Thursday, August 20, 2020

Proposal: Auto-lookup

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 1 vote to 5 by Kevan.

Adminned at 22 Aug 2020 12:08:55 UTC

Create a new rule titled “Automation”, with the following text:

When creating a new Location and its associated Distinct Discovery, a Pathfinder may use the generator located at https://repl.it/@blognomicaname/BlogNomic-Location-generator#main.py to make random choices instead of rolling for each separately. This is done by rolling DICE54321, pressing “Run” on the generator page and inputting the result of the roll. The values printed by the generator must then be used instead of making separate rolls.

The generator may not be used if it is Out-Of-Date. If the rules governing the process of creating Locations are changed, the generator becomes Out-Of-Date. The Computer may make the generator no longer Out-Of-Date at any time.

The generator is not Out-Of-Date.

The Location-generating process is a bit tedious right now (six random rolls) but can be easily automated and turned into a single dice roll. I’m not sure if this is a good idea, but it was suggested on the chat and might be useful.

Comments

Josh: Observer he/they

20-08-2020 22:31:06 UTC

There’s an immediate issue, which is that upon clicking the link the user can edit the code, presumably thus fulfilling the stipulation to ‘use the generator located at’ the link but stil ensuring that they get the result that they want.

Unless there’s a way of making the backend visible and auditable but locked down, this is going to be a hard no from me.

Josh: Observer he/they

20-08-2020 22:33:42 UTC

I also don’t think that, as it currently stands, the tool respects the different naming conventions for Animal, Mineral and Vegetable Discoveries.

Aname:

20-08-2020 22:51:44 UTC

Hm, version history is only visible to the author. I was hoping that others can see it as well, which solves the backend visibility issue, but it looks like this won’t work unless someone knows of a platform that works.

Re naming conventions: my bad, apparently I can’t read. I’ll patch it soon if someone has an idea for the first issue, but if that’s not solved the proposal won’t work anyway.

Raven1207: he/they

20-08-2020 23:51:40 UTC

against

Kevan: he/him

21-08-2020 07:49:26 UTC

[Aname] I think Josh’s concern is that someone visiting the URL and editing the code in the browser without saving it would still be validly “using the generator”.

We used jsfiddle.net the last couple of times we wanted to automate processes - I think they let us link directly to particular revisions, so that the developer updating them would have to matched by the ruleset updating the revision link to show player approval.

Josh: Observer he/they

21-08-2020 08:55:30 UTC

against

Kevan: he/him

21-08-2020 09:39:23 UTC

against Good idea, though.

derrick: he/him

21-08-2020 10:24:23 UTC

against not ready yet

Riggdan: he/him

21-08-2020 11:05:14 UTC

imperial Sure if it can be perfected