Timed out. 3 FOR votes, 4 AGAINST (2 + 2 def votes and editor voted against). So fails. -Clucky
Adminned at 01 Jul 2016 17:56:08 UTC
After the bulleted list in the Rule “Apocrypha”, add the following (unbulleted) paragraph:
The Editor shall only use the first method if all Maps whose date have arrived or passed have been used. If a Map specifies a Rule that would not be possible or permitted for the Editor to add, it is considered used.
it is not in the spirit of fair play to me for the emperor to refuse to use people’s maps
You do still have a veto, in any case; you can simply not add anything.
You can’t veto the result of the roll, so it’s weird to me to oppose a functionally pre-rolled thing, just because you know someone else wants it.
If there’s a Map currently exploiting the rules of Apocrypha (I know my one doesn’t), then Propose a patch, before a randomly rolled rule opens up a similar exploit or something.
If there’s a Map that simply makes a mess of our rules and/or GNDT, well, you’ve let a roll do that before. It seemed to be part of the game?
Just my two cents.
So, if there is a single map that is disliked, he will just never used maps again?
No, it would only prevent randomly rolled rules from being used if there was a Map pending that was disliked.
If a second Map was drawn, that he would use, it could be.
I just think Maps should be used, over more random rules. We have enough random rules already. I’m sure ‘HHGTTG’ wasn’t anyone’s Map, there have to be two or three left pending.
I don’t get this.
I try to work a Rule we already have into playable shape, and it’s voted down for introducing one new stat, because there were enough GNDT stats already.
But we should keep adding entirely random ones?
BlogNomic is powered by pMachine ExpressionEngine.
I don’t think it should be forced
Brendan: he/him