Yep, got to track the armour somewhere! Oh, and please don’t make another rule named Fleets, as we already have one of those.

well i’m afraid it’s past the 2 hour limit. i forgot to check the name against the ruleset. at least nothing mechanically breaks when there’s two rules with the same name, it’s easy enough to change it in a later proposal.

[card] Per your comments on Removing Limitations, is that last clause actually enough to get around the lack of ship sentience? We have “a Battleship can move up to 3 squares” in the ruleset, but the Battleship won’t ever take that action by itself (and the Captain won’t be able to take it “instead” until the Battleship takes it).

[Kevan] I would’ve thought it would be enough. If a sentence says “a battleship can move…” and then this proposal enacts, it would be tantamount to “a battleship can be moved…”
That aside, the rest of the proposal is definitely better phrased than the original. 

I’m not sure. We’re saying that Battleships can move if they want to, and that when they take that action the Captain steps in and takes it instead. I don’t know if we can say that the Captain also gets to choose when and whether the action actually happens.

[Kevan] I think it might work because the sentence says “if a Vessel is said to take an action” and not “if a Vessel would take an action”. I’m fairly certain that the first sentence doesn’t care about Vessels choosing to take actions while the second one does.

Wouldn’t a proposal giving fleets say “They control the ship” or something like that? “Control” seems pretty clearly to give agency to the player.

I agree with Thunder. Don’t see much need for the “clarification.”