On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:22 -0400, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:04 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Arguably, there are two requirements: the CotC SHALL assign an ID
> > number, and the CotC SHALL assign the smallest possible legal ID number.
> > The Monster was deputising based on the first, not on the second.
>
> It doesn't matter what e was deputising "based on", the fact remains
> that Rule 2161 says that assigning a number less than any existing
> orderly number is INVALID, and R2193's CAN doesn't override that; 2161
> is Power 2 and 2193 is Power 1.
No, rule 2161 says "such an assignment"; my assignment was sufficiently
unusual that I don't think it qualifies as "such an assignment", and
therefore is not forbidden by rule 2161.
--
ais523
