|Tyler Crosby on 14 Feb 2002 12:39:35 -0000|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|spoon-discuss: Storming the Bastille and running into the walls|
Actually, I don't think there's anything in the rules that says that if a paradoxical condition is caused by a player, that player is awarded a win. And, even if there did, rule 0 would take precedence over it, as the two would conflict. The "paradox win" rule would say, "if an unresolveable paradoxical condition exists, (a) will happen," and rule zero says, "if an unresolveable paradoxical condition exits, (b) will happen." Rule 0 will take precendence (since neither has chutzpah greater than one), and no win will be awarded, unless it is part of the refresh proposal which passes. In Suber's original ruleset, there is a provision for a player winning if they are unable to complete a turn, but we have no such rule. If r129/2 really is broken, then neither Glormorf nor Uncle Psy will win automatically from it. It will have to get through the other players first.You know, if Uncle P had meant for 129/2 to have this effect, it would be a brilliant way to win. Especially since he very charismatically convinced five people to vote for it. (Yes, I should have objected to it louder... but given UP's past failed proposals, I really doubted that such a logic-defying proposal would ever pass.) But if this really does cause an irreversible descent into paradox, then it's Glotmorf who gets the win, because he took the pseudo-Action. -- Rob Speer
Wow, that's too much thinking for 7:20 in the morning... -0- Thus Spake The Voice -0- *Ignore this signature if : 1) it doesn't make sense to you 2) it seems outdated 3) you feel moved to make a sarcastic comment 4) you didn't read to the end of this list. Thank you, and have a nice day.* _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.