[s-d] Re: Another Action

["Peter Cooper Jr." <pete+bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Mark Walsh" <flutesultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I think you may be right on the transitivity issue.
> If so, this could negate Rainbow's Estate, which I don't
> think I want to do.
> At present nothing precludes it, but I don't think it's prudent
> to allow any action not precluded by a Rule.
> There is much precedent for 'giving to' in various Game
> Actions since I joined.

The definition of Genechips, r9-4, says that "Players may possess
Genechips or exchange them with other Players." I took this to be the
authority upon which giving Genechips was allowed. But there isn't a
similar statement for Carryable Household Objects, as far as I can
tell. That's all I was getting at.

> Activated Abilities in 1-2 covers 'Players' holding an Object
> or being held by an Object. Perhaps an amendment stated as
> 'An Object holding or being held by an Object' is in order.

I don't think so if I'm reading what you're saying correctly; and that
was one of my most recent changes. That sentence gives players the
authority to play abilities on objects that they hold or that hold
them, but doesn't give it to other entities that might hold objects
(such as rooms). So, if we want to allow players to give another
player a carryable household object, we'd need to give them an ability
along the lines of

{{
0: Choose a player held by the same object as you. As long as you both
continue to be held by the same object, this object has the ability
{{0: Take possession of this object.}} which can be played and can only
be played by the chosen player.
}}

And maybe, taking/dropping objects should take action points.

> Got pens?

I think I just got 5 shiny new ones. :)

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