by Hermjard
curtc wrote:
Hermjard wrote:
Btw, assuming you are right, wouldn't it be more effective and more consistent, to say "Cubes on outdoor activities work exactly like cubes on cards with delayed actions, except [when] the description of the outdoor activity says otherwise. You are allowed [to] combine at most one cube from each outdoor activity with one cube from one and only one delay action for each single action."?
Because that wouldn't be very accurate. Cubes on outdoor cards are very little like cubes on cards. And it still doesn't answer the question you asked, about whether you can use them from this particular outdoor activity when it's not your turn.
It would be more accurate and efficient, than the current rules, assuming you are right. Because usually it is more accurate, to declare a rule as general, if the majority of referred objects follows this rule, and not, if the minority of referred objects follows this rule, making the decription of exceptions to be in majority.
And in case of doubt, it's more accurate, to make the more restrictive rule as the general one, making exceptions in NOT following the rule, and not vice versa.
You have heard about the golden rule? It goes like follows: "All mentioned rules must be followed except it is explicitely stated otherwise". It is not: "We present a new rule here, but generally you must assume the exception from the rule, even when not mentioned".
Of course would have been my question answered, if cubes on outdoor activities would be basically handled like cubes on activity cards. Namely, I would know that I can only use an outdoor activity in my own turn, with nothing further mentioned. Simple as that. I don't know what is inaccurate with that proposal.