Re: [spoon-discuss] warehouses and more

["Glotmorf" <glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/24/02 at 5:03 AM Orc In A Spacesuit wrote:

>I do not propose the following rule, as this is not public:
>{{__Warehouses__
>In this rule, Players, Societies, and Gremlins are Entities.
>In this rule, all things that can exist on The Grid, including all Grid
>Objects, are Physical Objects
>In this rule, all Physical Objects that can be carried, picked up, thrown,
>dropped, and/or possessed are also Carryable Objects.
>[[I didn't include dependence because it doesn't come up in this rule.]]
>
>There exists a class of objects named Warehouses.  Warehouses are Physical
>Objects.  All Warehouses have an Owner, who is an Entity.  All Warehouses
>are Passable.  All Warehouses must have a unique name, which may not be
>"Hiding". [[You'll see why below]]
>
>Warehouses may possess Carryable Objects.  Any Player who is in the same
>Location as a Warehouse may give any Object in eir possession to the
>Warehouse.  If the Owner of a Warehouse explictly permits it, any Player
>may
>take a Carryable Object from a Warehouse at eir Location.
>
>Any Carryable Object in the possession of a Warehouse is not considered in
>the same Location as the Warehouse, but is instead in the Location "In X";
>this Location does exist while the Warehouse exists.  If a Warehouse
>ceases
>to exist, all Carryable Objects it possesed are transferred to the last
>Location of the Warehouse.
>
>Any Entity may purchase a Warehouse for (10*(2^X)) points, where X is the
>number of Warehouses that Entity has purchased during the current nweek.
>When purchasing a Warehouse, the Entity must choose a Square in which the
>Warehouse is placed.
>
>If more than one Warehouse is in the same Location, the one that entered
>that Location most recently is destroyed [[The process repeats until there
>is one left]].  If a Warehouse is in the same Location as an Impassible
>Object, it is destroyed.
>}}

And to think, you spearheaded turning off my Mining rule.  What happens if the Baron has a Warehouse at (5,5) and I drop another one there?  Eir Warehouse goes away, mine survives, and I get all the stuff that was in eirs.  Okay, it's more expensive than bulldozing, but still.

How about something simpler?  Things can be thrown into Limbo.  Have warehouses be in Limbo, along with, oh, say, a robot that catches things thrown at it (most of the time, with only the occasional breakage to thing or robot) and can throw things back to people on the grid (with reasonable accuracy, and of course allowing for wind).  Maybe even throw in messengers (expense charged per trip, but no breakage) or field runners (like the water people at football games, or the ball fetchers at tennis matches).

Or simpler still: we give societies something called warehouses that don't have to be anywhere in particular, we assume all of the above is in place, and just allow stuff to be freely exchanged between societies and society members.  If you don't think "warehouse" is a good name for this, we could instead call it...oh, I don't know...how about "resource pool"?

I devised resource pools because they provided possibilities, not restrictions.  If you explicitly state that such-and-such are the things that can be possessed by a society, you create a restriction, not a possibility, because you implicitly exclude everything else.

Under the status quo, I could create a resource pool for WBE of airspeeder ownership, buy a bunch of airspeeders, give them to WBE and have WBE make them available for use by employees. (I assume this is close to what Wonko had in mind with eir 40-airspeeder pile.)  With your proposal, I'd have to get a rule passed explicitly stating WBE (or societies in general) could do that.

>For WBE, change the rules such that entities can Recycle certain Carryable
>Objects in Warehouses, maybe requiring a machine or something; and when
>something is Recycled, the Owner gets Materials.  And define Societies,
>Players, and Gremlins (why gremlins? they don't get any now, but may in
>the
>future) to have the Property Materials.

Why the insistence on Properties, as opposed to simply possessing objects?  Are you trying to establish a cashless economy?  If you're going for realism, the stuff objects are made from has to be objects too, as opposed to, say, my getting a pizza from an ATM.

						Glotmorf


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