I’ve put a new mini-essay up on the wiki. For posterity’s sake, I’ll put the text up here for whatever purpose is desired.

English has this really nice feature called the attributive verb, the upshot of which is this: There are words that implicitly exist in the rules in relation to an action that don’t need defining unless you want them to mean something else.

For example: If a rule exists that says, “Individuals may Punch a Spaceman on Friday,” then it is perfectly reasonable to refer to the Individual who is Punching as the Punching Individual, or to the Spaceman who is Punched as the Punched Spaceman, all with no further definition.

In fact, forget attributive verbs, those are perfectly valid words, period. The rules state, “A keyword defined by a rule supersedes the normal English usage of the word,” and, as derivative words are… Well… Derivative, defining Punch also defines the verbs (and any adjective forms of) Punching, Punches and Punched, the noun Puncher, and almost certainly a number of other words I haven’t thought of. Don’t overthink it. It just works.