Okay, I genuinely don’t understand this: is there any way to send a message through the Communication action that does not violate “No Collaboration?” Even the act of selecting some players to address, and not others, seems pretty easy to interpret as a communication that is “about dynastic gameplay.”
(for the purposes of that rule).
The intent seems to launder our comms though him. It… could fall under “creative strats”, though?
Still, if we never choose to punish it, then there really is no problem even if there technically may be (if there is) a breach of Fair Play. At least I dont feel motivated to punish anyone for it.
yea, we’re fully allowed to talk about the dynasty w/ josh!!
& i don’t think it’s a “creative strategy” if it’s literally written in the rules & expected for everyone to use
(not that it matters, bc like u said cuddlebeam it’s not an automatic violation, just a possible one and we can collectively choose which side of the “may” we land on)
I think we can and should tinker with the wording a bit to manage the ambiguity but I also think that there’s enough cover that people can raise Communications without feeling too much concern.
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
Madrid:
The Ministry isn’t a Cell