Saturday, March 18, 2017

Proposal: I’ll Take The #5 Combo

Self-killed. — Quirck

Adminned at 20 Mar 2017 07:11:20 UTC

If a quorum of the valid For votes have the text “themed” then change the text “may optionally specify that the terms Organ and Statolith” to

may optionally specify that the terms Combo (if it exists), Organ and Statolith

Under “Keywords” add the following definition before the “Can” definition, formatted like the others

Action: An act that a player does which changes the gamestate. Players updating the gamestate or representations of the gamestate to reflect automatic changes are not taking actions.

Add a rule titled “Combo”
Under it add the following text

Anytime an organ wants to do 4 or more non-atomic Dynastic actions within an hour, they may choose in leui of doing all of those actions separately to make a “Combo” blog post (which can’t be edited after posting) numbering and detailing the order of their actions and any changes to the gamestate and initial value of anything changed in the gamestate in those steps. Any steps that result in a random outcome must be before making the Combo with a note referring to which step in the Combo it is for. Random actions for this purpose can only be taken once per step of the combo and they do not count as being taken until said Combo is posted to the blog. They may then adjust the gamestate and anything that represents the gamestate to reflect the final results. If any action in the blog post is in error or results in an invalid gamestate, they must do the actions in reverse order and value. For the purposes of this rule, making a Combo does not count as an action. As an example, if the author of a Combo were to accidentally make an illegal action of transferring one Organ’s resource to themselves, doing the opposite would be to transfer that same resource to the Organ they got it from.

If a player for whom this is mandatory accidentally does four actions separatly within one hour starting from the first action without making a Combo, they must make a Combo within 30 minutes of the last action, detailing what they did. If they do not then those actions are reversed and never happened.

I’m not sure if the definition of actions are necessary but Kevan said something about it in my other proposal. It is not mandatory for any player but I added what would happen if it were, in case someone tried to make it mandatory for any number of people.
Also note that my comment does inherently contain the text themed.

posted by card at 18 Mar 2017 16:57:00 UTC Comments (11)

Comments

derrick: he/him

18-03-2017 17:49:47 UTC

Any reason you want to make it mandatory?

card:

18-03-2017 18:00:00 UTC

It’s not though, “they may choose in leui of doing all of those”

card:

18-03-2017 18:03:03 UTC

The last part just details what happens if it is mandatory, but doesn’t make it mandatory for anyone.

Oracular rufio:

18-03-2017 19:47:00 UTC

It’s “in lieu”.

The specification for random actions happening out of order seems awkward and potentially confusing, especially if it is mandatory for some people.  I will think on it.

card:

18-03-2017 20:17:31 UTC

“In lieu of” is a synonym for “instead of” or “in place of” so if you replaced it with one of those it would read “they may choose instead of doing all of those action separately”, which doesn’t make it mandatory in the slightest.

I just thought it might be confusing to see someone do a bunch of random actions in a row in GNDT, especially if it looks like those were illegal actions, unless they made the blogpost first. Also if it were mandatory for someone, someone else might see them doing a bunch of actions in an hour and try to undo those said actions.

Oracular rufio:

18-03-2017 20:40:52 UTC

No, I understand, there is just the possibility to make it mandatory if there are problems, which might be warranted.  I’m just saying that if it is mandatory, it could get very confusing.  I am thinking that maybe the post should happen afterwards, after all of the random rolls have been taken, and then there is no having to revise the blog post and roll back actions.  Or maybe the random rolls can be taken before hand, with a note on the GNDT that they refer to a specific step in a specific combo, but that requires some syncing between the blog and the GNDT.

card:

18-03-2017 21:02:18 UTC

Those sound like better ideas, I’ll change it now.

Oracular rufio:

18-03-2017 21:40:44 UTC

I thought of something else, which is that we should probably state that the action counts as being taken at the time of the blog post, in case the ruleset has changed and made actions illegal in the meantime.

Madrid:

18-03-2017 22:49:54 UTC

Overall, good. Just some suggestions to tighten it up a bit though:

Add that “the text “may optionally specify that the terms Organ and Statolith” to” refers to the ruleset because then it could mean that very text in the proposal itself.

Aaaaand here we go with imperatives lol:
“If any action in the blog post is in error or results in an invalid gamestate, they must do the actions in reverse order and value.” This is a command, and doesn’t grant the ability to actually do the actions in reverse order and value. If the ruleset doesn’t grant them the ability to do that, they effectively now have an impossible task. But without any consequence. So they can ignore it entirely. And even if it had a consequence, they could have the problem of not having the power to actually amend it, because they don’t have the faculty to do the “actions in reverse order and value”, just the command to.

Also, as for reversions overall, they’re a bit unnecessary imo, or not properly defined - The core of it is good, its just the reversion thing and acknowledgement of illegal actions that I’m wary about. If an action was illegal, it never actually changed the gamestate. If illegal actions can actually make legal changes that ACTUALLY HAPPENED to the gamestate, then I could submit an illegal proposal, illegally Admin and enact it, and that proposal would have a removal of all Fair Play rules and changes to the entire ruleset to have me as almighty dictator. So once the illegal changes have been made (which have been acknowledged to be actual, real changes despite the illegality), there is no chance to have them reverted anyways.

So, it’s just better to consider that illegal actions just never actually happened, imo, and instead just informal messages/gibberish that happen to be on the same locations as where representations of legal thing could be.

card:

19-03-2017 02:17:12 UTC

Well it looks like another revision is in order so against
[Oracular rufio] That’s a good idea. The only issue I can see there is if there is a rule for when two actions cannot be done at the same time, which could be gotten around by making multiple Combos.

[Cuddlebeam] Hmm, I was trying to make it so that if an error wasn’t noticed and play continued, that play could continue without resetting the gamestate to before said combo. It’s probably better to let each instance of that be handled by a CfJ.

Madrid:

19-03-2017 03:21:43 UTC

@Card: I agree. Consensus reality is really a fascinating thing lol. Like, bizarre af, especially in regards to the marriage of psyche and awareness (i.e. those unnoticed errors) and formal mechanics.