[s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] PlayerPersonman submits p1926

[Jeremy Cook <athena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 05:09:59PM -0500, wonko@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Auto-mailed on nweek 71, nday 3
> Sent at Sat Oct 16 22:09:59 2004 GMT
> 
> 
> 
> PlayerPersonman has submitted a new proposal, p1926.
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Proposal 1926/0: Conditional Triggers

> No Trigger may cause a player to take and action e could not otherwise take, nor may any Trigger cause any unsubscribed player to take any action whatsoever. No Trigger may give points, Vines, Renown, or any other Game Object or Resource to any player for any reason whatsoever. [[This does not of course mean that you can't get points, etc. from actions caused by the Trigger.  It just can't have "I gain 10 points" as an Action in the List. ]]

That's not an Action that Players can take, so you don't need that; in
fact, I could argue that the language of the prop doesn't allow me to
gain points from actions caused by the Trigger.

r1896: "The Rules also have the power to cause an Outsider to take Game Actions whether e posts or not." What if the effect of a Trigger is to do so?


> An action may be marked with a * before it's first character. All such starred actions must be actions which any player on the List of Subscribers could perform when the Condition is met. If any player on the List of Subscribers could not perform a starred action, that action is not performed. When a starred action would be performed, it is not performed by any of the players on the List of Subscribers, but rather is not considered to have any perpetrator whatsoever. Starred actions may not refer to specific players. [[These exist so that actions such as "Make a new trigger of X type with X condition..etc." can exist. If such an action were added unstarred, all subscribers would make a new trigger with the same name, and that's never good. They can't refer to specific players because that could lead to situations under which the game is throwing peoples Tomatoes at other people, and no one is losing Honor for it because no one threw them... ]]

I really like the idea of Actions that have no entity performing them.
This will lead to much craziness, in case you hadn't guessed. The
specific player prohibition isn't effective: "Throw all Tomatoes at a
random Player", for instance. We probably want to allow things like "If
I ever have Petty Theft, I play it targeting Zarpint", anyway. That
would save Wonko a lot of trouble.

It would be better to change the Tomato rule, if you're worried about
that situation. I personally would enjoy having the game throw
everyone's Tomatoes around at other people. What better use of Tomatoes
could there possibly be?

> 
> A.2 Creation
> Any player may create a Trigger at any time for no cost. [[This is to prevent situations in which no one creates a useful Trigger that everyone would use due to the fact that while they would pay for it, everyone would benefit.]]

...and the plotting begins.



What happens if a Trigger triggers for more than one player at a time,
but it's Single-Use, or the Action can only be done once? This is like
the problem with the Telephone answering machine automation scripts.

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