Subject: Re: MN: Proposal - current discussion topic

From: riffraff@n...
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 20:34:52 -0500

>For instance, I like the table in 1.7.2, where each action is listed with
>its 'arguments', costs and benefits, timing, duration, and relevant rule.
>I'd love to code more information in here, but the big question is how much
>can you put in without either making it incomprehensible or, even worse,
>>out of date. The Fosdyke Requirements, in particular, are not guaranteed
>>to be correct.

They're also a bit confusing, although they certainly look efficient...

>But to approach the problem from another angle, I think that a lot of the
>confusion is that there's no real standard way to phrase Action rules. IMO
>they need a sort of header, similar to the columns in the 1.7.2 table, and
>then the rule description. This too needs to be more consistent, so that
>one Rule doesn't say "This Action allows a Special Move to <Station>" and
>another says "After performing this Action, the Piece now exists at
><Station>."

Wasn't there a Proposal that wanted to change 'Special Move' to
'Translocation'? Did that pass? Special Moves have always seemed a bit
puzzling... is Action X a Special Move? Is a Special Move a Move? Do
Special Moves follow a (blockable) path, or are they teleportations?

Perhaps there's a first thing to change: make some Special Moves
Translocations instead. Translocations (such as a Compass Wormhole) do not
follow a path, and do not change your Charge; Special Moves _do_ follow a
path (Straddling, frinstance), and _do_ change your Charge.

(But, I digress)

>In part, we've gone some way to doing this - standardising things like
>Special Moves, Pieces, and other terminology. However, I still think that
>the wording of Actions needs to be standardised in some useful way. This
>would allow people to skim rules much more quickly to find the one that
>>they wanted.

This could be done by devising some Action catagories, that could be added
to the Action list:

Blocking <Station> ... Block
Bulkheading <Station> ... Block
Fire at <Station> ... Block
Straddling to <Station> ... Sp. Move
Walking to <Station> ... Sp. Move
<Compass> Wormhole to <Station> ... Transloc.
Home ... Transloc.
Narging <Player> ... Clamp
Spooning <Player> ... Clamp
Gold to Blue ... Token Ex.
Recycling ... Token Ex.
Into Knip ... Game State
Mind The Gap ... Game State

Then you could have two action lists: One simple alphabetical one ("What
page is Narging on?") (This could be placed at the end of the rules, as a
general index) and one divided into sections ("I need a block, what are my
options?")

--Riff

"I'm a non-local quantum event - I exist at _all_ points in space and time!"
--Riff