On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, D. Margaux wrote:
Does that actually work though?
I don’t see any provision that resets the resale value to 2 after the
master switch is set back to the player. So I think nichdel’s resale
value is still 1, because eir master switch was previously transferred
to me.
Resale value is a zombie switch, so while e is not a zombie eir resale
value simply does not exist. (Or does it? After writing the below I'm
wondering if rule 2240 might mess this up too because the provision that
says it doesn't exist is early in rule 2162.)
However, it occurs to me that rule 2162 is not obviously clear on what
happens when e again _does_ come to have an instance of that switch.
There are possibly competing provisions, and the later (which by rule 2240
would take precedence) _might_ imply it's set to the same value as the
last time it had one:
At any given time, each instance of a switch has exactly one
possible value for that type of switch. If an instance of a switch
comes to have a value, it ceases to have any other value. If an
instance of a switch would otherwise fail to have a possible
value, it comes to have its default value.
[...]
If an action or set of actions would cause the value of an
instance of a switch to become indeterminate, the instance instead
takes on its last determinate and possible value, if any,
otherwise it takes on its default value.
It depends on what it takes for a switch value to become indeterminate -
does the first provision trigger to prevent it from happening, before the
second one does?
Greetings,
Ørjan.
