Fun talk:Mornington Crescent

Move
To fun obviously, or perhaps even the moribund Blightynet? Totnesmartin (talk) 14:58, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this should really be in fun, with moar I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue. Webbtje (talk) 15:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * @Martini - I thought you were an active member of BN. What happened? 15:18, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I moved house and stopped being an active member of the internet. Should get connected on Wednesday, in'sh allah BT. Totnesmartin (talk) 10:42, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Move/develop to suit - and develop a RW version to suit.212.85.6.26 (talk) 16:08, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

See the Wikipedia page for more info on the subject: the RW equivalent would be a spoof of woo and the way proponents invent new rules faster than you can draw epicycles.212.85.6.26 (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I do agree with the metaphor, but probably not as a whole article. Certainly worth bearing in mind to mention at appropriate times. 23:30, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Isn't that covered in Chewbacca Defense? Totnesmartin (talk) 12:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Gish Gallop - David Gerard (talk) 12:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * All of the above. 12:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Would the winning point be "Goddidit"? 13:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Only when you've accumulated three Blue Stars (four in the 2002 special edition box set) and are riding the Circle Line under the 3rd edition rules. But you can also call it in a Duel Situation if your opponent is has just played a Green Goblin Chance Card and won it on a roll of 4+ on a D6. But you still need to be a Level 26+ Priest or 28+ Paladin to even call it, and that's only if you've traded 6 Red Stars for a Star Lance at Kings Cross and used it at least twice in the current Round but no more than 8 times in the current and preceding Set, this enables you to play a Swift Reversal Chest Card converting Mornington Crescent into Goddidit for the remainder of the set (although this can be cancelled if two or more opponents have Hotels on the Victoria Line). 14:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course, I prefer 4th Edition rules as it changes that completely stupid and pointless 4+ to a more reasonable 3+. And at least the Millennium East Coast Expansion Pack for 4th Ed. puts more Green Stars in play in any one Game so you can pick up more Exp Points at London Bridge and get your Paladin capable of playing Bridge Cards at a more reasonable level, because 16+ just leads to people nuking the game far too easily when they realise they can pick up the London Eye Fangs from Upminster and use them by the end of the first Set by trading it for Goddidit it in Doncaster, I mean, that's just retarded, and even worse if someone is stupid enough to trade it for Aliensdidit while they're a a Knight Class Bishop with a level multiple of 7 and force all Trainspotters to immediately abdicate their Level 3+ Chance Cards to the player on with the next highest birthday. 14:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And don't get me started on the hashup that the 5th edition was, where they rolled back the requirements needed to call a Godzilla Strike on South London to merely a 3+ roll + Benevolence Stats if you had a Gibson Les Paul in your Saddle Inventory. What on earth was that about, there's a reason you needed to trade in 6 Blue Stars and a Lucky Bag at three separate stops on the Overground expansion for that to happen! Now anyone who is Chaotic Yellow with bonuses on their Cheese Eating Stats can much their way through the board whenever anyone attempts to play the Hawkwind Star Card if they have any more than 6 Sky Points with a Mauve Star! Yes, the revised patch for the South East expansion upped that a bit to need TWO Stevenage Cards but seriously, that only applies when playing with the old 1980s "Up North" expansion where anyone starting in Milton Keynes as a Gothic Nurse or with a Lawful Alcoholic alignment already starts off halfway there AND gets two Head Start goes in the first Set, although granted most people can only do that with the aid of the Map. 14:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I am appalled that giggling "Mornington Crescent text generator" produces nothing comparable to the above. You need to write one - David Gerard (talk) 14:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The logistics of that sort of thing are mind-boggling... but I will think about it. 14:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion
Rather than delete this article transform it into the Funspace article and/or create the RW version of the game that #should# exist (ie spoof/mockery of 'systems of organised crankery'/ counter arguments to same.

'First define the hole/absence - then invite tenders to fill the hole.'

212.85.6.26 (talk) 16:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd wager that this would be harder than it seems. Most of the humour from Mornington Crescent comes from how it parodies real rules, the originals were more "strategy" and based their ideas on Chess and Bridge, while I tend to branch out into RPGs quite hard. Doing a RW version would be more like several extended non sequiturs firing one after another, kind of how assquote works. A more straight up parody of Mornington Crescent probably wouldn't be possible and would quickly end up as a "creationist jargon" generator, which in itself isn't a bad idea, actually. 16:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Given the nature of MC it deserves at least a mention on RW: one possibility 'Article describing the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Time Travellers Fund (which is a spoof) & suchlike.'

Possibly a MC generator could be developed from the materials on Seventh Sanctum (look at the Library page).

Suggestion 2 - creating parodies of some of the 'systems of organised crankery' (though many are self-parodying) without degenerating into Finnegan's Wake-ish and/or lorem ipsum (see generators thereof).

Suggesting ideas and turning them into RW articles can be two different activities.

The 'stations beyond Barking' reference is a London-centric joke. 82.44.143.26 (talk) 18:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)