[s-d] P300

["Mark Walsh" <flutesultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On: 12/12/05 1:08:48 PM Eugman sent:
> Subject: [s-b] [auto] EugeneMeidinger submits p308
>
> EugeneMeidinger has submitted a new Motion, p308.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Motion 308/0: Quest Queue Quite Quixotic
> A Proposal by EugeneMeidinger
> Last modified on nweek 102, nday 3
>
> [[First draft, A bit unorganized but the general idea is there.]]
>
> Create the following rule under section 2:

Why not create a whole new rule section defining QUESTS?
You seem to intend for them to stand apart from other objects.

> {{
> ==Quest==
>
> Quests are a type of Game document. Quests are not 
> Motions but are treated as such except where stated 
> otherwise. Any unstated characteristics of Quests is 
> assumed to be identical to those of Proposals.
>
> At the time a Motion is created, a Minister of Change 
> assigns it a unique serial number that is at least 1 higher 
> than all Motions created before it.
>
> A Quest consists of a list of conditions and a list of
> rewards. A Quest has five possible states: 
> Pending, Open, Stacked, Current, and Historical.
>

This, to me, looks like a fine line to walk. You can't
treat it like a Motion and at the same time have it not
 be a Motion. Rule 1-2 states that "The game of 
B Nomic consists entirely of Game Objects". Do you 
intend for Players to be able to Propose Quests 
(i.e. a non-Proposal that is a Quest)? This seems 
ambiguous to me. You're generating a whole new 
voting structure for this individual object. Imagine
the work! 
Why not create the Object within the existing 
Proposing/Voting Structure? And why Stack? 
Can't a Player go in pursuit of multiple Quests 
simultaneously?

> Whenever a Quest passes, instead of changing 
> to Historical and having an effect listed on the
> Quest it becomes Stacked. If a Quest fails the 
> the owner loses 10 GC, otherwise e receives 5
> GC and NOTHING ELSE[[No bonuses 
> garnered by passed props]].
>
Again. New Voting structure. I'll add that a submitted 
Quest would only be submitted should the submitter
see an advantage in doing so. Why an exceptional 
reward? Let it fly or fail.

> A play may submit any number of Quests less 
> than of tenth of eir GC per nweek.

In any world I've ever existed in (Timothy Leary
not withstanding) this is Gibberish.

> When the conditions of the Current Quest are met, 
> it becomes Historical, the oldest Stacked Quest 
> becomes Current, and any objects listed under 
> the rewards are given to the player who caused
> the last condition to be met. The rewards may 
> also list changes to the game which are at this 
> time acted out.
> }}
>
This last, at least, seems lucid. I'm still not comfortable with the
Stacking aspect of things.

> Create the following quest with the state of Current:
> {{
> ==Cartography Catastrophe==
>
> Conditions:A player has been in each room of the Haunted House. The only
locations
> counted are the current ones at the end of each nday.
>
> Rewards:
> 400GC
> 5 Pens

Better get you timing right! (and have a master plan).

> The Title of Master Mapper
> }}

Needs Work!!!

Triller

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