Looney Labs Fluxx Mailing list Archive

Re: [Fluxx] Monty Python Preview Cards

  • FromWNivek <wnivek@xxxxxxxxx>
  • DateTue, 5 Aug 2008 09:11:24 -0400
From: Petri Maaninen <Petri.Maaninen@xxxxxx>
>> 3) Hovercraft and Inflation: two possibilities:
>>  A) Add "This card not affected by Inflation" in small print at
>> the bottom.
>>  B) Spell out *all* the numerals, not just '3'.
> How about adding one extra rule: "8 or more: something something
> something" -> No problem with Inflation.
> Or changing "7" to "7 or more" perhaps?
There is a direct connection with the list of 7 'rules' and a certain
Python sketch. Adding an eighth one or wordage like "seven or more"
would be detrimental to the reference.
Unless there is an advantage in using so many numerals on the card
(another, somehow-safer number modifying New Rule? a New Rule which is
triggered by certain numbers?) I think it would be best just to spell
most of them out.
Looking at it from the viewpoint of a programmer, to only spell-out
the three looks like a sloppy work-around for a known glitch, which
stands out in contrast to surrounding code which can still go wrong if
used outside the intended context. Spelling out all the the numbers in
the effects would be a subtle change to the overall structure of the
code which would not only be more consistent in appearance, but also
corrects for the additional errors. In the intended context (only the
Monty Python deck - 1,3,5 and no Inflation) they'll both work the
same, but outside of that (adding Inflation, mixing decks) one of them
could easily crash while the other, being more robust, would execute
as normal.

I know _I'd_ rather have programs which are stable from the ground-up,
rather than needing to be patched to avoid certain self-contained
errors and still likely to throw a General Protection Fault if
something isn't as expected...

From: Christopher Hickman <tophu@xxxxxxx>
>>> 7) The Knights Who Say "Ni!":  Wonderful!  It would be even better
>>> if it were neutralized if a card with "It" is on the table -- like
>>> "Get On With It".
>> But as you know, at that point of the film, they are no longer the
>> Knights who say "Ni!" ...
>And that creates an opportunity for another creeper (The Knights Who
'>Til Recently Said "Ni").

Or a New Rule which turns the one into the other, and introduces said
weakness. Or perhaps a Shrubbery Keeper to do the same.