Re: [eia] dice re-roll policy

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Joel wrote:
> I hadn't had a chance yet to register my objections; I agree with Mike. In
> this case, I don't see how Prussia is benefiting from the error, since I
> take it he was planning to besiege both cities come what may, but in
> general I'm in favor of rerolls.
>

    Well, I thought consensus was still within our grasp until I read this
email from Joel.  Mike expressed a principle that I'm sure we all agree
with, namely, no one should benefit from his own mistake.  As I said before,
I'm sure we would all agree that Jim should re-roll if it can be shown that
he has benefitted from the revisions he had to make to his orders.  So up to
that point, it seemed like we were all on target for accepting a principle
that re-rolls should be required only when failing to re-roll would benefit
the one who made the mistake.
    But Joel's email seems to make that consensus impossible.  He seems to
be saying that he accepts that Prussia has not benefitted in any way from
the revision of his orders, but Jim should still re-roll nonetheless.  (He
didn't explain his reason for this position.)  If this interpretation of
Joel's email is correct, then no consensus is possible on this issue.  That
is a shame because if we can come to no consensus, then I fear that the game
will occasionally get bogged down while we wait for Mike and Joel's approval
to roll dice every time there is a die roll that might affect either of
them.  (Speaking only for myself, I guarantee that I will not roll dice if
there is a possibility that I will be forced to re-roll.  Luckily, though, I
am not likely to have to roll against either of them in the near future.)

    I do not think that "voting" is the right way to go about this.  If we
were to vote, it would be me, Jim, and Danny on one side, Mike and Joel on
the other, with JJ straddling the fence, and Everett silent.  A 3-2 vote is
no way to settle such an important issue.  That's why I was trying to reach
a consensus that we could all live with.  But if that is impossible then we
will simply have to live with no general policy at all - it will be up to
each individual player to insist on re-rolls.  So those rolling against Mike
and Joel would simply be more cautious in rolling, realizing that Mike and
Joel are likely to ask you to re-roll if there is a mistake.  So, in other
words, in the absence of a general policy, each player gets their own "veto"
as far as demanding re-rolls is concerned (when the die roll affects them).

    If people see another solution, I'd be happy to hear it.

kdh

_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia