I am still a target of the action even if I’m specifically named.

The rule set should probably be changed to allow people to continue to do that action (or make the despot the target instead of the director) in order to be fair, but I think technically the action can’t currently be performed because I’m the target.

also: wouldn’t this technically allow Larry to perform another flunky action?

for the interpretation,  because it’ll give Larry another flunky action.  Fail this, then go do it again is what I’d say.

I honestly meant to include a “Larrytheturtle is considered to have preformed a flunky action for the week”. I will just not do another but I suppose it is better to have in writing… I guess I will make a new one if this fails. CFJs can’t be self killed so I can’t kill it myself.

Per extra actions; I agree with your interpretation of target, though. The Director losing 10 power just kinda happens “and the Director loses 10 Power” instead of, say, “and [the user] reduces the Director’s power by 10”, which actually still doesn’t feel like targeting to me.

If Larry takes a second Flunky action we can just make a proposal to undo it, and fine him some Power for his impertinence.

Per extra actions; I agree with your interpretation of target, though. The Director losing 10 power just kinda happens “and the Director loses 10 Power” instead of, say, “and [the user] reduces the Director’s power by 10”, which actually still doesn’t feel like targeting to me.

Good point, Kevan. And sorry for my chronic multi-posting; school computers are terrible.

I’m with Clucky here. He is protected from Flunky Actions that target him, and the Corruption Action specifically points to (targets) the Director. Whether or not it makes sense from a gameplay angle is of secondary importance.

  per Purplebeard

I don’t agree but my case is already laid out so I don’t really have anything to add though, I don’t see how you can hold that position while not one of you said anything when RaichuKFM did the oil well action and gave 5 power to people at home. That targets people no more or less than what I did.

CoV with Kevan.

Yeah, if Corruption actions are illegal when the Director is Home, then the Drilling action was carried out wrong. Now’s a bit late to speak up against it, really.

eh, just because we missed that doesn’t mean we should keep playing wrong.

Also currently this CfJ can’t legally be resolved =)

We only need one more for vote or simply to await time. It isn’t like it never will be. Also the point isn’t that we were playing wrong, it is that we believe the Ruleset should be interpreted as stated in this.

my was point is that just because Riachu did an action where he targeted players at home and it wasn’t caught, it doesn’t mean we have to assume you actually are able to target players at home. Its not very relevant to the actual question of whether or not I was targeted.

and as far as my other point goes, power cannot be negative and thus any action that would set it below zero is illegal, and that includes passing the CfJ if it has enough for votes. =D

I won’t be able to be failed either…. I guess it will sit here till you have over 10 power…

I definitely agree that the corruption action isn’t “targeting” as the action isn’t directed at Clucky. Think of MTG or Hearthstone for instance - there are cards that cannot be the specific target of a spell, but can still get hit by an area of attack spell that is targeted at a creature next to it. Similarly here - Clucky is just an unfortunate casualty rather than the target.

kikar: the rules of MtG provide a detailed explanation of what ‘target’ means in the context of that game. Our ruleset doesn’t. (I’m not familiar with Hearthstone, so can’t comment on that)

Suppose another Action reads “The Oligarch named turtlemoon gains 10 Power”. Would you say that turtlemoon is the target of this Action?

The MtG adjectival use of “target” is a little ideosyncratic, but not a huge leap from the dictionary’s noun definition of “a person, object, or place selected as the aim of an attack”, which implies an active decision - if an action automatically affected every Loyal Oligarch, the General plus an Oligarch of my choice, I’d interpret that as only the final person being “targetted”.