Friday, December 06, 2019

Proposal: Transformation undergoing Transformation

Timed out 1 vote to 2, with 1 unresolved DEF. Failed by Kevan.

Adminned at 08 Dec 2019 18:15:25 UTC

In the rule 2.5 (“Transformation”), create a new subrule entitled “Monstrosities”. Move into this subrule the entirety of “Transformation” except for the first, second and last paragraph thereof.

In the last paragraph of “Transformation”, replace “Upon doing so, the Monster ceases to be a Monster” with “Upon doing so, the Monster ceases to be a Monster and is not considered to be Harrowed afterwards”.

In “Monstrosities”, move the paragraph “Only a Monster … all of their Monstrosities” to the beginning of the subrule.

Convert the sentence “A Monstrosity that is not Visible is Hidden, and Monstrosities are by default Hidden.” into its own paragraph and move it to a place between the aforementioned first paragraph and the paragraph beginning “In order to confirm possession…”.

Convert the sentence “If a Monstrosity has its effect […] as a Monster Battle Action” into its own paragraph and move it to after the list of Monstrosities.

Divide the list of Monstrosities into two, for Visible and Hidden Monstrosities. In the first part, amend the introduction to “Visible Monstrosities are the following:” and remove from each Monstrosity the sentence “This is Visible.” In the second part add the introduction “Hidden Monstrosities are the following:”

Rewriting the rule at this late stage is a bit of an academic exercise, but it doesn’t hurt seeing the rule fixed, if possible, and perhaps avoiding any final surprises from this quarter.

Mind you, this is not that rewrite, but rather the groundwork for putting it forward in my next proposal. It would certainly be easier for me to simply paste the new rule in a proposal and let you peruse it at your leisure. However, it’s a lot of work studying all the changes, and that is often reason enough to vote against, so I thought I’d do some of the heavy lifting in an edit with practically no changes of substance. That way, the second phase of my proposed change (if this proposal is approved, of course) will be less chaotic to compare to the existing text, since there will be much less in the way of rearrangements.

One thing that is plainly obvious, of course, is that I mean to untangle the mechanics of Transformation (a necessity for every Monster) from those of Monstrosities (which are optional, if only in theory). The new subrule deals with the latter, while “Transformation” keeps only the remainder (plus the reference to gaining Monstrosities, which the next proposal is meant to move to the subrule). Not much actually changes there; I’ve merely added that an Inspired Monster is not Harrowed afterwards – which I think is a sensible clarification. There wouldn’t be a point to Harrowed status with no stat updates to be done, anyway.

If this proposal is enacted but the next one ends up failing, the I guess we could simply make a proposal to revert this one. That said, this proposal doesn’t break the rule in any way even if it stands on its own, as far as I can tell.



12-06-2019 21:44:09 UTC

I’m usually up for reworking proposals, and appreciate your efforts, but we’re in the end stretch for this rule’s relevance. I don’t feel the need to get it just right, anymore.  against


12-06-2019 23:20:59 UTC


The Duke of Waltham:

12-07-2019 00:52:18 UTC

Fair enough. What we have is, after all, more or less the rule we played the dynasty with.


12-07-2019 19:23:15 UTC