Re: [s-d] [s-b] contract

[Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Jay Campbell <bnomic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   
>> "performed as if the Player had sent it to the public forum"
>>
>> You can send any old game action to the public forum. Whether it
>> succeeds does not concern Contracts. They only make you *try*.
>>     
>
> So if I have a contract with you that requires me to transfer 100
> macks to you, I can transfer all of my macks to someone else, attempt
> to transfer to you, failing, have them transferred back to me and not
> be in breach of the contract because I "tried"?
>
> The rule says the Game Action is performed.  If it's performed as it I
> sent it to the Public Forum then I must implicitly have the power to
> do it by announcement too.
>   

That transfer steal could have happened under the old rules, when you 
were simply obligated, and could transfer your money to a third party 
and hope your priest is friendly.

It's performed, but it's performed "as if the Player had sent it to the 
public forum" and can fail.

I trust that the majority of players interpret any such action as being 
executed in the permission scope of the obligated player.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss