Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Rules Questions => Topic started by: Anon79 on January 04, 2012, 12:25:22 am
-
Play Haggler, Play Quarry, buy Mint. I decide to resolve Mint first, trashing the Quarry, then resolve Haggler, where I now claim that the Mint is $5 and thus I am entitled to pick up a
Gardens Potion (thanks AJD for pointing out that Haggler cannot gain Victory cards) from Haggler. My opponent argues that the "it" on Haggler refers to "the gained card", which cost $3 at the material time of gaining, and thus because I choose to resolve Mint first, I am now precluded from gaining a Gardens Potion, and argues for good measure that I am unable to gain even a Caravan from the Haggler.
What's the verdict?
What if Mint was a Mandarin? How would that resolve (on-gain versus on-buy of Mint)?
Edit: removed Mandarin, not relevant
Edit 2: Argh sorry for all the amendments. Put back Mandarin as a separate question
-
1. You can't pick up a Gardens with Haggler; Haggler can't give you Victory cards. I'll assume you're talking about Potions instead.
2. I'm pretty sure you should be able to gain the Potion. Consider the case of Smugglers, which (a) is restricted to cards costing up to $6 and (b) refers to a card gained at an earlier time. What matters with Smugglers is the cost of the gained card at the time Smugglers is resolved, not at the time the card is gained. So what should matter with Haggler is the cost of the target card at the time Haggler is resolved, not at the time the triggering card is bought.
With Mandarin, the Quarry has to still be in play when you trigger the Haggler. So you can't gain the Potion, but can gain the Caravan.
-
With Mandarin, the Quarry has to still be in play when you trigger the Haggler. So you can't gain the Potion, but can gain the Caravan.
So, for a card B that you buy, you have to trigger any on-buy effects, before you trigger any would-gain or on-gain effect? Whereas, with reference to the Quarry+Talisman+Royal.Seal+Mint interaction, if an on-buy effect like Talisman's causes you to gain a card G, you must settle all the would-gain and on-gain effects of G fully, before going back to whatever you were doing for B?
-
Play Haggler, Play Quarry, buy Mint. I decide to resolve Mint first, trashing the Quarry, then resolve Haggler, where I now claim that the Mint is $5 and thus I am entitled to pick up a Potion from Haggler.
That seems correct to me, since the Quarry is not "in play" anymore.
-
With Mandarin, the Quarry has to still be in play when you trigger the Haggler. So you can't gain the Potion, but can gain the Caravan.
Why? I buy it, gain it and put all treasures on deck, so quarry is also not in play anymore for haggler gain.
-
With Mandarin, the Quarry has to still be in play when you trigger the Haggler. So you can't gain the Potion, but can gain the Caravan.
Why? I buy it, gain it and put all treasures on deck, so quarry is also not in play anymore for haggler gain.
Haggler triggers on buy. Mandarin trigers on gain. You buy a card, THEN you gain it.
-
With Mandarin, the Quarry has to still be in play when you trigger the Haggler. So you can't gain the Potion, but can gain the Caravan.
So, for a card B that you buy, you have to trigger any on-buy effects, before you trigger any would-gain or on-gain effect? Whereas, with reference to the Quarry+Talisman+Royal.Seal+Mint interaction, if an on-buy effect like Talisman's causes you to gain a card G, you must settle all the would-gain and on-gain effects of G fully, before going back to whatever you were doing for B?
That's right.
-
A follow-up question: Suppose that I have a Quarry in play due to earlier having played a Black Market. I now play a Develop, trashing a Quarry (cost 4), so I need to gain a cost 5 and a cost 3 in some order and put the gained cards on my deck.
I choose to gain Mandarin (cost 3) first, put that on my deck, and as part of its resolution I put the in-play Quarry on my deck on top of the Mandarin. For the cost 5 that I must gain, can I now choose... another Mandarin?
-
A follow-up question: Suppose that I have a Quarry in play due to earlier having played a Black Market. I now play a Develop, trashing a Quarry (cost 4), so I need to gain a cost 5 and a cost 3 in some order and put the gained cards on my deck.
I choose to gain Mandarin (cost 3) first, put that on my deck, and as part of its resolution I put the in-play Quarry on my deck on top of the Mandarin. For the cost 5 that I must gain, can I now choose... another Mandarin?
I'd say this is correct.
-
Suppose that I have a Quarry in play due to earlier having played a Black Market. I now play a Develop, trashing a Quarry (cost 4), so I need to gain a cost 5 and a cost 3 in some order and put the gained cards on my deck.
Errors!
1) Develop says : Trash a card from your hand. ...
--> so you can't trash a Quarry in play.
2) Also if "from your hand" would not be ...
trashing = put it on the trash ---> it is not in play anymore. And one has to do the trashing first, because it is first order on Develop.
Sorry. Did not pay attention. You did not say that the trashed Quarry is the Quarry in play, so 2 different Quarrys.
-
Suppose that I have a Quarry in play due to earlier having played a Black Market. I now play a Develop, trashing a Quarry (cost 4), so I need to gain a cost 5 and a cost 3 in some order and put the gained cards on my deck.
Errors!
1) Develop says : Trash a card from your hand. ...
--> so you can't trash a Quarry in play.
2) Also if 1) would not be ...
trashing means put it on the trash ---> it is not in play anymore
He wants to trash another Quarry, not the one in play.
-
A follow-up question: Suppose that I have a Quarry in play due to earlier having played a Black Market. I now play a Develop, trashing a Quarry (cost 4), so I need to gain a cost 5 and a cost 3 in some order and put the gained cards on my deck.
I choose to gain Mandarin (cost 3) first, put that on my deck, and as part of its resolution I put the in-play Quarry on my deck on top of the Mandarin. For the cost 5 that I must gain, can I now choose... another Mandarin?
How to Develop a $4 into 2 $5s could have been a nice question for the puzzle forum!!