Sunday, November 12, 2017

Declaration of Victory: Lab Rat Victory

The number of Tesserers not voting against is less than quorum. Failed by Derrick.

Adminned at 13 Nov 2017 15:17:31 UTC

I win, will post explanation in the comment section shortly



11-12-2017 05:04:08 UTC

Heavily inspired by this victory:

Basically, Tessered things lets me inject ruleset-level Atomic Actions into the game, because of “After X days have passed the action(s) must be performed following the rules of an Atomic Action”

Since “achieving victory” is an action as per the Tantusar win (, I do that action via the Atomic Action I have just injected via my Tessered post.

Since I have performed the action of achieving victory via that, I have won.


11-12-2017 05:04:38 UTC

(We have precedent too of Atomic Actions also giving you the ability to what they command you to. For example, giving someone points or adjusting game variables, when you normally can’t just adjust those variables whenever you want to. For example, subtracting PEDs or adding points to stats when training as in Poke’s Blogsball Dynasty:, when you normally dont have the ability to do that at all. So, when you’re stated to do an action in an Atomic Action, you both gain the ability to do it and the obligation to do it.)


11-12-2017 12:23:42 UTC

against I disagree. The Tantusar win you are referencing was executed within a ruleset that made “achieving victory” a legal action provided you had achieved it 5 times prior. It seems obvious to me that the current ruleset does not make achieving victory a legal action in the current circumstances (and the use of the terms “legal action” and “illegal action” multiple times in the Atomic Action rule clearly imply that Atomic Actions concern legal actions.


11-12-2017 12:25:05 UTC

(If this win is accepted I think kit would have the consequence of allowing one to simply say “I achieve victory” in any dynasty to win)


11-12-2017 13:19:10 UTC

The trick is that it’s “achieve victory” as an explicit Atomic Action, not just saying it.


11-12-2017 13:28:23 UTC

Currently on mobile so perhaps a fuller explanation later but short version: against ; simply being an Atomic action isn’t what implied legal do-ability in the previous examples. They also say “a manager can/may do action A” explicitly.


11-12-2017 13:35:10 UTC

Ok but that still means you could create an Atomic Action stating you achieve victory, any time, not just through a Tessered post. The Tessering does not add additional rules that makes the legality of the action any different than a normal Atomic Action. It just specifies time constraints.

I stand by my interpretation that Atomic Actions can only be used to perform legal actions (i.e. an action that the ruleset and the current gamestate allows you to perform), and even if achieving victory is considered an action, you do not legally meet the requirements to perform that action.


11-12-2017 13:35:56 UTC

(my answer was to Cuddlebeam, not Pokes who’s post I didn’t see before sending mine)


11-12-2017 13:45:25 UTC

I think I might agree that a rule saying “A Tesserer with flurm may borf, by, as an atomic action: (step 1) winning” could be invoked successfully by a Tesserer with flurm, giving them a win. But a Tesserer without flurm is out of luck, even if a rule says they must borf.


11-12-2017 18:00:38 UTC

The reason you may initially think that doing those actions are legal is that any atomic action so far has been rigidly defined in the ruleset. At it’s core they say “player may do X as an atomic actions whose steps are Y” and Y is a list of one or more actions. Up to this point, since the 19th dynasty of Kevan where the rule was introduced, atomic actions were only used in the ruleset and therefore were always legal.

Writing a Tessered post just means your writing the steps of your atomic action out; however it doesn’t automatically mean the actions are legal since the text is not in the ruleset.

Oracular rufio:

11-13-2017 01:32:36 UTC

Lol, I see nothing’s changed around here recently.


11-13-2017 11:51:18 UTC

Unfortunately, no.


11-13-2017 15:15:07 UTC


Cuddles has been good about this for a long time. This dynasty has some particularly sloppy with wording and apparently it enticed him too much!