It’s a rather expansive definition… It would ban terms like “Past Memory” because Rule 1.2.1 (“Idle Amnesiacs”) makes reference to “an entry or comment from the past four days”.

And even if, for simplicity’s sake, we’re fine with limiting ourselves to all words not already included in the Ruleset, it might still be useful to somehow exclude the dynastic rules, which are about to be deleted anyway, and which might include all sorts of extra text and names that further constrain the new emperor’s options.

I think it’s worth erring on the side of caution for multi-word terms: if we think changing player to “Rule” could be a problem, we shouldn’t allow changing it to “Living Rule” either (even though the phrase “Living Rule” doesn’t appear in the ruleset).

Excluding dynastic rules would certainly be useful if we wanted to carry a narrative concept forward from one dynasty to another, though, good call.

Wait. Wouldn’t this also ban a term like “Ruler” because it contains “Rule”?

Or “Past Memory” because of the “a”?

I don’t think so: the rule here says “includes” rather than “contains”, and given that a term can be several words, this seems implicit enough that we’re talking in terms of words rather than letters. But we can patch this if we’re patching it to allow dynastic terms.