Tuesday, September 12, 2017

unactive rules need to apply

Add to “Special Case”

Special Case Rules that are unactive do not have an effect on the gamestate aside from existing as text in the ruleset.

someone should probably word this better

Comments

Cuddlebeam:

09-12-2017 18:55:02 UTC

Rules just exist as text in the ruleset already though, but I get what you mean. Maybe have them “not grant any formal obligations/abilities.”

Semiel:

09-12-2017 19:22:29 UTC

Other potential phrasings:

“Special Case Rules that are unactive shall be interpreted as having no effect.”
“Special Case Rules that are unactive shall be interpreted as if they were not in the ruleset.”
“If an unactive Special Case Rule would allow or forbid an action, or have an effect on a Prince or the gamestate, instead it does not.”

Also, shouldn’t it be “inactive”, rather than “unactive”?

derrick:

09-12-2017 20:41:09 UTC

This is not a proposal, and it is too late to become one.

unactive was carefully and deliberately misspelled.

card:

09-12-2017 21:00:26 UTC

to avoid conflicts with the word “inactive”

“Special Case Rules that are unactive shall be interpreted as having no effect.” It can’t be all of the gamestate, since they clearly occupy the ruleset, which is part of the gamestate; setting a rule to unactive would simply allow anyone to remove it from the ruleset.

‚ÄúSpecial Case Rules that are unactive shall be interpreted as if they were not in the ruleset.”
This would make it difficult if people wanted to edit an unactive rule. Suppose an unactive rule was badly worded, it shouldn’t have to be active to fix the text. I’m not sure if an unactive rule would even be able to be set to active, since unactive rules are interpreted as not existing.

Semiel:

09-12-2017 21:19:13 UTC

Agreed that “not in the ruleset” doesn’t work, for the reasons you say.

Interesting point that the Ruleset is Gamestate. This wasn’t immediately obvious to me, but the definition of Gamestate in the appendix is “Any information which the Ruleset regulates the alteration of”, which would definitely include the Ruleset itself.

Kevan:

09-12-2017 21:54:12 UTC

What conflicts with the word “inactive”? The ruleset doesn’t use “inactive”.

card:

09-12-2017 22:29:14 UTC

No but it’s not unheard of for it to be used in dynastic rules https://wiki.blognomic.com/index.php?search=inactive&title=Special:Search

Kevan:

09-13-2017 10:05:36 UTC

I think we’d avoid using the word dynastically if it was used elsewhere. (And all those rules also use the word “active” as well.)

derrick:

09-13-2017 14:05:40 UTC

The existing text is actually quite robust. Other than the part where I think “special case” is an inaccurate name.

You must be registered and logged in to post comments.