[s-d] Re: [s-b] [auto] Triller submits p359

[Jake Eakle <jseakle@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just because a player is also a CHO doesn't make em not a player, so I think
we're fine there. Owned objects are game-defined properties, I would say.
The ambiguity comes up in the word 'loses' -- are they destroyed, or
dropped? For most things -- stats, the player object itself, Action Points,
etc -- destruction makes the most sense, and perhaps it does for talismans
and the like too, but it might be cool if those were dropped. However, it
also might just give the nearest player a bunch of free stuff for no reason,
so I'm not sure this is what we want.

On 2/14/06, automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <automailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Triller has submitted a new Motion, p359.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Motion 359/0: Finer Forfeiture Fundamentals Fixed
> A Proposal by Triller
> Last modified on nweek 106, nday 5
>
> [[ Alliteration ]]
> [[ I noticed at least one problem with Rule 3-2
> as regards forfeiting. I'll cover that first. ]]
>
> In Rule 3-2, change the paragraph that reads
> {{
> When a Player ceases to be a player for any reason,
> e loses all game-defined properties and attributes
> except for eir Name, and all Souls e holds become Lost.
> }}
> to
> {{
> When a Player ceases to be a player for any reason,
> e loses all game-defined properties and attributes
> except for eir Name, and all Souls e holds become Lost.
> All Souls Lost in this manner are moved to the Gallery.
> }}
>
> [[ This takes care of Souls Lost by Vatees. This might
> be better accomplished by amending the Vat's
> Ordinances, but what if a Player Forfiets while in the
> Basement or Attic? Should the Lost Souls remain there?
> Amplitude, Stats and Skills are defined as Attributes,
> so that is cut and dried. Action Points are not, and
> perhaps should be.
> However, 'game-defined properties' is a bit vague.
> Would Objects be considered game-defined properties?
> Is 'properties' to be considered in the real sense (as in
> a deeded parcel of land) or figuratively (as in e has a
> good ear for a harmony)?
> As to Carryable Household Objects (CHOs):
> Souls are covered by the above.
> Pens and Talismans could be destroyed, ignoring Effects,
> or simply dropped where the forfeiture occurs.
> Players (while asleep) are CHOs. What of em?
> Genechips are defined as Game Objects, though not CHOs.
> Rule 9-4 does state that 'Players may also destroy Genechips
> in their possession' which implies carryability.
> I don't know. Perhaps I'm overthinking this.
> Opinions? ]]
>
> Triller
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
> This Message was sent automatically by the Wiki.
> Please do not reply to the sender of this message, as your replies will be
> ignored. Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> spoon-business mailing list
> spoon-business@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-business
>
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss