Re: [s-d] Comments on this nweek's proposals

[Rainbow Wolfe <rainbowdreamwolf@xxxxxxxxx>]

> p30 (History & Summary duties): I'm not sure this is really all that
> useful. Why not just have the documents and update them? I don't
> really see why they need to be a part of the game. And "begginning"
> should be "beginning".
> 

I can see why it's there - it's much better to get it first hand from 
players that read through the archives (which I would reccomend to anyone 
who has time). I can see why the players are rewarded for this information, 
and I admit I'd be interested in some BNomic stories. Why not add them to a 
chat, and transfer gene chips as and when.

I'm also where to begin tackling the tracking document I created. My brain 
hurts now. :D


> p32 (Blackjack): Rather than try to define an infinitely-large deck, I
> would just define plays as dice rolls. The "If the neither the casino
> owner or an employeee of the casino responds" ought to have some sort
> of time limit. I don't see a definition of "dealer". If p33 doesn't
> pass, the "list of allowed games" doesn't mean anything. Also,
> "employeee" has an extra 'e', "vault.If" ought to have a space after
> the period, "higher i value" is nonsensical, "e bad bet" probably
> ought to be "e had bet", and "infnite" should be "infinite". And
> that's without looking very hard.
> 

I have a simple idea for a slot machine using the roller. In fact it's not 
really that hard to imagine.

p33 (Cityscape): This is just way too complicated to throw in there
> all at once. I can't possibly process all the rules at once. The
> sentence "If a building is transferable it may be sold, exchanged,
> demolished, closed or opened." makes it sound as though anyone can do
> any of those as game actions at any time, which I'm guessing isn't
> what you want, but I don't want to go through and really understand
> all the ramifications of everything in there all at once. Maybe try to
> add things a bit at a time? The changing of rule 4-4 will undo the
> renaming of Gambly if p32 passes. And it's riddled with spelling and
> grammatical errors.


Sounds interesting, but would probably work better as a stand alone game 
(which I did try to add to BNomic to genereate more interest.. maybe I'll 
try again)

p36 (Random Object names): Hmm... An interesting idea, but I'm not
> sure how well it'll work. As someone said, it's going to raise the
> barrier of entry for new players. And I don't know if I like the
> all-proposals-get-annulled if they all use the Gibberish word.


I like the idea, but I agree with BvS. It'll reach a point where it's hard 
to interpret (without some sort of dictionary being proposed). Alternatively 
there could be irregular props to turn gibbereish into normal words.

p43 (Tweaks immutable): Well, it's an interesting restriction, but not
> that hard to work around. (For instance, consider a prop that made a
> Tweak, and then executed the changes in it, and then deleted the Tweak
> it just make.) But it might not be a bad plan, just to discourage
> additional tinkering.


Define Mutable, make all rules mutable (including new ones). Define 
Immutable. Either make this rule immutable OR don't define it placing it 
outside the ruleset, but still accesible. Um. Somehow. (I'm confusing myself 
now)

p48 (Filibusters): The "ballot" isn't currently defined. I think I'd
> prefer plain-old shelving, although I don't really think that's needed
> either.


I like the idea of shelve / delay. But I'd simply be for voting a proposal 
down (not neccesarily against going by this nweeks props.) and have it be 
reproposed in a new form. This would save things being shelved and not 
changed as previously happened. 

p49 (Veto power): Again, the "ballot" isn't defined. I think I'd word
> this as having the prop fail regardless of the voting or something. It
> seems like it'd just postpone things an nweek, which doesn't seem to
> me like it'd do much good.


The veto could be used once (as 49/0), but could effectively kill the prop. 
Although CFI's aplenty if it was worded like this and someone tried to sneak 
it back in.

- RW, my 2-cents.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss