Fantasy Rules Committee

For all your silly time-killing forum games.

Moderators: jestingrabbit, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Mon Feb 15, 2010 11:31 pm UTC

A nomic-style game, but less rigid. Anyone can post a rule, which will then be judged valid or invalid by the judge (me). The purpose of the rules is to regulate further rules. Sooner or later it will be virtually impossible to create a rule that adheres to all rules, and then all rules are removed and the next round starts. The player who posted the last valid rule becomes the judge for the next round (if e wants to) and everything starts over.
A rule is to be judged invalid if it is inconsistent with a previous valid rule or itself; otherwise valid. If a valid rule restricts further posting too much too early in the round, it can be judged unfair and need not be followed. If no valid rules are posted for a whole day, the round ends.

The first round begins with the first rule posted.

EDIT: Meta-rules summary for clarity:
1. The game progresses in rounds. All rules are repealed between each round.
2. Anyone may post a rule in the current round.
3. A rule that is inconsistent with a previous valid rule in the same round, or with itself, is to be judged invalid. Otherwise it is to be judged valid.
4. If a rule restricts play too much too early in the round, it can be judged unfair despite being valid. Unfair rules need not be followed, although style points if you do.
5. If no valid rules are posted for 24 hours, the judge may end the round.
6. The player posting the last valid rule becomes the judge for the next round, if e wants to.
7. Valid rules are numbered [round]:[rule], e.g. 1:1 is the first rule of the first round.
8. The judge may set a theme for the new round when starting it.

The Nomic 6.0 Addendum (rules for gaining points in our Nomic by participating in this game. If you wish to ignore all nomic business, be warned that the judge might award your rules style points which have no effect in this game):
Spoiler:
9. The gamemaster of this sub-game may, within 24 hours of the start of a new round, declare that round to be Official. This is done by posting the round's number and the name of its judge in both the FRC thread and the Nomic 6.0 thread.
10. In an Official round, the judge can give style points for rules. A valid rule may be given between -2 to 5 style points; an invalid or an unfair rule between -3 and 2 style points. These points should be awarded for clever ways of abiding restrictions, following the round's theme and general wit.
11. The judge of a round cannot receive style points in that round. If the new judge of a round is a player of Nomic 6.0, gamemastership of this sub-game should be transferred to em if e agrees.
12. At the end of a round, each poster's rules' style points are added together. Each poster that is also a participant of this sub-game has that amount of points transferred to em from this game's pool (negative points means points go to the pool, though no player's points may fall below zero due to this)
.
EDIT: The nomic decided this was a bad idea so ignore this.
Last edited by She on Sun Mar 07, 2010 10:23 am UTC, edited 7 times in total.
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

User avatar
Mishrak
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:15 pm UTC
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Mishrak » Tue Feb 16, 2010 4:31 pm UTC

All rules must be posted in italicized font.

Fume Troll
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:06 am UTC
Location: Scotland / Norway mainly

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Fume Troll » Tue Feb 16, 2010 5:06 pm UTC

No rule shall contain more than ten words.

User avatar
neoliminal
Posts: 626
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 6:39 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby neoliminal » Tue Feb 16, 2010 5:21 pm UTC

Every player has a stable of Gladiators. Their first Gladiator has the same name as they do. All gladiator names are underlined. For example my first gladiator's name is neoliminal.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0073YYXRC
Read My Book. Cost less than coffee. Will probably keep you awake longer.
[hint, scary!]

coolguy5678
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 12:20 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby coolguy5678 » Tue Feb 16, 2010 6:24 pm UTC

All rules must obey themselves.

(this should be part of the actual rules, or else I can just say "No more rules are valid" and win right then.

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:55 pm UTC

Mishrak's, Fume Troll's and coolguy5678's rules are all valid. Neoliminal's is invalid for not following rule 1:1 (the format is round:rule, i.e. the first rule of the first round).

On rules obeying themselves: hmm, yes, that should be part of the actual rules. However, that's not the reason you can't say "no further rules are valid". That's because the jurisdiction of the rules are only the rules, not how the judge judges them. But still, I'll edit that into the original rules. And if the ruleset in the OP is supposed to be complete and secure against things like "No rule any be posted after this one" (which is consistent with itself and probably most earlier rules too) I'd better add in something about that too.

For those of you who also hang around in the nomic, I wanted to see how this caught on and plan to do a sub-game in there where you gain points based on your rules in this thread. Then people with no interest in the nomic can still be in the same fantasy rules committee.
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

User avatar
Mishrak
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:15 pm UTC
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Mishrak » Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:32 pm UTC

Rule of Naming
All rules must be named, formatted as "Rule of xxxx".

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:38 pm UTC

Mishrak's latest: invalid, since it's inconsistent with 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3 (if rules that have already been judged valid suddenly aren't due to a later rule, it's the later rule that's invalid instead)
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

User avatar
Mishrak
Posts: 1045
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:15 pm UTC
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Mishrak » Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:55 pm UTC

Woops! I should pay closer attention. My bad. Format the rules so they're easy to locate/read! 8)

No rule can reference an xkcd comic.

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:01 pm UTC

Mishrak's latest: valid, though quite boring - the opposite would have been more interesting.
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

User avatar
frogman
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:57 am UTC
Location: Corvallis, OR

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby frogman » Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:14 pm UTC

Rules cannot contain a word starting with the fourth letter.
yeah yeah yeah

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Tue Feb 16, 2010 10:19 pm UTC

frogman: valid
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

kevmus
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby kevmus » Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:58 am UTC

Regulations must
be posted in haiku form,
current rules okay.

User avatar
Krong
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:49 am UTC
Location: Charleston, South Cackalacky

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Krong » Wed Feb 17, 2010 3:17 am UTC

Required: New rules
Give new sci-fi characters.
Palpatine likes that.
The answer to the question "What’s wrong with the world?" is just two words: "I am." -- G. K. Chesterton (attributed)

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:29 am UTC

O'neil only allows
Alliteration usage
under rightly rules
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:33 pm UTC

Kevmus' is valid, though you should learn from Krong: writing "new rules", "future rules" or "rules posted after this one" is okay and does away with the trouble of previous rules not following your new restriction.
Krong's is valid.
Duban's I'm not sure, what do you mean by "under rightly rules"?
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:41 pm UTC

She wrote:Kevmus' is valid, though you should learn from Krong: writing "new rules", "future rules" or "rules posted after this one" is okay and does away with the trouble of previous rules not following your new restriction.
Krong's is valid.
Duban's I'm not sure, what do you mean by "under rightly rules"?


all acceptable rules require alliteration. It's getting hard, ok?
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

kevmus
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby kevmus » Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:50 pm UTC

Rule Ruling: novel
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.


It just got harder.

Wow, that rule's not valid (no sci-fi), here's another try...

Rackham's Rule Ruling:
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:10 pm UTC

never mind X-/. Wow, it was only up about 10 seconds and kev caught me.
Last edited by Duban on Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:19 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

kevmus
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby kevmus » Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:12 pm UTC

Duban wrote:
kevmus wrote:Rule Ruling: novel
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.


It just got harder.

Wow, that rule's not valid (no sci-fi), here's another try...

Rackham's Rule Ruling:
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.

you can't use the wor reunance. It's the 4th letter of the alphebet.


It says "Starting with"

None of mine started with it.

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:18 pm UTC

Rulings, River Tam
requires red writing with
written red rulings
Last edited by Duban on Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:36 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

coolguy5678
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 12:20 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby coolguy5678 » Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:06 pm UTC

kevmus wrote:Rackham's Rule Ruling:
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.
I'm pretty sure that breaks "No rule can reference an xkcd comic.".

EDIT: Actually the xkcd says "tautology", so it's not exactly clear. She can decide.

kevmus
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby kevmus » Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:44 pm UTC

Tautology!=Redundancy
Tautology!=Redundancy

User avatar
TimelordSimone
Posts: 916
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 6:05 pm UTC
Location: Cambridge ish

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby TimelordSimone » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:01 pm UTC

Duban wrote:Rule: River Tam to
require red writing with
written red rulings


That is eleven words. Which makes it invalid, yes?
I mostly lurk. Hello.

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:33 pm UTC

If I read Duban's right, it's invalid, since among others 1:1 does not contain any alliteration. Inconsistency with preceding rules works both ways.
kevmus' first redundancy rule is invalid as noticed, inconsistent with 1:7.
kevmus' second (the Rackham one) is valid.
Duban's latest also invalid as noticed, doesn't obey 1:2.

Current valid rules summary:
1:1 - All rules must be posted in italicized font.
1:2 - No rule shall contain more than ten words.
1:3 - All rules must obey themselves.
1:4 - No rule can reference an xkcd comic.
1:5 - Rules cannot contain a word starting with the fourth letter.
1:6 -
Regulations must
be posted in haiku form,
current rules okay.
1:7 -
Required: New rules
Give new sci-fi characters.
Palpatine likes that.
1:8 -
Rackham's Rule Ruling:
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.

If everyone's okay with it, I'm going back and editing the meta-rules again - three days of inactivity is a bit much. I think a full 24 hours without any valid rules merits a new round, at least in this medium (I've been playing this on a mailing list where it's 14 days).
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:44 pm UTC

Revised #2
Rulings, River Tam
requires red writing now,
written red rulings
Last edited by Duban on Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:54 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

kevmus
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:35 am UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby kevmus » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:53 pm UTC

Duban wrote:Revised #2
Rulings, River Tam
requires red writing now
written red rulings


Old rules don't fit, you have to make it so that it's new rulings.

User avatar
TimelordSimone
Posts: 916
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 6:05 pm UTC
Location: Cambridge ish

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby TimelordSimone » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:54 pm UTC

Echo's smurfing rule:
Following rules (after this)
Must utilise 'Smurf'.
I mostly lurk. Hello.

User avatar
TimelordSimone
Posts: 916
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 6:05 pm UTC
Location: Cambridge ish

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby TimelordSimone » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:56 pm UTC

Duban wrote:
kevmus wrote:
Duban wrote:Revised #2
Rulings, River Tam
requires red writing now
written red rulings


Old rules don't fit, you have to make it so that it's new rulings.

Uh, it says requires red writing now.

P.S. what is "smurf"? Does he mean the word smurf?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Smurfs
But yes I mean the word smurf. Luckily, it can be used to mean just about anything. Noun, verb, adjective... anything is possible!
(Yeah I'm just being annoying. :P)

Oh gods I edited this because the post above me covered what I said, and asked a question relating to my rule, and now somehow this post is above the one I'm replying to. I don't know what is happening.
Last edited by TimelordSimone on Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:23 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
I mostly lurk. Hello.

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Wed Feb 17, 2010 10:56 pm UTC

kevmus wrote:
Duban wrote:Revised #2
Rulings, River Tam
requires red writing now
written red rulings


Old rules don't fit, you have to make it so that it's new rulings.

Uh, it says requires red writing now.

P.S. what is "smurf"? Does he mean the word smurf?
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

User avatar
Krong
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:49 am UTC
Location: Charleston, South Cackalacky

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Krong » Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:37 am UTC

LaForge levitates.
Later laws must lie, be a
Smurf pseudostatute.
The answer to the question "What’s wrong with the world?" is just two words: "I am." -- G. K. Chesterton (attributed)

Fume Troll
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:06 am UTC
Location: Scotland / Norway mainly

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Fume Troll » Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:14 am UTC


Yellow Yoda yells:
Following rules form verse,
smurf poetry: terse.

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:59 pm UTC

Ruling: Teal'c demands
new rulings begin "Ruling:"
smurf poetry: terse.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:56 pm UTC

Duban's River Tam rule: valid. As e said, "requires red writing now" is taken to mean "from now on".
TimeLordSimone's Echo rule: valid.
Krongs LaForge rule: valid, though it's quite harsh - how does one include a science fiction character, redundancy, some kind of meaningful regulation as well as a lie into a haiku of maximum ten words?
Fume Troll's Yellow Yoda rule: valid. There is redundancy (if smurf is taken as a verb meaning write or create), an s-f character and a lie (Yoda isn't Yellow). In a way, there's redundancy in ruling that the poetry be terse - it hard not to in ten words.
Duban's Teal'c rule: I don't see where this lies, and the verse is a little forced too. Could you tell me why it should be valid?

Current valid rules:
Spoiler:
1:1 - All rules must be posted in italicized font.
1:2 - No rule shall contain more than ten words.
1:3 - All rules must obey themselves.
1:4 - No rule can reference an xkcd comic.
1:5 - Rules cannot contain a word starting with the fourth letter.
1:6 -
Regulations must
be posted in haiku form,
current rules okay.
1:7 -
Required: New rules
Give new sci-fi characters.
Palpatine likes that.
1:8 -
Rackham's Rule Ruling:
new rules require redundance.
Reduncance required.
1:9 -
Rulings, River Tam
requires red writing now,
written red rulings

1:10 -
Echo's smurfing rule:
Following rules (after this)
Must utilise 'Smurf'.

1:11 -
LaForge levitates.
Later laws must lie, be a
Smurf pseudostatute.

1:12 -
Yellow Yoda yells:
Following rules form verse,
smurf poetry: terse.


Noone objected, so I'll edit in the changes I mentioned before.
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:04 am UTC

She wrote:Duban's Teal'c rule: I don't see where this lies, and the verse is a little forced too. Could you tell me why it should be valid?

X-/. Maybe the smurf part is a bit forced, but it breaks no rules. Anyways it would cut down on the available options. Now people only have 3 sylables in the first line and 5 syllables in the second to make a new rule, and they must do it in 6 words or less. Isn't the point to make it slightly, but not impossibly, harder to continue? Best way to do that is to slowly cut away on options.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:16 am UTC

No no, I mean I don't see where it lies, as in where the lie is. The "pseudostatute" enforced by 1:11. Yes, you have got the point of this game, it's supposed to get harder until no one can be bothered within the timeframe.
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

Duban
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Duban » Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:22 am UTC

She wrote:No no, I mean I don't see where it lies, as in where the lie is. The "pseudostatute" enforced by 1:11. Yes, you have got the point of this game, it's supposed to get harder until no one can be bothered within the timeframe.

Teal'c never actually demanded that. It's a bit easy if you tie it into the non-existant fantasy characters, but w/e.
It is not the gods I fear. No, It is those who claim to speak for them that concern me.

User avatar
Levi
Posts: 1294
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:12 am UTC

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby Levi » Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:28 am UTC

"Smurf-siz'd," says Ender.
"Future rules must be like me:
As small as a flea."

User avatar
She
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 8:08 pm UTC
Location: Sweden

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby She » Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:11 am UTC

Duban: of course. It's valid, then. Which means that Levi's Ender rule is invalid; it is inconsistent with 1:13 by not starting with "Ruling:".
She speaks in the third person
So she can forget that she's me

User avatar
skellious
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:06 am UTC
Location: Dundee, UK
Contact:

Re: Fantasy Rules Committee

Postby skellious » Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:21 pm UTC

She - please dont bring this into nomic for a couple of days at least... we will end up with no end of trouble what with the current somewhat "quantum" state of the rules.
kerfuffleninja wrote: Minutes are the same length in Europe, right?


Return to “Forum Games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests