bd on Sat, 2 Dec 2006 16:50:29 -0700 (MST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Legal mode

shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Proposal: Legal Mode.
> Create a new rule titled "Legal Mode":
> {{
> If a game action is not prohibited by the rules, then it is permitted.
> However if a list of valid actions or alternatives are given as part
> of a rule or rules, then those are the only valid actions or
> alternatives in regard to that rule or rules.
> [[So if I say you can "call" or "draw" on a "hand", those are the only
> two things you can do on a hand, even if I didn't actually say that.]]
> }}

Hmm, I sense an ambiguity here. If we have:
Blue Weevils are a type of Weevil. Players possessing Blue Weevils may 
Frob or Tweak any Red Cards in their possession.

Weevils are game objects. Players may Boink Weevils for five points, 
removing the Weevil from the game.

Red Cards are game objects. Players may Discard Red Cards at any time.

With your rule, does this mean that players may not Boink Blue Weevils, 
because the Blue Weevil rule gives an exclusive list of actions? Does it 
mean that they cannot Discard a Red Card while holding a Blue Weevil?

I think it makes more sense to simply state that players may not perform 
a game action except as permitted by the rules - where "Players may <X>" 
is considered giving permission.
spoon-discuss mailing list