BlogNomic: The First Dynasty of Desertfrog

No that I can tell, I believe that it should have been implemented, which would complicate your enacting of Yoink!

I don’t think it changes anything, does it? If Axemabaro didn’t perform all the steps of the atomic action then we’re just waiting for them to do that, and the remaining steps seem unaffected by the Yoink changes.

Although ironically now that “No No Limits” has enacted, it means that Axemabaro won’t get any payout from Ditzy.

On the subject of Yoink, is there a reason why Power and Defence were initialised at 0, when the rule sets defaults of 1 and 2 respectively?

[Kevan] My understanding was that enacting a rule qualified as an action, therefore preventing it from occurring as long as other actions were underway.

[Josh] I don’t think that defaults are necessarily the same as starting values.

Thinking more about it, if you’ve found an optimal Wager, making the Spin take a long time would be a good scam to prevent the change of wagers between spins.

[Josh] Unintentional, I missed that clause. Haven’t got time to check the ruleset right now but feel free to correct.

Ah, okay, looking at it now, I see the gap you’re looking at.

We’ve certainly said “X is a number defaulting to Y” a lot in the past, usually zero, and I think the precedent is that “default” and “starting” are plain English synonyms. (Picking up a random dictionary, I get “the thing that exists or happens if you do not change it intentionally by performing an action”: if an undefined thing starts existing, it comes into being with default properties.)

I think the ruleset implies as much by saying “that starting value is the nearest legal value to zero that it may take (for numerical variables, defaulting to positive if tied)”.

It’s worth having your proposal to clarify, but I think weight of precendent and the unlikeliness of any counterobjections from players who anticipated zeroes means we should update the gamestate to 1s and 2s. I’ll do that now.

Well, as I said on Slack, betting on Ditzy is quite useless.

Marco also pointed out on Slack that the Ditzy payout is equal to the Wager cost (which I hadn’t noticed was also missing), so this was all fine and the atomic was completed. Carry on.

Right. Ditzy’s global effect basically means “no one spends their wager” in a roundabout manner