Subject: MN: Belated Proposal musings...

From: kevan@d...
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 12:44:01 -0000

>Proposal 705 - The Emperor's New Clothes... [Enactment]
>
> Garments that are being worn have the following properties:
> Hat (Silly) The player may Farkle on eir turn.

Not that you can't Farkle anyway. Such things are probably best
written into the relevant rules - that the Busking bonus applies
for *wearing* a Silly Hat rather than carrying one, and whatever.

> Hat (Hard) The player may move along Construction Lines.

Likewise.

> Hat (any other) If the player ends eir (non-Passed) Move at a
>Station of the same type as the Hat being worn, e may collect 1 Blue
>Token provided that e has not collected that Hat in the same Turn.

Superfluous exception, really - if you're being given a Blue in your
Token Collection phase, you must have performed the Hat Collection
before your Move; since this wasn't a Pass, you must have been at a
different Station. All credit to you if you collect a BR Hat then
Move to a different BR Station, I think.

Surely this should be in Rule 1.4.20's Token Collection Table, though?

> Overcoat - The Player has access to a Nantucket and may perform
>the [Reshuffling] Action. Only one may be worn at any one time.

This is actually stated in the amended Nantucket rule, so is rather
superfluous here. I suppose one-at-a-time makes sense, though; such
restriction is probably best generalised ("A Player may not wear a
Possession if e already wears a Possession of that type.") and made
more obvious.

> Spectacles - If the Player performs an Action that targets
>another Player (i.e. one from Section 1.10) e may affect a Player in an
>adjacent station (instead of the normal stipulation that the Player must
>be at the same location), but eir maximum LV is one less than normal (9
>rather than 10 under normal circumstances.) 

I had to read this twice to understand that the LV restriction was
permanent, not just during the targetting Action. Seems like an
odd effect of wearing Glasses, anyway, being able to fit Clamps on
people at different Stations.

>Spectacles may not be worn by a Player wearing the Hyde Mask.

But you can put the Mask on after the Spectacles, I think. The
Hyde Mask is an obvious candidate for becoming a Garment, actually.
Quite a nice addition, this Garment business.

> Gloves: A player wearing a pair of Gloves may pick up two Tokens
>from any Stack in the station that e finishes eir Move at (but only one
>from those e passes over.)

Probably easier to implement as picking up two Tokens when you use
the "[Claiming Token]" Action. Good stuff, though.

> *New Actions: [Wearing <Garment>] and [Removing <Garment>], both
>15-minute Post-Move.

Mmm. Why fifteen, rather than ten? In all honesty I find it quite fiddly
to check the durations of the Actions I perform - wouldn't it be better
(and I might propose such sweeping reform) to have most Actions at ten
minutes, with only a slim few "obvious" exceptions?

> {Comment: Pockets aren't bottomless, hence the suggested limit of
>four small possessions therein...

Oh, I don't know, I used to lose an alarming number of things in the
lining of my old coat. It's rare that anyone would Nantucket many
things, though, looking over past games.

>Proposal 706 - Timeout On The Grand Scale [Enactment]
>
> Any player who does not play a single move in any particular Game
>for a period of two calendar months should be considered to have
>Resigned from that Game and deleted from the relevant GSD, along with
>all eir Tokens and Possessions.

Fair enough. We could probably use a formal "Player X has resigned"
notation to put in the GSD, actually, to make it easier to follow
what's happened when you read back over it.

>Proposal 707 - You Have 10 Minutes To Clear This Building... [Amendment]
>
> *Amend "Any Player" to "Any Player who is fewer than <n> stations
>away, where <n> is that Player's LV" in the restrictions on detonating
>the Package: and change the Action to Post-Move (it is currently
>Neutral.)

Hmm. Not a bad idea, I suppose. Why the distance of a radio transmission
should be affected by LV, though, I've no idea. Doppler effect?

> "A Player may perform the Action of [Defusing Package] provided
>that e is situated at the same location as a Suspect Package and has not
>placed a Suspect Package emself during eir last three Turns. Eir LV is
>set to zero upon performing this action, and the Package is removed from
>the game."

I think it's fair enough to let you defuse your own packages, if you're
stupid enough to drop one and sit next to it for a Turn. So long as you
can't defuse one you've dropped earlier in the Turn, things should be
alright. And if you're able to drop one and defuse it the next Turn,
without anyone blowing you up in the mean-time, you deserve a reward.

>Proposal 708 - Blocks, Impediments and Gaps [Multiple]

Bravo, I think. Not sure about the Sinkholes, but this all seems quite
wise.

>Proposal 709 - *Boing* (Chalk Farm Ruleset) [Enactment]

Very cute. Another thing that I'd welcome in the main ruleset, as a
variation of basic Shunting.

>Proposal 710 - Token Table Change [Amendment]

I suppose this can't hurt. It was only the huge Token bonuses for
more than five Interchanges that I objected to, whenever it was.

>Proposal 720 - Liquid Assets [Multiple]
>
>Repeal Rule 0.4.14 (The Ice Man Cometh).

Mmm. I suppose there's no need for it now that things seem to have
picked up, and that the Ruleset's behaving itself more.

>Proposal 722 - Funny Peculiar [Amendment]
>
>Amend Rule 0.9.4 (Fish and Fowl) to add the following award:
>
> Lyttleton Trophy Audience Appreciation Award
>
> Awarded to the Player whose Proposal or Proposal title garners the
> greatest number of remarks appreciative of it humour posted to the
> Discussion Lounge from the other Players.

Hmm. Do you really feel enthusiastic enough to total these up every
Week, Dunx?

Kevan

--
kevan@d...
http://members.xoom.com/asabove

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/group/l-nomic-d
http://www.eGroups.com - Simplifying group communications