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

[Daniel Lepage <dplepage@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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superceded by rules to which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