Thursday, March 06, 2025

Proposal: [Appendix] Let Names Be Names

In the subrule “Names” of the Appendix rule “Clarifications”, add a new list item after the first list item:

Within the Ruleset, a word or phrase cannot refer to the name of a gamestate entity unless the Rules explicitly define what name that gamestate entity has.

To prevent, e.g., a team named “Winning” from being considered the Winning Team – it’s unclear from the current core rules whether or not this sort of thing works, but it would probably be better for the future if it clearly didn’t work.

Comments

JonathanDark: he/him

06-03-2025 05:08:39 UTC

As discussed in the CfJ, I don’t think we should actually try to fix this. Although the wording is decent, I think it will introduce more problems than it will fix, and we don’t actually want the protection (well, I don’t, anyway…)

ais523:

06-03-2025 05:13:54 UTC

I’m not sure whether I want it either (but was working on this before I saw the arguments against). I will likely withdraw if it appears to be a close vote (but won’t withdraw if other players are broadly in favour).

I am happy with having come up with a wording that works, though – that was a fun problem to work on even if the change turns out to be unwanted.

Josh: he/they

06-03-2025 07:03:10 UTC

against

SingularByte: he/him

06-03-2025 08:02:54 UTC

Just popping in to comment since this is an appendix change: isn’t this rule paradoxical? When it says it can’t refer to the name of a gamestate entity, that is itself referring to the name of a gamestate entity. It’s just fairly indirect about it.

You must be registered and logged in to post comments.