Round 169 Final Summary

From: Glenn Overby II (guardcaptain_at_earthlink.net)
Date: Sun Oct 07 2001 - 05:45:56 PDT


Round 169, "Frantic Racing Chits"
The round opened at 15:17:27 GMT on 25 September 2001.
The round closed at 08:45:07 GMT on 7 October 2001.
The Judge was Glenn Overby, winner of Round 168.
The Wizard was Alan Riddell, style leader of Round 168.

Winner:
Factitious, +2.65, Klein bottle on space 22

Others in order of losing eligibility:
Jesse Welton, +3.00, space 6
Christopher Bartlett, +2.00, (golden flute awaiting entry)
The Wizard, +1.50, Start space
Other members, +0
David Lerner, -0.50, space 2
Aron Wall, +4.60 (style leader), platinum horse awaiting re-entry
Rich Holmes, +1.00, invisible bagpipes on space 11
Anton Cox, +3.25, one-legged tin Chihuahua on space 15
Gallivanting Tripper, +2.63, hemp rucksack on space 22a

Da Judge's glow-in-the-dark bowling ball ended on space 26b/c.

Final reflections:

It started with a bang, and ended with a whimper.  It featured a
newbie Judge, a really creative board, lessons in modular
arithmetic, and a precedent that may be completely irrelevant in
most Rounds but was pivotal here.

I still want to know, for certain, what prompted the gust of
wind.  But that will remain a mystery.

Thanks for your creativity and your courtesy.  I wish the new
Judge Factitious and new Wizard Aron all the best, and promise
to behave--more or less.

Summary judgements:

169:1--The Wizard--VALID +1.5
169:2--David Lerner--VALID -0.5
169:3--Jesse Welton--VALID +1.5
169:4--Gallivanting Tripper--VALID +0.75
169:5--Rich Holmes--VALID +1
169:6--Anton Cox--VALID* +1.75
169:7--Aron Wall--VALID* +1.35
169:8--Jesse Welton--INVALID +1.5
169:9--Anton Cox--VALID +1.5
169:10--Factitious--VALID +0.65
169:11--Gallivanting Tripper--VALID +1.88
169:12--Aron Wall--INVALID +2
169:13--Factitious--INVALID +0.25
169:14--Christopher Bartlett--INVALID +2
169:15--Aron Wall--UNSUCCESSFUL +1.25
169:A--Gallivanting Tripper--FAILS, 2-7
169:16--Factitious--VALID +1.75

*Originally ruled INVALID; the Judge later reversed his decision.

Full judgements:

169:1--The Wizard
=====
Hey everybody!  I have a new board game to play and you are all invited,
hopefully you will all have copies of the board and so you will know what is
going on.  When a FRC member posts a rule they will say what they roll,
where they land and what happens to them there.

Sadly I only roll a 2 and as such land on square 2, which is a dull square
as nothing happens to me there.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 15:17:27 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  The board alone--wonderful creativity, with lots of room to improvise play--is
worth about +2.5.  The rule is clear, simple, complies with itself, and is in harmony
with the suggested theme.  Another +0.5.  Could this be a perfect 3?
Unfortunately, the attachment is a -1.0 for Style...in these days of viruses, an e-
mail attachment essential to a Rule is most unstylish.  Ping another -0.5 because I
had initial trouble with the Web version as well.  The net is still +1.5, as the Wizard
demonstrates why he's the Wizard.

Reflections:  I wanna play!  :)  But this board could make judging a riot.
*******

169:2--David Lerner
=====
I roll a 3!  The Safe House Space!

While I am on The Safe House Space I can't be affected by other events from
other spaces (e.g.: All other players lose one turn, move ahead three
spaces, etc.).
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 17:26:23 GMT

Validity:  No problems.  I will interpret the description of The Safe House Space to
apply to anyone who may occupy it, not just "I".

Style:  Ambiguous (-0.5), but helps to define a space on the board (+0.5).  No
restriction on other rulemakers (-0.5).  Total -0.5.

Reflections: I would also like to see a name for this epic journey.
*******

[The next message was posted by the Judge in response to a query from a blind
member
of the Committee, who cannot see the Wizard's board.]

Here is a quasi-official text description of the map at this stage of Round 169:

The map is roughly circular, commencing with a space in the lower left with a
direction arrow pointing to space 1.  It is possible to travel clockwise from space 1
through space 2, 3, etc. to space 70 consecutively, and then to the arrow space
again for another circuit.

There are also several branching pathways, as follows:

>From space 15, it is possible to go to space 16, or to 16a-17a-18a-19a-20a-21a-
22a-23a to 36.
From space 19a it is possible to go to space 20a as above, or to 20b-21b-22b-
23b-24b-25b-26b/c to 30.
From space 23 it is possible to go to space 24, or to 24c-25c-26b/c to 30.
From space 42 it is possible to go to space 43, or to 44a-45a-46a-47a-48a-49a-
50a-51a to 56.
From space 45a it is possible to go to space 46a as above, or to 46b-47b-48b-
49b-50b-51b-52b to 61.
From space 49a it is possible to go to space 50a as above, or to go to space 51.

(All of these presume one direction of movement, roughly clockwise, to ascending
numerical spaces.)

Additionally, many spaces have pictures in off-track spaces linked to them.

3 has a picture of a house.
11 has a picture of a ship.
17a has a stylized animal face.
21 has a volcano, or possibly a teepee, with an entry at bottom and stuff coming
through an opening on top.
21a has a picture I cannot identify.  (Wizard?)
23b and 34 both link to the same picture, showing a black cloud and lightning
over figures possibly standing on a battlement?
27 has a castle, with its drawbridge partway up or partway down.
39 has a spaceship, I think.
44a looks like four beasts in a field.
48 has a book.
48b and 58 are connected by a single ladder.
49b has a cannon.
53 has a stick figure of a person.
67 has a squiggly line ending at the bottom in a three-pointed flower head?

Pleased to be of service...
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 19:20:57 GMT
*******

169:3--Jesse Welton
=====
Uh, oh, since Alan and David are occupying two consecutive spaces
their pieces form a blockade which cannot be passed, so I hope I don't
waste my turn by rolling more than 3.  I roll a . . . 3!  Woo-hoo!  I
land on David's piece, which sends it back two spaces (as landing on
someone else's piece always does).  I remain (relatively) safe in the
Safe House.

I can see why this game is called Frantic Racing Chits.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-25 20:22:43 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  Adds two reasonable new rules to play--the blockade and the hit-and-send-
back (+1.0).  Clever loopholing of David's immunity provision for the Safe House
(+0.5).  Responds to the calls for a Name...and an FRC name to boot (+0.5).
Doesn't limit future rulemakers much (-0.5), although perhaps the blockade will do
that soon enough.  Overall, a solid +1.5.

Reflections:  The blockade threatens to pin us all at Start!  What's a rule-changer
to do!  <evil grin>
*******

169:4--Gallivanting Tripper
=====
I think I?ll Gallivant in to join the game.

I?ll start by placing my piece on Start (the space with the arrow), which of
course everyone has to do when entering the board.

Before me I see an imposing barricade of David on square 1, Alan on square 2
and Jesse on the safe-house in 3.  Because of the blockade on 1 and 2, I
can?t go beyond 2.  Carefully I roll...

Fortunately I roll snake-eyes (all those years of craps practice haven?t
gone to waste), which takes me to 2 and bumps poor old Alan back to start.

Because I rolled a double, I can roll again, and now there?s no blockade in
front of me.  I roll an 8, Tripping ahead to square 10, where I can get a
bit of breathing space.

PS, in case you?re wondering why my 2 was a double and Alan?s wasn?t, as we
all know the Frantic Racing Chits are played with two dice numbered from 0
to 5.  Don?t ask me what happens when you roll a double 0, though!
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 01:14:18 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  A good solution to the blockade which was threatening to choke play
(+0.5), and a creative explanation of the double to both introduce a new rule and
maintain consistency (+1.0).  I assume the ? in place of ' is some kind of computer
glitch, so I will not deduct for it.  (If it was by design, it is dubious style.)  No
restriction on future rulemakers (-0.5), and a little windy (-0.25).  The balance is a
respectable +0.75.

Reflections:  Two consecutive rules have failed to treat the Wizard with the
proper respect, by using his name instead of just his title.  I failed to catch the first
one before judging, so I can't really penalize the second without warning the
Committee.  But now everybody knows I'm watching.  Dissing the Wizard is not
stylish.  :-)   On another front, I'm curious about the 0-0 roll now.
*******

169:5--Rich Holmes
=====
It's my turn!  I place my token on Start and wonder why no one's
described their token yet.  Mine's in the shape of an invisible set of
bagpipes.  Anyway, with a deft flick of the wrist, I throw the dice.

A 5 and a 2.  I move my Invisible Bagpipes to Square 7.  Now, when you
land on a square whose numerical portion is an even multiple of 7, you
must draw a Constraint card.

The card I draw says, "From now on, when the dice are thrown, the
number that comes up on each die must be equal to the number of
letters (modulo 5) in one of the first five words of the previous
valid rule.  For a throw of two dice, two distict words of the first
five must be used."
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 14:37:19 GMT

Validity: No problems.  Note that the token is placed on Start, as was first explicitly
done in 169:4.  I have no trouble with this being different from landing on a player;
thus, the Wizard's piece is not bounced.

Style:  +0.5 for the bagpipes.  +0.75 for the constraint card mechanic, which not
only defines several spaces but also encourages future rule-writers to add
constraints.  +0.25 because the rule obeys its own restrictions.  -0.5 for ambiguity;
the clear intent of the rule suggests "multiple" or the redundant "exact multiple"
rather than the actually used "even multiple" which can be interpreted differently.
Net of +1.

Reflections:  We're getting a game built around the board now.  Tokens, cards,
funky dice, and of course cool rules.
*******

169:6--Anton Cox
=====
Having finally found my token (a one-legged Chihuahua made of tin), I
can at last take my turn. I had better be careful not to roll a 1 or a
3, or else David will end up on 70 by the bumping rule, and be almost
sure to win! Here goes...

I rolled 7 as well. So I land on Rich's square, he is bumped back to 5
and I have to draw a Constraint card (although Rich did not mention
it, you also have to draw one when your square's numerical part is an
odd multiple of 7 too.)

My card says, "Henceforth, only players who have taken less turns
than the player with the most advanced token (including "missed turns"
due to penalties) are allowed more than one turn in the same rule."

Having rolled the same total as the last player to go, I am guilty of
being Unoriginal, and must miss a turn. Missed turns must be taken in
the player's next valid rule.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 15:33:14 GMT

Validity:  [Original ruling reversed by the Judge, after being schooled by several
players in the past precedents and history of the Committee.  The rule is VALID.]
On the surface, this looks good.  The problem is that the rule excludes
certain eligible players in certain circumstances from being able to post a valid rule
at all.  This conflicts with Regular Ordinance 4, which specifies how a player
becomes eligible to post a rule.  INVALID.

Style:  Unoriginal is quite original; +0.75.  Another +0.75 for bailing out the Judge
in posting a quick copy of the Wizard's map...I promised him a bonus for that.  :)
Finally, +0.25 for patching Richard's ambiguity in 169:5.  No deductions--a fine
+1.75.

Reflections: Rulemakers may wish to specify the count on each die rolled.  Or not.
*******

169:7--Aron Wall
=====
I roll a ten! I always had the greatest luck in this game.  Having
placed (not landed) my piece on the start, I move forward to space 10,
tripping the piece that is already there back to 8. Note that moving
past a blockade means moving from all the way behind it to all the way
in front of it, so blockades on Start/1 aren't all that annoying at the
beginning.  Now since I rolled doubles, I get to go again.  I stare in
disbelief at my pair of zeros and watch in horror as space 10 disappears
into ooze and fog, consuming my top hat piece.  Next moment, space 10
seems to have completely vanished, leaving a smooth connection between
space 9 and space 11.  So this is what happens on a double 0!

Is my piece destroyed?  No, it has merely entered the Void, from which
all pieces come and to which they will inevitably return.  All members
of the FRC have a piece (even the Judge, whose piece is on the board).
They come from it to start and they return to it when their piece is
"destroyed".

Fortunately, we all are provided with an extra life, so rather then
re-entering the game as an abstract concept, I can provide my piece with
a new physical form and enter the board again normally.  The default
pieces have 3 for all their stats, but for a new piece I have to roll.
Let's see... my new plutonium horse piece has 5 strength and 2 magic.  I
can re-enter him next turn.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-26 17:30:10 GMT

Validity:  [Original ruling reversed by the Judge, after 169:6 was ruled VALID and
he received some additional instruction in modular arithmetic.  The rule is VALID.]
INVALID.  The last valid fantasy rule, 169:5, has from its first five words
possible die rolls of 3,2,4,1,0.  You can't get 10 on two dice from that.  Consolation
prize...You get your top hat back, should you choose to accept it.

Style:  Sigh.  Aron picked up on most of the technical goings-on, had a really cool
idea in response to the 0-0 question (+0.5), another cool idea with the Void (+0.5),
a third cool idea with the stats concept (+0.5), and was kind enough to give me a
piece knowing that I wanted to play (+0.1).  Yes, he was also windy (-0.25).  The
balance is +1.35.

Reflections:  169:5 made it impossible to throw a 5 on either die, of course.
*******

Judge's Reversals on 169:6 and 169:7, abridged:
=====
Thank you for your courteous input.  (I knew I wasn't particularly well-schooled for
taking up this bench!)

I still believe that 169:6 violates the spirit of RO4.  But I am convinced that the
past precedents and practices of the Committee as presented do in fact allow this
rule to be considered VALID.

My initial ruling being at variance with this, I reverse it.

Rule 169:6 is VALID.
=====
0 modulo 5 does in fact "equal" 5 modulo 5.  I hit Drexel University's "Ask Dr.
Math" site to research the modular arithmetic questions.  (Incidentally, the
professor answering one of the key questions used both congruent and equal as
equivalent to each other in this context.)

So a five- (or ten-, or fifteen-) letter word will allow a roll of 0 OR 5 under rule
169:5.

(Regarding my reflections: "Of course" is not "of course".  Of course.)

The 10 rolled by Aron is thus quite possible, if the last VALID rule was 169:6 being
VALID, and there is no other reason to judge 169:7 INVALID.

Therefore, given the ruling on 169:6 has been reversed, I must reverse the ruling
on 169:7 which hinged only on 169:6 being INVALID.

Rule 169:7 is VALID.
*******

169:8--Jesse Welton
=====
Did I forget to mention that I was unoriginal for rolling a three
right after David?  Silly me.  For my missed turn, I do nothing, as
that is all one can do when taking a missed turn.  Fortunately,
Gallivanting Tripper, who is in the lead, took two turns because he
rolled doubles, (indeed, that is the only case in which a player may
ever take two consecutive non-missed turns), so he's taken more turns
than I have, which means I can still take another turn in this rule.

As I prepare to roll the dice for my next turn, they snap around in my
hand as though magnetized.  The pair of them are strangely loaded:
They never roll the same pair of numbers twice between resets, which
happen on a roll of double-zero.

I roll a double-two, landing me on 7.  That sends Anton back to 5,
which sends Rich back to 3.  I draw a Restriction card: "Each rule
must leave a legal sequence of die rolls for the next player."
Finally, I roll a 1, landing me on 8.  Nothing happens there.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-27 13:03:29 GMT

Validity:  Hmmm.  I see two issues.  First off, a Restriction card is not a Constraint
card (see 169:5 and 169:6).  Second, with 169:7 now being VALID, the double-
two roll is no longer possible.  INVALID.

Style:  The relationship between the odd dice and the proposed restriction is
simply too elegant for words.  +1.5

Reflections:  Jesse's interpretation of "turn" is not the only one possible.
*******

169:9--Anton Cox
=====
Knowing that I have been guilty of unoriginality, and being upset that I
drew a card that also restricted his options, Jesse has just tried to
hand me the dice. (It must be my go again - I dont think I will ever
understand how turns are ordered in this game!)

Unfortunately I have to miss a turn, and the card I drew last time
prevents me from taking another turn to make up for this. So upset I
am by this adverse state of affairs that I roll myself up in a ball
and make quiet gibbering noises while rocking on my chair. A little
too vigourously perhaps, as I land up on the floor, and there add
injury to insult.

At least in my next rule I will be able to have a proper turn!
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-27 14:41:36 GMT

Validity:  No problems.  In particular, 169:1 has been interpreted most literally.  We
know what Anton rolled (himself), where he landed (on the floor), and what
happened to him there (injury).

Style: Short, and fiendishly creative (+2).  No significant restriction on future
rulemakers, save possibly for setting in place the interpretation of "turn" (-0.5).
Another +1.5, which seems to be a popular judgement so far.  Maybe I'm getting
lenient.  But that's the way it is...  A word to the wise--once is a cool and stylish
loophole.  More than once is repetitive, boring, and, well, you get the picture.

Reflections:  I need to get a summary up soon, I think.  (Question concerning
customary practices--what needs to be in a summary?)  Overall, a wild and crazy
two days.  I had a feeling that we were headed this way.
*******

169:10--Factitious
======
    This always seems to happen to me when playing this game.  Due to the
strange turn ordering (which I think has a non-deterministic element to
it), I have to begin late, when the early spaces are too crowded for
comfort.  I don't particularly want to give any of my opponents a better
chance of winning by bumping them back to space 70, but it looks probable.
Well, I have to roll, so I might as well not agonize over it.
    Let's see, I've rolled a two and a four.  By my math, that works out to
6, though addition is certainly a topic open to some debate.  This lands me
on a previously empty space, so I won't bump anyone back. Whew!
    Anyway, some of you may be a bit confused with my piece.  Rather than
use one of the default pieces, I chose to start the game with a customized
one.  It's a Klein Bottle, as I find the game's defaults a bit simplistic
from a topological point of view.  My stats are fairly low - 1 strength, 2
magic, and a mere 0 charisma.  By the way, Aron, what did you get on your
charisma roll?  Did you not mention it because you feel it's low?  I'm not
embarrassed of my low rolls, I can assure you.  It's still possible for me
to do well, even if it might have been better for me to take a default
piece.
    I could take another turn at this point, but I remember the adage
"Haste makes waste" and choose to wait for now.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-28 08:15:16 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  Start with +0.4 for the Klein bottle, and another +0.25 for expanding the
stats to include charisma.  Top it off with another +0.5 for the brave choice to take
low stats instead of a default piece.  The rule doesn't restrict other players, which
gets -0.5.  The total here is +0.65.

Reflections:  Strength, Magic, Charisma.  What shall we do with these lovely
concepts?  And we are starting to clog the path again.
*******

169:11--Gallivanting Tripper
======
You all can see it's quite relativistic and non-deterministic, and it's my
turn again.  I roll a 2, which takes my hemp rucksack to 11, the ship space.
Immediately a gust of wind springs up - I must move all the pieces a number
of spaces equal to their current square number.

That permits me to trip ahead to square 22a.  As for the others, the Wizard
remains at Start, Dave moves to 2, Jesse to 6, Rich to 11, Anton to 15, Da
Judge to 26 bc and Factitious to 13.
This is complicated, so I'm introducing a house rule.  Every odd-numbered
rule from now on must list the positions of all the pieces on the board.
--
Rule Date: 2001-09-30 08:45:07 GMT

Validity:  No problems.  The source of the gust of wind is not clear, but that does
not affect validity.

Style:  Now I know where my piece started--on space 13 (+0.13).  Helpful rule in
keeping things together, while providing a land mine for writers of half the rules
(+0.5).  Refreshingly brief (+0.5).  Observes its own limitation (+0.25).  A novel
breakup of the blockade (+0.5).  I've been waiting for somebody to do what
Tripper did with the first five words (+0.5).  There is some ambiguity (-0.5), as the
source of the gust of wind is not precise.  A rather impressive Gallivant of +1.88.

Reflections:  C'mon in, lurkers!  Still two days left, and the Tripper just cleared the
path so you can all get on board.  We have the hemp rucksack, the tin
Chihuahua, the Klein bottle, the plutonium horse, the invisible bagpipes, my glow-
in-the-dark bowling ball, and some other cool pieces.  What else will be pressed
into service as a Frantic Racing "Chit"?
*******

169:12--Aron Wall
======
My horse rolls a nine.  I move it from Start to space six, but can
proceed no more because of the blockade.  Yet, I have three points of
momentum left, and thus cannot simply land on space 6, so the situation
entails some sort of Conflict Resolution.  Since I have more Charisma
points than the Klein bottle, I simply order Factitious to step to the
side and let me through.  Factitious's piece is now to the side of space
6 and the blockade is gone (Factitious will have to spend an extra
movement point to re-enter space 6).  But politeness only works as many
times as the difference in Charisma values, so any future Conflicts with
Factitious in which I am the acting player must be resolved with either
physical or magical combat.  I now move two spaces forward and am
blocked again by Tripper.  But this time I must fight since my Charisma
is two points less.  I have 5 strength and my opponent has 3, so I will
attack physically.  Here is how physical combat works.  It's all about
the seconds number in which the rule of the move officially takes place
(GMT).  If the one's place digit is less than or equal to the attacker's
strength, the attacker wins; if it is not but is less than or equal to
the sum of their strengths, the defender wins.  Otherwise it is a draw
and I will end up simply landing on space 8.  The winner stays put if
defending or continues if attacking, and the penalty for the loser is
determined by the tens digit of the official seconds--
0-Killed-physical form lost and piece sent to void.
1-Left in mud-pushed beside the space and transfer one charisma point to
the victor.
2-Wounded-pushed beside the space and lose one Strength (if any stat is
negative one is killed).
3-Kicked into next week-hurled forward to all spaces whose numerical
component is 7 greater than the conflict space and miss next turn.
4-Pushed one space farther than victor's final destination.
5-Sent back to start.
Whatever effects happen due to the combat take place at the beginning of
the next player's move.  During *this* move my piece does not land on
any space.  I hope that I will get kicked forward to space 15, from
which I will be able to choose which pathway I take.  Otherwise, one
goes into a superposition of states and takes BOTH pathways.
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-01 05:27:53 GMT

Validity:  A nine is not possible with 169:11 remaining VALID.  Thus, 169:12 is
INVALID.  (More's the pity.  I want to use some of this.)

Style:  Windy (-0.5) and complex (-0.5), but with more clever blockade-running
(+0.5), excellent ideas about Charisma (+1) and Strength (+1), and an extra +0.5
because politeness as a game mechanic tickles me.  This is a +2.

Reflections:  Aron would have kicked Tripper [back to Start, if he'd been there to
kick].
*******

169:13--Factitious
======
    As players rolling an unlucky total now have no risk of hitting
blockades, I'm thankful for the gust of wind, which, as we know, always
occurs exactly four turns before any roll of double zeros.  I've often
wanted to take the game apart to see how it manages that, but I have
learned nothing through my efforts save that the Constraint Cards have
more clockwork than one would expect.
    Anyway, I need to roll now.  One of the dice quickly lands with a 3
facing up.  The other seems to take it's time bouncing, but eventually
settles for another 3.  I am now on space 19, an unremarkable location.
    Fortunately, since I rolled doubles, I can roll again as part of
this turn. Unsurprisingly, I get double threes again, moving to 25.
Well, I guess I'll roll a third time.  Of course, this makes me nervous,
as the penalty for rolling doubles three times in a row is severe indeed
- one must move back 4 spaces!
    My third roll again turns out to be double threes, so after a brief
stop on 31 I must go far back, to 27.  Oh, wait!  That's not as bad as I
had thought!  27 is the Castle Space, giving everyone +3 to strength as
long as I remain here. Strength, of course, cannot be greater than 5,
and, in the case of values which would exceed 5, is calculated by
subtracting 5 until it is within the allowed range.  I'll choose not to
exercise my option of rolling again, as I'm happy with my current location.
    The current positions are: Factitious: 27. Gallivanting Tripper:
22a.  The Wizard: Start. Dave: 2. Jesse: 6. Rich: 11. Anton: 15. Judge:
26 bc.
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-02 01:43:59 GMT

Validity:  The rule is not consistent with prior rules; the gust of wind cannot always
occur exactly four turns before a roll of 0-0, since we've already had a 0-0 roll with
no gust of wind heralding its arrival.  Nice try, though.  INVALID.

Style:  Long-winded (-0.5), tries to play with piece attributes (+0.25), imaginative
attempt to explain the mysterious gust of wind (+0.5), not much else here.  A soft
+0.25.

Reflections:  How do we handle lots of double-3s, and from whence came the
wind?  The mysteries remain for others, as the first week reaches its waning hours.
*******

169:14--Christopher Bartlett
======
Well, I better get in while the gettin's good.  I place my golden flute
(strength 0, magic 1, charisma 5) on the start space and nervously take the
dice in hand.  I'm expecting a run of doubles, which might have grave
consequences, but franticly paging through the unwritten rules section on
the inside cover of the box, I find out that apostrophes within words are
included in the set of letters.  With relief, I roll a 3+4 = 7.  At this
point I could choose to add or subtract my magic score from the roll, but I
would rather draw a constraint card.  It reads as follows: No future rule
may make it more difficult for any player other than its creator to reach
square 70 and thus win the game.
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-02 12:18:34 GMT

Validity:  I want to call this one VALID, but I can't.  169:1 requires that the maker
of each rule state what they roll, where they land, and what happens to them
there.  The writer states that he starts on Start, rolls a 7, and winds up drawing a
constraint card, but he never says where he lands.  We can infer that he gets to
space 7, but I think that falls short of the explicit standard in 169:1.  INVALID.

Style:  A unique stretch to avoid perpetual doubles (+1).  A marvelously elegant
idea for the use of Magic (+1.5).  A Constraint that I'm glad I don't have to interpret
(-0.5), in the unStylish "No future rule may bla-bla-bla" form (-0.25).  For all that's
packed in, it's short (+0.25).  Another +2.

Reflections:  It looks like time is up on the first week, although something may be
waiting for me as I post this.  I'll get a summary out in the next couple of hours, or
at least ship it to a couple of folks to post for me.  (Still having email import
problems.)
*******

169:15--Aron Wall
======
I hate it when that happens.  For some reason the hypnotic vapors
emitted by the paints used to craft the game often give players the
delusion that it is their turn and that they are playing it out; in
fact, they are staring immobile at the game with an odd far away look
while chanting nonsense about what they are doing, until they snap out
of the trance.  Often their rantings involve quite ridiculous
assertations about the rules, but I assure you that in my most recent
trance, in which I thought it was my turn instead of Tripper's, I was
quite accurate in my little lecture about conflict resolution (alright,
so my statement about pieces going into a superposition of states was
completely delusional?  I plead insanity).  I roll the dice and get a 6,
landing on the space of the same name and bumping Jesse back to 4.  Then
I roll a 6 again, but am stopped by the ship space, which can only be
passed by magical spells.  Since I am certainly not traveling by means
of magic, I am forced to land on the ship space, bumping Richard back to
8.  By the way, I still don't understand why the number of turns taken
listed on the side of the board for the Judge started at 43, and keeps
going down by one each time any of the rest of us make a move.  Is it
possible to take a negative turn?  Does anyone know why that is?  I know
that the Judge has a Charisma of 8, but that doesn't quite explain this
effect.
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-02 17:15:37 GMT

Validity:  Aron tries to save his eligibility with 15 minutes to go.  Unfortunately for
him, Chris Barnett posted 169:14 earlier in the day, making Aron's rule 169:15.  As
an odd-numbered rule, it must specify the location of all pieces on the board (per
169:11).  This did not happen.  Given the message line of "169:14" and the usual
vagaries of e-mail and off-line composition, I conclude that Aron was reasonably
not aware that he was in fact posting an odd-numbered rule.  The rule would
otherwise be VALID.  (A magical spell is certainly a legitimate explanation of the
infamous gust of wind, which is the only way the ship space has been passed.
Da Judge was beyond 11 before that, but he apparently started there and did not
pass 11.)  Therefore, I rule UNSUCCESSFUL.

Style:  Aron continues to write rambling (-0.5) but interesting rules.  A magical spell
as an implied explanation of the gust of wind is inspired (+0.75).  The whole thread
with the Judge's token status is also cute (+0.5).  There's no doubt about the
quality of the restriction (+0.25) or the attempt to bring attributes into play (+0.25) .
Add +1.25 to the total of the style leader.

Reflections:  In the past three weeks I've seen a lot more substantially-delayed
email than usual, although not yet from this list.  This factored directly into the
UNSUCCESSFUL ruling.  I'll add this one to the summary and get it out any time
now.  It looks like we now have four players still eligible.
*******

169:16--Factitious
======
    3, and another 3!  Seems to me that's a good roll, as it allows me to choose
which branch of the path to follow.  Going to 19a would get me closer to the end,
but I am a patient gameplayer, and will instead take the lengthier route by going to
19.
    Of course, I can roll again after getting doubles.  My next roll is also double
threes, which moves me to 25.
    Since spaces marked with square numbers are hostile by nature, players
landing on them must then move 3 spaces back, minus the player's charisma.
This is because charismatic players are more able to influence the space's
feelings.  (Yes, of course spaces have feelings.  At least, the odd ones do.  Some
of the others are too even-tempered for strong emotions, and many odd ones are
more in tune with their primal nature.)
    After moving back 3 minus 0 spaces, I end up on 22, just one space away from
The Volcano.  The Volcano is not a space I would care to land on.  In addition to
requiring a Constraint Card to be drawn, landing on The Volcano makes a player's
piece turn into a pile of ash!  I do not want my beautiful bottle reduced to such an
ignominous condition, and I hope I will be able to stay past The Volcano.
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-04 05:27:34 GMT

Validity:  No problems.

Style:  The square space limitation is elegant (+1) although not terribly limiting (-0.5)
as the only piece with Charisma other than 3 is Factitious's own.  Another +0.25
for defining the Volcano.  Add +0.25 for sensitivity, and a round +1 for some clever
punning.  Lop off -0.25 for length...although rules at this stage tend to get long.
Let's go with a +1.75 here.

Reflections:  It's been a while since I got to declare something VALID.  Maybe if I
do it more often we get less discussion on the list.  :)  We are down to three, as
Rich Holmes has passed his eligibility threshold.  I also observe the characteristics
of the Volcano, and sincerely hope that nobody makes an ash of themselves.
*******

Proposals:

169:A--Gallivanting Tripper
=====
That the rule which the Judge has re-labeled 169:15 but whose author labeled
it 169:14 be declared VALID.
--
Rule Date: 2001-10-03 07:01:24 GMT

FOR: Rich, Aron.
AGAINST: Tripper, Glenn, Karl, Anton, Mark, Factitious, Chris.
*******

Glenn E. Overby II "da judge"
Clinton Twp, MI
http://home.earthlink.net/~guardcaptain/

--
Rule Date: 2001-10-07 12:47:41 GMT


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST