Proposal: Reproposed.
Failed 13-2. Quorum against, and arguably s/ked.—alethiophile
Adminned at 17 Dec 2009 02:44:17 UTC
Create a new rule, “Insanity and Calmes”:
Each adventurer has a statistic called their Sanity, Sanity Level, Insanity, or Insanity Level. Its legal values are all integers between and including 0 and 100. If at any time an adventurer’s sanity would be set to a negative value, it is changed to 0. If at any time an adventurer’s sanity would be changed to above 100, it is set to 100. Each adventurer’s sanity is initially 50.
Up to three times per week, but not more frequently than once every 18 hours, adventurers may increase their sanity by 10.
If an adventurer’s sanity becomes zero, they suffer a mental breakdown, and – rules to the contrary notwithstanding- may not take any game actions for a period of 36 hours. Their sanity may not be modified until this time has elapsed, at which time it increases by 20.
If an adventurer suffers a level x shock, the integer that is x is subtracted from their sanity. If an adventurer has a boost of x, the integer that is x is added to their sanity.
Create a subrule to the above rule, and call it Shocks and Boosts.
*If an adventurer causes the Djinni to be outside the lamp, they suffer a level 20 shock.
*If an adventurer causes the Djinni to be inside the lamp, they have a boost of 15.
*If the Djinni grants an adventurer’s wish, that adventurer suffers a level 10 shock.
*If an adventurer gains power, they suffer a level 3 shock for each power they gain.
If possession is defined by the rules, add the following bullet to the above subrule:
*If the Djinni possesses an adventurer, then that adventurer suffers a level 75 shock.
Fixed

Comments
Ienpw III:
I’d call it a typo.
Wakukee:
I wouldn’t. It’s a distinct error in the proposal.
Klisz:
Ienpw III:
Well that’s just dandy, ain’t it?
Klisz:
I wonder if Wak can legally CoV…
Wakukee:
How is that a s/k? Its not binding.
Ienpw III:
I don’t think DEFs are S/Ks
Darknight:
digibomber:
Bucky:
Kevan:
Scaramouche:
Josh:
SingularByte:
Ornithopter:
Oze:
ais523:
Klisz:
It’s self-killed already…
ais523:
Yes, I’m warning in case someone tries to repropose.
Klisz:
I wasn’t talking to you, ais523, I was talking to all those people who only included an against icon without stating their concerns.
Hix:
NoOneImportant:
ais523, are you sure that’s true? I think the proposal explicitly overrules the generic “illegal value = illegal action” rule by stating that anything that would cause it to go under 0 or over 100 just pegs it to the appropriate end point.
Ornithopter:
Darth: It isn’t s/ked; you voted DEF.
ais: What NOI said.
alethiophile:
I think it counts as s/k if the DEF counts as against, but I’m not sure. Also,