Friday, January 29, 2010

Proposal: I’m back

Enacted 11-1 by Thrawn

Adminned at 31 Jan 2010 00:58:13 UTC

If the Rule “Turning Up” exists, this Proposal does nothing.
Add to the end of

# If a Guest is Missing, his location becomes “?”. Two Missing guests are not considered to be in the same room.

in the rule “Life and Death”

A Missing guest has an Actual State, tracked privately by the Executor. Their Actual State may be Healthy, Stunned, Wounded, Poisoned, Restrained, Terrified, Asleep, or Dead.

Add a new rule, “Turning Up”:

As a weekly action, if the lights are on a Missing guest may roll D3 in the GNDT. If they roll a 1, they may send a PM to the Executor asking to change their Status to their Actual State. The new location of the guest is set by the Executor.

Comments

Ornithopter:

29-01-2010 06:47:05 UTC

for
This has potential. I keep running out of proposal slots this dynasty…

redtara: they/them

29-01-2010 11:44:20 UTC

against Too hard to show up. Only a 1 in 3 chance.

ais523:

29-01-2010 12:04:18 UTC

for Actual State needs to be initialised, somehow. Chances of turning up are probably about right, though.

Kevan: he/him

29-01-2010 12:13:11 UTC

for

ais523:

29-01-2010 12:25:39 UTC

Also, I love the URL of this proposal.

Thrawn:

29-01-2010 12:54:02 UTC

I intend Actual State to be set by whatever rule causes the guest to go missing. So if the Murderer can kidnap guests it sets their Actual State to restrained, for example. In most cases it would probably be whatever their status was before going missing.

Klisz:

29-01-2010 14:48:45 UTC

imperial

Uvthenfuv:

29-01-2010 15:58:08 UTC

for

Oze:

29-01-2010 17:24:09 UTC

for

TrumanCapote:

29-01-2010 18:08:50 UTC

for

Darknight: he/him

30-01-2010 01:04:35 UTC

imperial

Put:

30-01-2010 16:20:48 UTC

imperial

NonnoNaz:

30-01-2010 18:13:37 UTC

I like the idea, and seems to me there’s no particular contraindications against it. So my vote is simple,  for