Re: [s-d] Not a Proposal: Dependence Day

[comex <comexk@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Monday 10 December 2007, Mike McGann wrote:
> A Game Action that requires M (default 1) supporters or without N
> (default 1) objections is a Dependent Game Action.

That would make more sense, but how to phrase the without objections 
bit? ;)

Perhaps: "that the Rules require to be performed 'without M supporters' 
or 'without N objections'", but then you run into the whole 
requiring-literal-text problem.

> If my rewording was your initial intent, then yeah, you are right and I
> agree with 'not really'. How about adding something to allow "more
> supporters than objectors (if that is even a word)" in ndays and have
> that used in the Tweaks rule. Also why rdays instead of ndays?

Tweaks at least need to be performable when the Clock is Off.  For other 
actions I can see why ndays would be preferable.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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