other approach we could take is that if you do multiple updates at once you have to specify which order you’re performing the actions in. that would deal with any issues where suddenly now there are gameplay implications to if you do your updates one by one or if you do them at once; but that runs the risk of people forgetting and invalidating their whole action

Only other approach I can think of is to allow any player to choose the order if unspecified, calling it and reverting any steps that would be impossible. But being able to pick the worst possible outcome for even a minor error is probably too harsh.

Invalidating the whole update sounds good.

It has an ambiguous cheating application, but I’m not sure that we can massively prevent that

[Josh] What’s the problem?

I know it would be technically illegal, but I am bothered by the potential thought process of:

* I have to do a risky action that involves a dice roll
* I can do the dice roll and if the result isn’t one that I like I can bundle it up with an accidentally-too-expensive set of other actions in a wiki edit to invalidate the dice roll

Hmm, that would only invalidate the alteration, rather than the die roll: Fair Play’s “should not roll dice that are clearly associated with a particular action in the Ruleset, but with the intention to not use these rolled values to the best of their ability to resolve that action” should still catch it.

There may be some murkiness if the die roll requires a payment up front: “I pay 1 coin to roll a die, I roll D20 and get a critical failure, I lose 10HP and buy this sceptre I can’t afford” all in one wiki edit, with the illegal purchase invalidating the coin payment which invalidates the die roll. But does that even work all as one wiki edit, or would I not be allowed to actually roll the die until I’d paid the coin?

Even if we can’t model out the precise scenario, I think the principle of bundling-to-manufacture-illegality is of some concern to me.

I was going to say that falls under core rules scams, except apparently that rule only applies to victories!

, anyway.

Doesn’t the new core rule undo most of the Enter the Crypt actions? Josh tends to do one large wiki update for those, and many of them have made mistakes, so the rule is effectively reverting the whole thing.

Yeah, that’s a good point, and makes me inclined to veto

(its a CfJ, you can’t veto)

Enter the Crypt actions are already singular atomic actions. So if the action is illegally performed, it gets undone.

The dice roll thing is an interesting point. I think it would be clear to me from the dice roll the action was already performed. But I guess then you gotta wonder was it an “alteration performed in the update” or an “alteration performed when you rolled the dice”

still might be safer to and revisit this and if anyone tries to complain that Chiiika’s revert actions were illegal we just bop them on the head with a NO

Oh yeah duh

I think it’s important, though, that this clause can transform mistakes into illegal actions quite easily, without there being space for the mistakes-are-made clauses to kick in.

Fair points.

CoV