Daniel Lepage on 5 May 2003 03:26:01 -0000


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

Re: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Veni, Vidi, Vacancy



On Sunday, May 4, 2003, at 09:40  PM, Baron von Skippy wrote:

>>Yes, I know, but note the phrase 'Unless otherwise prescribed by the
>>rules'. Moving by Force is defined as 'moving' by the Force rule, and is
>>therefore an exception
>>to this rule, as this rule defers to it.
>
>-I think this is a debateable point. No one said the target wants to move, >just that the mover wants it to move. Extending that, if I move myself, then >I want to move myself but I don't care if I am moved - which of those takes >precedence? What if I don't want to move but have to out of necessity?-

You state my point yourself here; 'No one said the target wants to move,
just that the mover wants it to move.'

You are the mover of yourself here; it is your free will which is a cause of your movement. When you 'want it to move' you cause the activation of a force power which then moves yourself, thus the subsidiary actions are dependent on your free will. Egro, you cannot legally use the force
power to make yourself move.

-What I was actually trying to get at was that I stated both of our points in one situation and was asking whose side took precedence. If I move myself, I'm also the unwitting target of my own action, just like you would be if I moved you as a toad/penguin.-

>>
>> >Since that's the accepted definition of "movement on the Grid," and since
>> >I'm not doing that, what I'm saying is still legal.
>>
>>This is the base definition of movement on the grid, whose rules are
>>superceded by rules to which
>>it defers, which is, in effect, any rule which says otherwise.
>
>-No other rule says otherwise.-

The rules on the force say otherwise, by using the word 'moved' to categorise what happens to the target of the power in question. This rule therefore comes into conflict with the movement section of r301, but r301 defers to it because r301 states that it defers to any other rule that proscribes any form of player movement. As in this case the object is you, and the rules state that you cannot move of your own free will, you cannot employ a force power to move in this
manner.

-Rule 301 defers to any rule which specifically contradicts it. This opens a whole new nearly-impossible argument for us - does the Force rule specifically contradict 301, or are they just not quite in agreement?-

Essentially, because it can be used upon a toad, the Force power rule is a rule which proscribes
player movement.

>>
>> >Also, using your logic, I could escape Wonko be announcing that I want to >> >move wherever e does - any time e moves, clearly I am then moving of my
>>own
>> >free will, and since I can't do that, I have to get left behind or
>>perhaps
>> >my position is undefined, since it's not clear what is contrary to my
>>free
>> >will.-
>>
>>No, because your Free Will is not a cause of your movement.
>
>-In that case, I can float myself around because I'm not moving of my own
>free will, I'm moving with some help from the Force.-

As you yourself stated above, you decide where the object of your force power moves to. Therefore your arguement is inherently flawed. Your concept of what the force is and how it does it has no
bearing upon the game.

-Okay, time to open the dictionary...

Main Entry: of
<snip>
2 a -- used as a function word to indicate origin or derivation <a man of noble birth> b -- used as a function word to indicate the cause, motive, or reason <died of flu> c : BY <plays of Shakespeare>
<snip>

So, to move /of/ one's own free will would here indicate that you move with Free Will as the motive force. Given that there is no other such force when you're walking/ running/ flying on the Grid, this means we can still do those. On the other hand, utilizing the Force means that, under this definition, you are moving of The Force, not of Free Will. And, if you want to say that 301 defers to everything that says it's wrong, then this clearly means that 301 defers in this instance to the Force rule. Penguins can fly, after all. Crazy penguins...-

Ah, but what you do not realize is that penguins are irrelevant to the issue at hand. I submit to the players that the Baron is not, and has never been, a penguin. E is, however, a Toad.

I cite r1183: On any roll from 83 to 90, a random player becomes a Penguin, the effects of which are identical to becoming a Toad.

What are the effects of becoming a Toad? The object is now a Toad.
What are the effects of becoming a Penguin? They're identical to the effects of becoming a Toad; thus, an object that has become a Penguin is now a Toad.

Thus, when the Baron became a Penguin, e in fact ended up as a Toad; and as nothing has change about said toadliness, e is still such now, Q.E.D.

--
Wonko

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