On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Jonatan Kilhamn <jonatan.kilh...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 2009/4/6 Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk>: > > On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 22:50 +0200, Jonatan Kilhamn wrote: > >> 2009/4/6 Alex Smith <ais...@bham.ac.uk>: > >> > Rather different from what you thought up, though; the "old ruleset" > >> > looks like quite an interesting and fun ruleset for Mornington > Crescent. > >> I can't be bothered to read all that, I'm sorry, but it's not at all > >> what I meant. From what I can see Mornington Nomic is more of a nomic > >> meant to look like a game of MC than a game of MC fitted into a nomic. > > > > Yep, in my view making up plausible-seeming actions is less fun than > > having actual rules that when you play, make people think you're making > > the rules up as you go. > > > Okay, well, not in mine. At least that's not the kind of game I want > to create now. I take it you're not a big fan of MC as it's originally > played? I'm not that familiar with MC, but what you're describing sounds like it might fit well as a round of the Fantasy Rules Committee. As long as you start with an appropriate first rule for the round that sets up the ground rules of MC, it could work. And the "progress" of each player would be well tracked by the Style Points awarded by Fantasy Rules Committee. http://groups.google.com/group/frc-play?pli=1 Billy Pilgrim
