Thursday, November 14, 2019

Proposal: Battling chaos

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 15 Nov 2019 11:17:57 UTC

Restructure the rule “Battles” as follows:

Create a sub-rule entitled “Battle Actions” and move into this sub-rule the paragraphs beginning “During a Battle…”, “If the most recent X Battle Actions…”, “Adventurers may not take Human Battle Actions…”, “The following are Human Battle Actions:-”, “If the Monster is not Recovering…” and “Adventurers should not use tags…”, with their respective associated lists where applicable.

Create a sub-rule entitled “Weariness” and move into this sub-rule the paragraphs beginning “If the Vanguard became the Vanguard…” (with its associated list) and “The previous Vanguard remains Weary…”.

Create a sub-rule entitled “Revival” and move into this sub-rule the paragraph beginning “If an Adventurer’s HP goes from 0…”

In the main rule “Battles”, three paragraphs thus remain, to be placed before the three aforementioned new sub-rules: they are the paragraphs beginning “Battles may occur…”, “If a Monster exists and no Battle is occurring…” and “If there is no Monster…”.

Some housekeeping…



11-14-2019 15:18:19 UTC

I feel like this is good, if a little risky, too. But I’ve checked it over carefully enough to be fine with it, from a gameplay perspective. I trust the enacting admin won’t mix things around while moving them.

Upcoming FOUR.

The Duke of Waltham: HE/HIM

11-14-2019 15:45:07 UTC

If the enacting admin errs, I’ll be sure to correct such an error.

I deliberately didn’t just paste the new version here because a) it could be affected by open proposals and b) you’d have to check if I’ve made any tiny changes to the text; in this case all you have to worry about is whether I’ve missed any paragraph (I haven’t)* and whether I’ve split any paragraphs in a manner that affects their function (I haven’t, but almost all of them are autonomous to the extent that this danger didn’t even occur to me until this comment). Well, that and the substance of my restructuring, which in my admittedly biased opinion is a great improvement.

*And even that wouldn’t be a concern had I not included the final “verification” part in the proposal: these three paragraphs that remain in the main rule would remain anyway, and they’d even be in the same order, so any accidental leftovers would end up there as well. As it is, any internal conflict I’ve missed in this proposal will likely just prevent it from taking effect.


11-14-2019 16:19:37 UTC

Internal inconsistencies in a proposal has not prevented valid parts of it from enacting in the past. If your goal is to checksum, you can always put a clause in saying that if ... is not true, undo all changes made in this proposal.

But you’re right, I can’t see how you’d have made substantive changes, other than (possibly) accidentally separating lists from their paragraphs. Hence the admin trust.

The Duke of Waltham: HE/HIM

11-14-2019 16:38:21 UTC

Good point; I’ll keep it in mind.


11-14-2019 17:11:11 UTC

for since I trust the admins to enact voteable matters to the best of their ability


11-14-2019 17:15:22 UTC

additionally, The Duke of Waltham, the media wiki software prevents text to be added after a subrule that is in its parent rule but not in another subrule. in case you had plans for doing that in a future proposal


11-14-2019 17:33:36 UTC



11-14-2019 17:33:57 UTC

imperial woops lmao

The Duke of Waltham: HE/HIM

11-14-2019 17:39:21 UTC

That’s a good point, and this wouldn’t be good practice even without the technical impediment, because then you couldn’t tell where the text belonged.

(I’m actually very familiar with the software, and I still edit Wikipedia on occasion, but I appreciate the heads-up.)


11-14-2019 19:12:25 UTC


The Duke of Waltham: HE/HIM

11-14-2019 19:20:34 UTC

Darn it, putting the Monster Actions before the Human Actions would read so much better. I’m tempted to switch them around, confident that nobody will actually notice…

Bah, next time. There are other minor improvements one could slip into a future proposal as well.