[s-b] Consultation: Usurping

["Mike McGann" <mike.mcgann@xxxxxxxxx>]

I submit the following Consultation:

{{
Unbeliever: Billy Pilgrim

Is 2 support required to usurp a ministry with a retainer less than or
equal to zero?
}}

Reasoning:
In Rule 48, there is the following sentence which I will name as A:

"As a Game Action a Player may usurp a Ministry whose Retainer is less
than or equal to 0, unless that Player has held that Ministry during
the current or previous nweek or the current Minister (if any) is
their twin."

There is also the following sentence which I will name as B:

"As a Game Action with 2 Support a Player may usurp a Ministry whose
Retainer is less than or equal to 0."

B applies additional restrictions to A and thus reads as such:

"As a Game Action with 2 Support a Player may usurp a Ministry whose
Retainer is less than or equal to 0, unless that Player has held that
Ministry during the current or previous nweek or the current Minister
(if any) is their twin."

It is incorrect to read is this way:

if ( Retainer == 0 )
{
  if ( Player has held Ministry during the nweek )
  {
    May usurp with 2 support
  }
  else
  {
     May usurp.
  }
}

A and B are in separate paragraphs and there is no wording that
creates this association. If that was the intent, it should have been
stated differently.

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