Call for Judgment: Dijini are supposed to grant valid wishes
AQed, fails 2-13. Ienpw.
Adminned at 12 Jan 2010 21:18:48 UTC
This is the second time that the current Dijin has not granted a valid wish for me. The rules state that I can use a CFJ to make the Dijin grant my wish, and so I choose to do so.
My wish was:
I wish that you would create a new relic with the property text of “If this relic is owned by any adventurer, tecslicer has achieved victory.â€
The dijin replied that it was not granted “only because I want to let everyone have a fair chance” Which feels like a parent giving everybody else 10 points because one player made a good move, and this is upsetting all the other children. Everyone DOES have a fair chance to wish for this very thing, to not get the relic, to prevent me and anybody else from getting the relic, to do any number of things to make this not give me the win, but to not allow it on this basis is unsporting for me, and anybody else that takes the time to think up clever wishes.
Therefore if this CFJ passes force the Djinni to create a new relic with the property text of “If this relic is owned by any adventurer, tecslicer has achieved victory.â€
Comments
Klisz:
Klisz:
It specifically says later in the rule “There are some wishes he will not grant.”
Klisz:
Also, there is no Dijin or Dijini. It’s Djinn and Djinni - double N, no I between the D and J.
spikebrennan:
not convinced that he’s required to accept a victory condition
redtara: they/them
Idle FOR - not just because I want the dynasty to end. I think it’s a clever loophole.
Darknight: he/him
Apathetic Lizardman:
Josh: he/they
digibomber:
ais523:
Kevan: he/him
NoOneImportant:
Although I also feel cheated by the Djinn… he took his time granting me the lamp and I’ve had one wish denied because he didn’t feel like updating the GNDT and another one has suffered a “pocket veto”. I don’t like being in limbo. :(
Qwazukee:
If tec writes it more subtly, as Kevan says, than it will be more likely to work out.
NoOneImportant:
This wouldn’t result in tecslicer winning anyway. Rule 3.2.5
Wakukee:
Personally, I think that this is covered under “Wishes that a player achieve victory.” I specifically did not say “wishes that cause a player to achieve victory” since, theoretically, any legal wish could do that in some way. I never forsaw a rule that would allow legal manipulation of the ruleset, so I did not specifically disallow this wish, but the Djinn does have some disgressionary freedom in granting/not granting wishes.
Though it sounds like it might be time for a “new” Djinn granting wishes? Do people think I should unidle?
Wakukee:
(*idle
)
Darknight: he/him
Bare with me Wak. I got a back log of wishes during the night lol.
Aquafraternally Yours:
tecslicer:
MY interp of the rule stating “The Djinn is supposed to, to the best of his ability, grant all wishes legally requested of him by an Adventurer” is that the Djinn is supposed to grant valid wishes, but that those wishes that are not legal are the “Some” that he will not grant.
@Kevan: Yeah, subtlety. But I was not going for a subtle win, rather, a sound win. but yeah if the djinn does not have to grant legal wishes I need to reevaluate, and sneak one by him.
But NOI is right (Forgot about that rule, thanks There) the relic still would not grant me the win unless is states “The adventurer named tecslicer achieves victory. so.
yabbaguy:
Bucky:
“Wishes for things the Djinn is not willing to do, such as idle himself, will obviously not be fulfilled.”
.