On 8/7/07, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 August 2007, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > No, game custom is that possibility and requirement are independent.
> > This passage just solidifies that into a rule. With regard to R2161,
> > the rule says nothing about possibility, and so by the proposed R2152
> > as well as game custom, it implies nothing about possibility either.
> > Game custom in the case of R2161 is that record-keepers can assign ID
> > numbers. So I don't see where the break is.
> >
> > -root
>
> The fact that things called ID numbers are commonly assigned by record
> keepers is then at odds with the game custom that regulated actions are
> impossible unless the rules allow them, and especially the game custom
> that arbitrary modifications to Rule-defined properties cannot be done by
> announcement (CFJ 1689).
I'm not aware of the former being a game custom; the custom is that
regulated actions are not *permissible* unless the rules allow them.
If they were impossible, there would be no need to regulate them.
The latter is a good point; record-keepers can assign ID numbers to
objects all they want, but under R2161 those numbers are only the
official ID numbers if the rules say so.
Looking at R2161(a):
(a) Whenever an instance of that type does not have an ID
number, the player held responsible by that rule (or, if
there is no such player, the Speaker) SHALL assign an ID
number to it by announcement as soon as possible.
I see two ways to interpret the phrase "SHALL assign an ID number to
it by announcement".
1) The phrase says two separate things: that the responsible player
SHALL assign an ID number, and that announcement is a mechanism for
assigning ID numbers. The definition of a mechanism thus implies that
the action is possible.
2) The phrase does not define any mechanism but instead implies that
announcement is the only mechanism satisfying the legal requirement.
In this case, assigning ID numbers is not possible.
Of these, I think that 2) is a bit unnatural, and 1) makes more sense.
The rest of the rule also supports 1) by providing some additional
detail about the mechanics of ID number assignment.
Thus, I think that R2161 *does* talk about possibility; it just
doesn't do it using R2152 terms.
-root
