Mistletoe - an LA game for busy people (in progress)

[Bananadine]

Originally Posted by BesucherXia

This game is a simultaneous-turn based, means the result is always generated after all players have submitted their orders instead of immediatly resolved. Thus what we read from the messege list is the result of last turn, and the turn you give attack order is also the turn you "officially start war".

A good point. It's easy to think of the orders you give as happening immediately after all battles you see, but who is to say that the battles don't happen earlier than when you get to see them. Really, the game doesn't say much about whether they happen right after you give attack orders, or right before you give the next turn's orders.

Originally Posted by BesucherXia

The spirit of NAP-N pact is to delay attack by N turns and thus called “none-aggression”. Assuming we have a NAP1 pact, and that does not mean one can attack another at any time given noting him before the new turn is generated, which means no war is delayed at all.

Also a good point, but this doesn't render my style of NAP1 completely meaningless. Without an NAP, somebody could attack you at any time, and you would never know it beforehand. With an NAP1 using my interpretation, somebody could still attack you at any time; there would be no delay, as you say. But they would be required to tell you what they were doing, at the beginning of the turn, so that you would have that turn in which to quickly respond.

Anyway I am currently thinking both interpretations are reasonable--which increases the danger of misunderstanding. What's important to me is not that we use the "correct" one, but that the people with whom I make agreements understand which one I am referring to without a big hassle. So maybe when I make games in the future (as I will probably continue to do since I have slightly unusual tastes) I will arbitrarily pick one of the NAP definitions but let the players override me if they like--just so long as we agree on one, with minimal pain, before the game starts.

As for the many subtleties involving sneaky spells and sneaky Sidhe armies and whatnot--well those are complex, diplomatically significant issues, whereas this question of what the 3 in NAP3 actually means is just a silly naming problem. If somebody fudges the terms of a pact by causing a hurricane in my rich farmland, I will consider it part of the game. (I don't mean it's entirely "okay", but still, it's part of the game.) But if I suddenly learn that I disagree with somebody about what the 3 means, well that's not part of the game, that's a silly misunderstanding getting in the way of the game. I am only concerned here with the reduction of silly misunderstandings.