Just a quick question. People may have noticed the mess I just made of the GNDT after I tried to declare a clue illegally. Was it okay for me to just revert all my actions back then? I back-tracked each step back to where I declared a clue (as most of my actions built on an illegal gamestate). I’m just wondering whether back-tracking actions is a legal way to resolve gamestate issues, or should I have just reverted my illegal (and subsequent building-on illegal) actions?
Did you give me the Can of Worms back because you already had three items when you took it? It would still have been a legal move to take it - it just would have been lost in the sea instead of being added to your possessions…
Okay. I’ve amended what I think is correct. There was some confusion because I couldn’t give away the Oil Painting after giving away the Deck of Cards today. Unfortunately, since I tried to get Kevan’s Can of Worms when I already had 3 Items, that goes overboard.
Look what happens when you think you’re acting Rationally, when you’re actually not!
BlogNomic is an online Nomic: a self-modifying game where changing the rules is part of the game. Players make blog posts proposing additions or alterations to the ruleset, discussing and casting votes in the comments: if enough vote in favour, the rules are changed and play continues.
The game has been running since 2003 and resets every month or so. Have a look around the wiki for more information and history. New players are always welcome and can join in the game at any time.
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
Kevan: he/him
You should have reverted your illegal actions but not the legal ones.
If you declare that you’re taking the actions of “find a clue on the Cards”, “understand the Cards clue” and then “give the Cards to Doctor29”, the first two actions were illegal (you couldn’t have found the clue, and there was no clue to understand) and should be reverted, but you were still able to give the cards to Doctor29, even if you wish you hadn’t.