Re: [s-d] squares

[Elliott Hird <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2 Dec 2008, at 10:46, Jamie Dallaire wrote:

> yay, so I finally read ehird's RP really carefully front to back.
>
> a) whither the temporal prime directive? don't think it matters in the
> proposed ruleset, but it's just a good idea to keep its absence in  
> mind.

It's no fun!

> b) proposal conflicts are a little bit broken. if a proposal  
> conflicts with
> another that is won, then the first is automatically lost. if two
> conflicting proposals are won, I think the one with the highest  
> strength
> should prevail, but this is not currently the case. I'll propose  
> this if
> ehird's RP passes.

Yeah, it was just too complex. Stop proposing such complex  
dependencies :P

> c) "Initially, all Players are Resident in the Square (0,0). [...]  
> A Square
> can never have more than 3 Residents." What???

Um... crap. You're meant to have to place yourself.

Oh well... the 3 residents thing takes precedent, I think, so no  
players are
actually in (0,0) to start. I hope

> d) I quite like this refresh proposal. Here, let me go vote for it  
> for real.

and

e) oh, and we'll see how it works out, but my initial feeling is that we
should scale down the ranges of most weapons. As it now stands, I get  
the
feeling that with 5 square moves per day, one could get shot A LOT  
before
managing to move out of someone's range. Then again maybe we want  
that :-D

Yeah true. It was hard coming up with some stuff logically. Still, we  
can
see how it goes.
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss