Side [Amendment]

Amend Rule 1.7.10 (Walk the Walk) such that its second paragraph is
replaced by the following text:

Two Stations are within Walking Distance if they are adjacent to each
other on the Map, or if they share the same name but are not co-located,

or if a line drawn between them would form the third side of a triangle
with a Station adjacent to both and the Stations do not share a Line
Segment (eg Queensway to Bayswater, or Rickmansworth to Croxley would be

valid; Northolt to Pervial or Croxley to Northwood would not be valid).

In addition, the following Stations are within Walking Distance of each
other:-

{ Comment: a presumption of geographical proximity, if you like. }

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

Proposal 939 - Focus Group [Multiple]

[Amendment: Under the Microscope]

Add the following possession to the table in Rule 1.4.18 (The Emporium):

| Magnifier | 6 Br | |

[Action: Foskdyke's Magnifier]

Action: [Magnify]
Phase: Pre-Move
Duration: 20 mins
Cost: none

If a Player is carrying a Magnifier Possession, e may perform the
Pre-Move Action of "Magnify". This has the effect of loosening Fosdyke
Requirements on Actions operating on a particular Station, Player, Token

Stack or Line played during that Turn such that a single Fosdyke
Requirment component may have its index increased by one.

For example -

* (S0) => (S1) - the Player need only be adjacent rather than
co-located

* (S0,L0) => (S1,L0) or (S0,L1) - the Player may be at an adjacent
Station on the same Line, or on a different Line at
the same Station.

[End of Focus Group]

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

Proposal 940 - Louder Actions [Amendment]

{ Comment: one or two Actions seem to have dropped out of the Actions
table. The following extra lines have been drawn from the original
Proposals. }

Add the following lines to the Action table in the appropriate alphabetic
locations:

[Declension] Pre 1.7.58 varies 
[fFrobisher fFlourish] Neut 1.7.59 5Bu 
[Speed Craze] Pre 1.8.13 3Gr 
[Craze Sidestep] Pre 1.8.13 3Bk 
[Terminate Craze] Post 1.8.13 
[Double-Shunting <Player> Post 1.10.2 1Re 

to <Station>]

{ Comment: that last one is probably the most surprising omission. Also, no

cost is mentioned in the Proposal so I've taken it as being a single red
just as the Shunt was made to be eventually. }

In addition, move the entry for [Topple] to its rightful place after [Toll
to <Player>].

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

Proposal 941 - Your Freem Clamp Glows Black For A Moment [Multiple]

{ Only one from me, again, this week. Busy times. }

Throughout the Ruleset, replace the words "Indestructable" and "Undroppable"
with "Cursed".

{ Well, why not? }

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

MN Speaker
-Singing the Lord's Prayer to the tune of Smack my Bitch Up.

---

From: "Ole Andersen" <1508oa@m...>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 11:05:04 +0000

Aaaargh!

> Proposal 937 - Typo Frenzy! [Multiple]

Nice.

> Proposal 938 - The Third Side [Amendment]
...
> valid; Northolt to Pervial or Croxley to Northwood would not be valid).

Not bad. I assume the Speaker will change Pervial to Perivale.

> Proposal 939 - Focus Group [Multiple]

Nice.

> Proposal 940 - Louder Actions [Amendment]

Nice.

> Proposal 941 - Your Freem Clamp Glows Black For A Moment [Multiple]

Cursed Clamps.... reminds me that I need to call together my AD&D 
group soon.

Ole

---

From: "Snow" <snowl@s...>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 20:10:43 -0000

> Cursed Clamps.... reminds me that I need to call together my AD&D 

Aardvark Deployment & Detonation?

Snow
-Reporting Ole to the RSPCA.

---

From: "Snow" <snowl@s...>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 22:49:51 -0000

> as the Raspberry Ripple Rules.

Known where? You're not even changing the title.

And why not "variations [to] the Vanilla Ruleset"?

> Crescent, but may be required to clarify aspects of Play.

We just got rid of that "{Comment:" thing.

> http://members.xoom.com/mornomic/london/map.html

There is also http://members.xoom.com/mornomic/map.jpg. The patchwork map leaves holes on my
computer.

> other on the Map, or if they share the same name but are not co-located,

I know this is the original wording not the Proposer's, but how can two Stations have the same name
without being the same Station? And why not co-located ones?

> Segment

Is Line Segment the right term for this?

> Proposal 939 - Focus Group [Multiple]

Looks fine.

> Proposal 940 - Louder Actions [Amendment]

Good.

> Throughout the Ruleset, replace the words "Indestructable" and "Undroppable"

I'd rather have "Undiscardable", but this will do.

Snow
-Paying someone to have an anti-capitalist riot for him.

---

From: "Ole Andersen" <palnatoke@g...>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 06:26:46 +0100

Snow quoted me: 
: > Cursed Clamps.... reminds me that I need to call together my AD&D 
: > group soon.
: 
: Aardvark Deployment & Detonation?
: 
: Snow
: -Reporting Ole to the RSPCA.

Drat. Foiled again...

Ole

---

From: "Ole Andersen" <palnatoke@g...>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 06:37:57 +0100

Snow wrote:

: > Proposal 938 - The Third Side [Amendment]
: >
: > Amend Rule 1.7.10 (Walk the Walk) such that its second paragraph is
: > replaced by the following text:
: >
: > Two Stations are within Walking Distance if they are adjacent to each
: > other on the Map, or if they share the same name but are not
co-located,
:
: I know this is the original wording not the Proposer's, but how can two
Stations have the same name
: without being the same Station? And why not co-located ones?

I assume there is a reason why Paddington is both a two-blob Interchange and
an ordinary Station.

As to co-location: Who would want to Walk from Sloane Square (DS) to Sloane
Square (CL)?

:
: > or if a line drawn between them would form the third side of a
triangle
: > with a Station adjacent to both and the Stations do not share a Line
: > Segment
:
: Is Line Segment the right term for this?

I think it is, in the sense that the intended new Walk is across the split
of a junction.

Ole

---

From: "Snow" <snowl@s...>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:50:18 -0000

> As to co-location: Who would want to Walk from Sloane Square (DS) to Sloane

Someone on on Sloane Square (DS) wanting to attack someone else on Sloane Square (CL) with an LV
over 3, Green Park and S.Ken are Blocked and they don't have a Construction Hat.

Snow
-Forgetting how to program C++.