Craig Daniel on Mon, 2 Feb 2009 16:40:10 -0700 (MST)


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

Re: [s-b] [s-d] Let's get this sorted out...


On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Marr965 wrote:
>
>> In addition, if the answer overall proves to be NO, this will force retroactive changes to the gamestate, which is not allowed.
>
> It will do no such thing.  If anything, it will reveal that the
> gamestate was different all along from what we thought it was.

Indeed. It will force recalculation of a variety of facts about the
gamestate, but in doing said recalculations we'll be making our
knowledge of the gamestate reflect what it always was.

I find the answer to Consultation 205 CONSISTENT, if I haven't already.
_______________________________________________
spoon-business mailing list
spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business