This would make keywords in the dynastic ruleset a thing.

“Cuddlebeam’s Reef” for example would be a keyword, because its a group of words whose definition is given in the rules (it’s the name for a cell with certain characteristics, such as being a reef, etc etc).

I would add that keywords are only keywords if explicitly stated that they’re such to avoid potential weird shit.

It’s a bit of a paranoid proposal but oh well. I’d vote FOR for it.

Cuddlebeam’s reef is part of the gamestate, it’s not defined in the ruleset.

But I don’t see a need for this. 

[Cuddlebeam] keywords are not currently prevented from being in the dynastic rules.

[Card] I know. But it would make every instance of “a word or group of words whose definition is given in the rules” into a keyword.

[Cuddlebeam] The definition of a keyword is not defined in the rules, however the “Keywords” section in the Appendix has this to say about keywords

A keyword defined by a rule supersedes the normal English usage of the word.

So I’ll presume that if a word’s definition here supersedes the regular definition of English language, then it’s a keyword. In the dynastic rules there are plenty of terms that do just that.

For example, currently a cell (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/cell?s=t) neither means a small room for detainment or the microscopic parts of organisms, but is instead a representation of a location in The Habitat. The Habitat is another example of a keyword, along with crosswise, 8-adjacent and Hunger. Hunger by default means the mood Hunger listed under the Moods section of the rules. Any other definition would have to be specified.

As long as that premise holds I see there really isn’t a reason for this proposal, s/k. 

That’s actually a curious point but it depends on interpretation I believe. I’ll make a CfJ for that though, because I want to know for sure.