I came to the same conclusion, but then I realized it was wrong. The rule states: “Camping may be performed by an adventurer once between any two respawns.” It doesn’t say one “must” camp, so it is not required to do after every respawn, which means one can opt not to do it altogether, allowing one to perform other actions.

With that said, we do need to define what “subsequent” means in this case. Does that mean one can’t take actions at all? Or simply can’t take actions after camping? I, personally, am in favor of the latter, but am willing to hear arguments for the former.

No vote yet.

This CfJ assumes “Or simply can’t take actions after camping?”; the problem arises in the fact that the “may not take any subsequent dynastic actions.” clause never stops being active. So according to the current rendition of that rule, once an adventurer takes a camping action they’re unable to take any dynastic actions after it. ever.

Though the text in the ruleset no longer exists, so this just legalizes all of the weirdness before now.

This might actually meet the auto-fail criteria, as it doesn’t change the game state.

The GNDT is part of the gamestate and I suppose one could make the argument that the current GNDT isn’t accurate since everyone who has camped has made illegal actions. So this CfJ would make the current GNDT the correct one if someone were to revert it back.