This thread is hilarious because I also created a Tournament a while
back to act as an Arcadia On-the-Go.
I'll leave it up to those who have been active in this conversation to
debug this, but consider me interested regardless.
On 1/5/19 3:01 PM, Kerim Aydin wrote:
Hmm, that's a really good question. It's not a Rules vs Tournament thing,
this is how Lost and Found Department is used in Rule 2576:
If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Lost
and Found Department.
and there's no further definition of what the Lost and Found Department
actually is (though a couple other sentences about how it works).
If we needed a definition, it would probably look something like:
If an asset would otherwise lack an owner, it is owned by the Lost
and Found Department, which is an entity that exists to own assets
that would otherwise lack an owner.
But is that second clause really needed, or is it a circular statement
that's implicit in the first clause?
Unless we have a CFJ on the subject, I think we've assumed that those
implicit definitions work. Of course, the risk is that (by not putting
in an
explicit definition) someone could sneak in a power-1 Rule that says "The
Lost and Found Department is defined to be the Player G." or something, but
that's not really a risk for tournament regs (because they can't generally
be changed after the tournament starts).
On 1/5/2019 7:39 AM, ATMunn wrote:
This is very interesting! I would definitely play this.
One question though (and maybe you've already answered this, I haven't
read the other replies) - doesn't the Discard Pile need to be defined?
Or does it not because this is a tournament? If this was made with
rules, I assume it would have to be. But clearly tournament definitions
don't have to be written like rules (as I have now learned).
--
Trigon
