No more simulturns? I must have missed that post! Why no more simulturns?!
In addition I'd like any feedback on adding this:
Proposal 3XX: At all times there will be two active turns following the current turn order. Both active turns will begin and end at the same time.
3XX.1 If at any time any turn is interrupted by invoked judgment, or a different official stoppage of play, that time will be added to the end of the players turns.
Well, I mean, I've been using "simulturn" to refer specifically to the "early turn" that a player can invoke through Rule 309. There will never be another one of those because there will always BE two active turns--as soon as one ends, the first line of 309 causes the next turn to begin.
No more simulturns? I must have missed that post! Why no more simulturns?!
In addition I'd like any feedback on adding this:
Proposal 3XX: At all times there will be two active turns following the current turn order. Both active turns will begin and end at the same time.
3XX.1 If at any time any turn is interrupted by invoked judgment, or a different official stoppage of play, that time will be added to the end of the players turns.
That was along the lines of my initial idea, but Binary pointed out that if the two were in any way contradictory, it would be paradox. Ending at the same time is bad.
Just figured out how to have simulturns in a cleaner (although less elegant) matter. How is it? You'll find out after I write it down sometime later tonight probably.
Well, I mean, I've been using "simulturn" to refer specifically to the "early turn" that a player can invoke through Rule 309. There will never be another one of those because there will always BE two active turns--as soon as one ends, the first line of 309 causes the next turn to begin.
Hahaha. That'd be correct only if things were done reasonably, IW, unfortunately you're completely wrong; sure, this follows the rules and makes sense, but it's not the judgement Binary handed out. Go check his ruling to see how the rules now "work." Here's the short version: Everytime a player invokes their simulturn, their next turn (which happens immediately) is skipped, and an illegal copy of the next player's turn is created and instantly destroyed, leaving one active turn; so, every third player or so can invoke simulturn.
Proposal for fixing the simulturns:
Firstly, 312 is amended to include the following item:
Name: Conch
Max Hold: 1
Price: 42^42 XP
Effect: This item is a rules item.
Then, this rule replaces 309:
Rule 3XX. The Conch.
i. There can only be one Conch. If ever there is more or less than one Conch, all Conches are destroyed and a Conch is given to the player who comes comes next in turn order after the player who comes last in turn order out of all the players that are currently taking a turn.
ii. When the die roll part of a player's turn is completed, the turn ends.
iii. Whenever a turn ends, the player who has the Conch takes the next turn.
iv. Whenever a player posts a proposal, if they have a Conch, they give the Conch to the player after them in turn order.
Proposal for fixing the simulturns:
Firstly, 312 is amended to include the following item:
Name: Conch
Max Hold: 1
Price: 42^42 XP
Effect: This item is a rules item.
Then, this rule replaces 309:
Rule 3XX. The Conch.
i. There can only be one Conch. If ever there is more or less than one Conch, all Conches are destroyed and a Conch is given to the player who comes comes next in turn order after the player who comes last in turn order out of all the players that are currently taking a turn.
ii. When the die roll part of a player's turn is completed, the turn ends.
iii. Whenever a turn ends, the player who has the Conch takes the next turn.
iv. Whenever a player posts a proposal, if they have a Conch, they give the Conch to the player after them in turn order.
Sure, that would work. I just wish there was a simpler way to say that; since turn order is decided alphabetically, maybe something like... players shall take turns in alphabetical order?
EDIT: That rule could get ugly with an "Oven Mitt".
EDIT 2: And yes, I know 201 already says that; the rules should already do what your "conch" would be doing. The game should be capable of keeping track of alphabetcal turns all by itself.
Proposal for fixing the simulturns:
Firstly, 312 is amended to include the following item:
Name: Conch
Max Hold: 1
Price: 42^42 XP
Effect: This item is a rules item.
Then, this rule replaces 309:
Rule 3XX. The Conch.
i. There can only be one Conch. If ever there is more or less than one Conch, all Conches are destroyed and a Conch is given to the player who comes comes next in turn order after the player who comes last in turn order out of all the players that are currently taking a turn.
ii. When the die roll part of a player's turn is completed, the turn ends.
iii. Whenever a turn ends, the player who has the Conch takes the next turn.
iv. Whenever a player posts a proposal, if they have a Conch, they give the Conch to the player after them in turn order.
I like it. A little bulky, but if thats what it takes. After all, I don't care how it looks or reads, as long as it works.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Almost forgot. Thanks for reminding me. That's the whole reason that the sentence "This is a rules item." is there. Any item that the rules use would have that sentence there. Any item that could affect items would have to have "non-rules item." This way the item framework can easily be used to support rules like this.
Do you hope this comes up before your nexst turn? Otherwise you have to wonder what else other players are dreaming up right now. Maybe you should lobby for this one a little, PM it to some upcoming players. Especially since it is a two parter.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
This doesn't need to stop the game, so I prefer not to post it as an Invoking Judgement thread, but if I have to, I can.
Quote from Rule 15 »
Name: Oven Mitt
Cost: 50 XP
Max Hold: 1
Abilities: Use: Roll 1d6. If you roll 4, 5 or 6, choose a player. Switch control of Oven Mitt and an item of your choice that player is holding. If you roll 1, 2 or 3, nothing happens.
The maximum hold is 1. Assume this hypothetical situation:
Player A has an Oven Mitt and another item.
Player B has an Oven Mitt.
Player B activates the Mitt, rolls a 6, and attempts to steal the other item from player A. The question is, does this work? Since the other player already has an oven mitt, they cannot hold another one. According to Magic, an attempt to "switch control" where one side of the trade does not actually change control fails entirely (I think anyways). Does a similar philosophy apply here (in the Nomic)?
This doesn't need to stop the game, so I prefer not to post it as an Invoking Judgement thread, but if I have to, I can.
The maximum hold is 1. Assume this hypothetical situation:
Player A has an Oven Mitt and another item.
Player B has an Oven Mitt.
Player B activates the Mitt, rolls a 6, and attempts to steal the other item from player A. The question is, does this work? Since the other player already has an oven mitt, they cannot hold another one. According to Magic, an attempt to "switch control" where one side of the trade does not actually change control fails entirely (I think anyways). Does a similar philosophy apply here (in the Nomic)?
This is what I gathered when I read it, bu I assumed you couldn't make a trade with anyone that had a mitt. Meaning:
Player A has a mitt and wants to steal an item from player B.
Player B has a mitt, can't hold 2 mitts, so the move is void.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Do you hope this comes up before your nexst turn? Otherwise you have to wonder what else other players are dreaming up right now. Maybe you should lobby for this one a little, PM it to some upcoming players. Especially since it is a two parter.
I'm about to once I finish my English homework.
EDIT:
Proposal for fixing the simulturns:
Firstly, 312 is amended to include the following item:
Name: Conch
Max Hold: 1
Price: 42^42 XP
Effect: This item is a rules item.
Then, this rule replaces 309:
Rule 3XX. The Conch.
i. There can only be one Conch. If ever there is more or less than one Conch, all Conches are destroyed and a Conch is given to the player who comes comes next in turn order after the player who comes last in turn order out of all the players that are currently taking a turn.
ii. When the die roll part of a player's turn is completed, the turn ends.
iii. Whenever a turn ends, the player who has the Conch takes the next turn.
iv. Whenever a player posts a proposal or a player skips their turn, if they have a Conch, they give the Conch to the player after them in turn order.
v. Upon adoption of this rule, a Conch is given to XXX.
Well, then we'd have to edit the Conch rule to talk about every item that comes up that would mess too much with the flow of the game, plus if other items like this are implemented too, then we'd have to put that same line in those other rules too. This way, it acts like a creature type for items, an we can use it to differentiate easily by referring to non-rules items.
Ahh, so saying it is a rule item really doesn't do anything? It's too bad this wasn't the original multiple turn proposal, now we have all these hoops to jump through.
EDIT: also, why does it have to be an item, can't there just be a conch?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
I see the interaction between the conch as an item, and some items already available, and even future items as being kind of risky. I agree that since it is "passed" from player to player it feels like an item, but wouldn't it be better to err on the side of caution?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
I see the interaction between the conch as an item, and some items already available, and even future items as being kind of risky. I agree that since it is "passed" from player to player it feels like an item, but wouldn't it be better to err on the side of caution?
Having it be an item is indeed risky, and worse, it's unnecessarily risky.
The Conch can be considered a binary attribute of a player. A player is either said to have the Conch, or to not have the Conch. Players without the Conch can't post proposals, and it passes from player to player as you describe in your post, Iammars.
Well, I mean, I've been using "simulturn" to refer specifically to the "early turn" that a player can invoke through Rule 309. There will never be another one of those because there will always BE two active turns--as soon as one ends, the first line of 309 causes the next turn to begin.
Here's a history.
That was along the lines of my initial idea, but Binary pointed out that if the two were in any way contradictory, it would be paradox. Ending at the same time is bad.
Want a hint? "The Conch"
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
Hahaha. That'd be correct only if things were done reasonably, IW, unfortunately you're completely wrong; sure, this follows the rules and makes sense, but it's not the judgement Binary handed out. Go check his ruling to see how the rules now "work." Here's the short version: Everytime a player invokes their simulturn, their next turn (which happens immediately) is skipped, and an illegal copy of the next player's turn is created and instantly destroyed, leaving one active turn; so, every third player or so can invoke simulturn.
Firstly, 312 is amended to include the following item:
Name: Conch
Max Hold: 1
Price: 42^42 XP
Effect: This item is a rules item.
Then, this rule replaces 309:
Rule 3XX. The Conch.
i. There can only be one Conch. If ever there is more or less than one Conch, all Conches are destroyed and a Conch is given to the player who comes comes next in turn order after the player who comes last in turn order out of all the players that are currently taking a turn.
ii. When the die roll part of a player's turn is completed, the turn ends.
iii. Whenever a turn ends, the player who has the Conch takes the next turn.
iv. Whenever a player posts a proposal, if they have a Conch, they give the Conch to the player after them in turn order.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
Sure, that would work. I just wish there was a simpler way to say that; since turn order is decided alphabetically, maybe something like... players shall take turns in alphabetical order?
EDIT: That rule could get ugly with an "Oven Mitt".
EDIT 2: And yes, I know 201 already says that; the rules should already do what your "conch" would be doing. The game should be capable of keeping track of alphabetcal turns all by itself.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
I like it. A little bulky, but if thats what it takes. After all, I don't care how it looks or reads, as long as it works.
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Pssh. If you think this is bulky, you should see some of the other proposals I have up in the wings.
Iammars != elegance.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
The maximum hold is 1. Assume this hypothetical situation:
Player A has an Oven Mitt and another item.
Player B has an Oven Mitt.
Player B activates the Mitt, rolls a 6, and attempts to steal the other item from player A. The question is, does this work? Since the other player already has an oven mitt, they cannot hold another one. According to Magic, an attempt to "switch control" where one side of the trade does not actually change control fails entirely (I think anyways). Does a similar philosophy apply here (in the Nomic)?
Salvation Mafia Clan
Mafia Stats
last updated 03/23/11
This is what I gathered when I read it, bu I assumed you couldn't make a trade with anyone that had a mitt. Meaning:
Player A has a mitt and wants to steal an item from player B.
Player B has a mitt, can't hold 2 mitts, so the move is void.
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
I'm about to once I finish my English homework.
EDIT:
Proposal for fixing the simulturns:
Firstly, 312 is amended to include the following item:
Name: Conch
Max Hold: 1
Price: 42^42 XP
Effect: This item is a rules item.
Then, this rule replaces 309:
Rule 3XX. The Conch.
i. There can only be one Conch. If ever there is more or less than one Conch, all Conches are destroyed and a Conch is given to the player who comes comes next in turn order after the player who comes last in turn order out of all the players that are currently taking a turn.
ii. When the die roll part of a player's turn is completed, the turn ends.
iii. Whenever a turn ends, the player who has the Conch takes the next turn.
iv. Whenever a player posts a proposal or a player skips their turn, if they have a Conch, they give the Conch to the player after them in turn order.
v. Upon adoption of this rule, a Conch is given to XXX.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
Well I'm running low on ideas over here. Does anybody have any suggestions I could work on? I'd like to have my proposal worked out before my turn.
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
EDIT: also, why does it have to be an item, can't there just be a conch?
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Also, it just feels so much like an item. It could also work as a status variable, it just feels like an item.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Avatar by Grey. Banner by spiderboy4 from High~Light Studios
Seriously, good thought on the conch.
banner by god child. he'd make you one too, if you weren't so bad at posting.
Having it be an item is indeed risky, and worse, it's unnecessarily risky.
The Conch can be considered a binary attribute of a player. A player is either said to have the Conch, or to not have the Conch. Players without the Conch can't post proposals, and it passes from player to player as you describe in your post, Iammars.
"...a talisman against all evil, so long as you obey me."