Sunday, January 26, 2020

Proposal: [Special Case] Interpretative… Words

Fewer than a quorum not voting against. Failed 1-5 by Kevan.

Adminned at 26 Jan 2020 21:05:00 UTC

Add and activate a Special Case, “Interpretative Notes”:

Any instance of italicised text in brackets within the Ruleset (such as this) is an Interpretative Note.

An Interpretative Note has precedence over any Rules it would have precedence over if it was not an Interpretative Note. The remainder of the Ruleset has precedence over that Interpretative Note.

(A Dynastic Rule that contradicts an Interpretative Note in the Dynastic Rules has precedence over that Interpretative Note. A Core Rule that contradicts that Interpretative Note does not, unless it explicitly says it cannot be overruled by a Dynastic Rule. See [[#Prioritisation|Prioritisation]].)

Comments

Madrid:

26-01-2020 16:40:54 UTC

I think it would be better to bundle this into Prioritization to make it less confusing.  against

Kevan: he/him

26-01-2020 17:44:16 UTC

If the intention is that these are casual clarifications which - reader beware - may not be entirely accurate, wouldn’t it be safer to make them flavour text? Although they defer in cases of contradiction, there may be situations where an Interpretative Note includes an aside (perhaps in giving an example) which can stand alone as an uncontradicted statement about the gamestate or rules.

against

Josh: Observer he/they

26-01-2020 17:51:12 UTC

imperial

card:

26-01-2020 20:50:25 UTC

against i’m confused, especially by having an interpretive   note within its own defining rule

Darknight: he/him

26-01-2020 21:03:57 UTC

against