On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 26 Apr 2015, Sean Hunt wrote: > > I've got an idea which is actually why I rejoined the game: > > What if erratic rules could override regular rules on > > certain aspects of the game, as long as they were carefully > > sealed so as not to be able to affect regular rules? The > > idea would be to create erratic instruments with erratic power, > > and these things would override regular rules on some things. > > Thoughts? > > Oh, that's excellent. > > One of my long-time "we'll get to this someday" ideas has been > to separate rules into Domains. Within Domain, precedence > works as usual. But power-1 in-domain rules trump power-3 out- > of-domain rules for anything initially defined within a > domain. > > My idea was "serious" in that I was thinking of legislative, > versus judicial versus executive (officer) Domains and economic > structure yadda yadda (which is where I always get bogged down), > but you're right... erratic rules might be a really really cool > place to try something like this. > > -G. > > > > That can get fun, G. Put some "errors" into how to resolve Domain precedences, and all sorts of interesting scams can occur. The easy one is to make certain Domains non-transitive -- Legislative Domain takes precedence over Executive Domain takes precedence over Judicial Domain which takes precedence over Legislative! This might actually work better if non-Domain rules take precedence over Domain rules of lower power, just to keep the fundamental rules intact, especially R101. -- OscarMeyr, Scamster
