Daniel Lepage on Sun, 18 Dec 2005 10:01:06 -0600 (CST)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] Re: [auto] Peter votes 


On Dec 18, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Peter Cooper Jr. wrote:


Daniel Lepage <dpl33@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

On Dec 17, 2005, at 7:53 PM, Peter voted:

Motion 311/0: Uncommonly Good Talismans                : Against


Any particular reason? I didn't propose this just to make my other
prop work. I really do think that having "Uncommon" as a rarity makes
sense, because some things shouldn't be that common but also might not
warrant the restrictions associated with being Rare.


How would uncommon be different from common? If there's a distinction
between them I don't mind having it, but it feels weird that there'd
be two rarities that behaved identically...
Well, if my Superpowers prop passes, there's at least one power that lets you do things with Talismans "of the same Rarity", and another that lets you steal Talismans that are Absurdly Common or Common, but wouldn't apply to Uncommon Talismans. I don't think "Uncommon" vs. "Common" Talismans need to behave differently the way the other Rarities do. The difference can be in how other things refer to them. 

--
Wonko

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss