Re: [s-d] Proposal: Win or Win or Win

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

shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> Proposal: Win or Win or Win.
>
> Amend rule 2.3, so that it reads as follows:
> {{
> Wins are Game Objects that may be possessed by Players. The number of
> Wins held by a player is known as that player's Win Count.
>
> Wins are automatically granted to a player when the rules say that he
> has "won" or is "granted a win" or is the "winner".  No rule shall
> limit the number of ways that a win can be created;

It seems to me that later in this very rule you're trying to limit the
number of ways that a win can be created.

> a given winning condition shall be optional for the player.

Did you just say in the first sentence of that paragraph that it was
automatic? I'm not quite following this.

> If at any point it is only possible for one player to win, then that
> player has won.
>
> When a win occurs, winning cannot occur again in the same way in the
> same game week.  [[giving us time to pass a  game change.]]

I'm not sure about "same way" here, and "game week" should probably be
"nweek".

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