Re: [s-d] [s-b] Proposal: Consistent mack spending

[Elliott Hird <penguinofthegods@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 15 Dec 2008, at 20:18, Ed Murphy wrote:

> Proposal:  Consistent mack spending
>
> Amend Rule 5E29 (Mackerel) by appending this text:
>
>       Text to the effect of "X may destroy Y macks" refers to macks
>       owned by X, unless otherwise specified.
>
>       Text to the effect of "X may spend Y macks to do Z" or "X may
>       do Z by spending Y macks" should be interpreted as successful
>       (with "spend" as a synonym of "destroy") if and only if all of
>       the following are true:
>
>         a) X owns at least Y macks
>         b) X is not otherwise prevented from destroying Y of eir macks
>         c) X is not attempting to count the destruction of any one  
> mack
>              toward more than one Z

Please generalize this to all currencies.

> Amend Rule 5E49 (Health, Food and Weapons) by replacing this text:
>
>       Players may increase their Health by any integer amount, as long
>       as they have at least (amount / 5) macks, rounded up. Those  
> macks
>       are then destroyed. Dead players cannot increase their Health.
>
> with this text:
>
>       Any non-Dead Player may spend N macks (where N is any positive
>       integer) to increase their Health by 5*N.

Good.

> and by replacing this text:
>
>       A Player may Purchase a Weapon if they have the same or more  
> macks
>       than the Weapon's Cost, causing them to destroy the macks and
>       causing an instance of that Weapon to be created in their
>       possession.
>
> with this text:
>
>       A Player may Purchase a Weapon (i.e. an instance of that  
> Weapon is
>       created in their possession) by spending macks equal to its  
> Cost.
>
> and by replacing this text:
>
>       If the Weapon has a Usage Cost: If the Player has less macks  
> than
>       the Usage Cost of the weapon, the usage fails. Otherwise, that
>       amount of macks are destroyed in the Player's possession.
>
> with this text:
>
>       If the Weapon has a Usage Cost, the Player must spend that many
>       macks to use the Weapon.

Is that a CAN but SHALL NOT situation?...

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