Subject: MN: Strawberry and Chocolate *and* Vanilla

From: "Kevan Davis" <kevan@z...>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 10:07:11 -0000

>You could have a frozen Ruleset for each Game, with votes being taken
>amongst the players for that game as to whether particular proposals
>affecting the Vanilla ruleset should be applied to the rules for that Game.

Won't that be a bit of a giveaway, though? If someone votes against an
amendment affecting a particular Game, it's a clue that it would have
affected their plan for it.

I'm partly wearing the Devil's Advocate trousers here (since such is usually
the best way to get things analysed), but I do wonder if this is going to be
more trouble than it's worth - I don't particularly relish the idea of
having to keep six separate Rulesets on my hard disk, and certainly don't
trust myself to remember off the top of my head which Rules (or versions of
Rules) are affecting which Games. It's bad enough forgetting that a Rule's
been amended, and carelessly playing it as if it hasn't - playing three
Games with one implementation of Shunting and two with another would just be
monstrous.

I don't have much of a problem with playing under a shifting Ruleset,
myself; maybe I've just been luckier than Paul in having my tactics mostly
unmolested by Rule amendments, but I know that most of the more dramatic
alterations have been thoughtful enough to have some sort of compensation
(refunds for the owners of to-be-repealed-Possessions, and whatever). There
are cases when you have to rethink something due to a Ruleset change, but I
see those as more of a challenge than a problem.

Kevan

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/l-nomic-d
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com