[s-b] Upper House Ruling on CFI "15 points for DOOM!"

[Jeremy Cook <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Looks like I'm still in the Upper House, and so I come out from
my Rock to make a Ruling.

Plaintiff: Peter

Statement: When Peter played eir Card of DOOM! on nweek 80 nday
3, e gained 15 points.

Plaintiff's argument: The text on Card of DOOM! doesn't state
that the normal action doesn't occur if the required cards are
not chosen. Other cards (such as Greater Booty and Petty Theft)
state that something happens "instead" of the normal action if
the normal conditions aren't meant. Here without the use of the
word "instead" or something similar, one would follow Card of
DOOM!'s instructions in order, just like any other card. The
card-player chooses cards.  The chosen cards, if any, are
discarded. The card-player gains 15 points. Then, if not all
cards were chosen, more stuff happens (namely, the random
devouring of the card-player's hand, followed by other players'
hands).

Defendant's Argument: The wording of the card suggests that the
two are intended as disjoint alternatives. You pick the target
cards, and then the target cards are discarded and you gain 15
points; if you didn't pick the target cards properly, then
discarding the targets is impossible, so instead you go to the
end of the card, and the DOOM! randomly devours your hand. Since
the 15-point gain is grouped with the discarding of the targets,
it doesn't happen unless that whole block happens, which it
didn't in Peter's case because e failed to specify valid targets. 

Ruling: FALSE

Analysis: 

The text of the Card is: "Choose any three cards held by players,
and one card you hold other than this one. All those cards are
discarded and you gain 15 points. If you fail to choose such
cards, five cards are chosen at random and all of them are
discarded. The random choices will be made from cards in your
hand until you have no unchosen cards left in your hand; the
remaining choices will be made from cards in all player's hands."

Peter's Action was "I play a Card of DOOM!, discarding an
Enclosing Game card held by Zarpint, a Tournament Russian
Roulette card held by Wonko, a Your Spoo Has Too Much Fleem card
held by bd, and another Card of DOOM!  from my hand. I gain 15
points."

The Minister's response was "Peter plays a card of DOOM!, but
fails to choose three cards in player's hands to be destroyed
(there is no TRR in my hand). So the Card of DOOM! eats eir hand
instead (two Cards of DOOM! and a Greater Booty). There are only
three cards to eat there, so the DOOM!  selects two other cards
at random, specifically SkArcher's RPS and bd's YSHMF."

According to Plaintiff's argument, what should happen is: "The
chosen cards, if any, are discarded. The card-player gains 15
points. Then, if not all cards were chosen, more stuff happens
(namely, the random devouring of the card-player's hand, followed
by other players' hands)."

This argument doesn't hold. The card doesn't say "if any". From
the text of the card, it's clear that "All those cards are
discarded" refers to four cards. Thus, the sentence "All those
cards are discarded and you gain 15 points." fails to do anything
at the first conjunct, since "all those cards" fails to refer to
the four cards it's supposed to. So the second conjunct never
gets a chance to happen. It's like short-circuiting operators in
Perl. As Defendant points out, DOOM eating Plaintiff's hand and
Plaintiff getting 15 points are written as disjoint alternatives.

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