3 hours seems too short, but otherwise this checks out!

It matches up to the 3 hour lockout on performing two actions simultaneously (that’s in the rules already).

We could make it longer if you think that’s a better idea, but in that case, we should probably change the lockout for two simultaneous non-atomic actions to match.

Note that intentionally stalling for three hours to dodge the lockout would almost certainly be considered a Fair Play violation, so this is only likely to matter in cases of accidental breakage.

well shucks, good points!!

Even if you don’t intentionally stall, allowing atomic actions to be uncompleted doesn’t seem like the right solution to the problem. (as you have one of two scenarios: the person believes the atomic action to be complete, and now you need to update the gamestate to show it wasn’t completed at all; or someone is in the middle of an atomic action that got delayed for some reasonable reason, and the might as well do it over)

This is about not creating ongoing breakage that causes issues in the future if one somehow does end up uncompleted. Several of the Expeditions were never correctly completed, for example, because Josh did the steps out of order (something that’s specifically against the atomic actions rules), and it’s unclear what the correct fix to that is – maybe reverting and repeating the steps that were done out of order, but that would have lead to duplicate blog posts.

It makes sense to be able to just carry on from the “good enough” gamestate we get after the not-quite-properly-completed Enter the Crypt actions, without having to say “Josh doesn’t get to play BlogNomic ever again because he didn’t finish the actions properly” as a consequence.

Won’t the DoV-upholding deal with the proximate issue?

I don’t think so? Upholding actions has nothing to do with whether you’re currently in the middle of one or not. (If you’re in the middle of an action, then the completion of the action wasn’t something that lead up to the victory, because it didn’t happen at all.)

It makes the first line of the CFJ redundant, but won’t unlock your ability to actually do things.

the problem is, if you allow old atomic actions to be completed you run into issues where they could still in theory be completed.

I think it would be better to clarify that if steps of an atomic action are done incorrectly, the action was still “completed”

Doesn’t the existing “excluding any actions which have been ongoing for more than three hours” clause already cover this, given that atomic actions are actions?

It would still block victory, though.

@Kevan I don’t think so. The atomic action lowers the scope.

True.

I’m not a fan of the 3-hour timeout and have mixed feelings about whether this is necessary; I think failure to complete an atomic should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis without there being a blanket “out” which might backfire in the future.

per Josh