Am I missing an angle, or was Trigon choosing to represent Bananasoft on the 29th illegal? This company was already being represented by Zaphod, and a newly acquired Client “must not be a non-State Client who is already represented by any other Attorney”.
It might be worth having a CoJ about it, but probably not, seeing that pokes’ Proposal amending the Appendix has passed.
I think those are legal (as is my representation of Morgan); an Attorney can take on an idle Attorney’s client because “For the purposes of all Gamestate and the Ruleset, [...] Idle Attorneys are not counted as Attorneys.” - the “already represented by any other Attorney” check returns a “no”, as those people aren’t Attorneys.
I agree with the original call out, but indeed I hold that my action was legal (I did an illegal one before that and pokes pointed it out for me).
I just realized this thread exists and would like to publicly apologize to anyone who reads this. Somehow during my many readings of the rule text I missed the “not”. I thought it was strange that there was no “not”, but I was just following the rules as I thought they were written.
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.
naught:
It is illegal. You may notice that Trigon has also chosen to represent Benjamin and edelopo X Express, both also illegal actions.