Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Rules Questions => Topic started by: GendoIkari on September 26, 2016, 02:10:11 pm
-
While Stash is the only thing affected by this change, it's leaving me with some questions about how drawing actually works. So the new rules says that when you play a Smithy, if you have 2 cards in your draw pile left, you don't draw any cards before shuffling. But is this clarified in the rules? I've read the new section under "Shuffling", and it still seems like there's 2 valid interpretations:
1) I need to "do something with my deck" that requires 3 cards. I only have 2 cards. So I'll shuffle first.
2) Drawing is 1 at a time by nature. So at the moment I play Smithy, I need to do something with my deck that requires 1 card, so I draw that card. Then I do that again. Then I still need to do something with my deck that requires 1 card, but I have 0, so I'll shuffle first.
Now obviously the first options is what's intended, because otherwise "put it under your deck" makes no sense. So I guess my question is; is there a general rule about when drawing cards is considered all 1 atomic action? What about "draw up to X" cards? Are those drawn one at a time, checking after each if you've drawn enough?
I think that that was the ruling on "discard down to 3"; that you can discard a Tunnel, then reveal Watchtower to put the Gold on top of your deck, then discard Watchtower as the second card.. but I don't remember for sure.
For Library, it would *have* to be one at a time, because you don't know how many cards you will draw ahead of time. But if you know you are going to have to draw at least 4 cards, (but you might be going through 5 or 6), do you shuffle before beginning if you have less than 4 cards in your draw pile?
-
To clarify: it doesn't say that you should shuffle your entire deck, only your discard, putting the reshuffled discard under your current deck. And only when you know you are going to need the extra cards (for drawing, revealing, etc.)
Sometimes you don't know (Golem), so you don't shuffle. And when you play Madman with 20 cards in your hand, you just make an educated guess I think?
I think it's meant to speed things up so you can draw all of the cards at the same time.
Not 3 actions: draw - shuffle - draw, but just 2 actions: shuffle - draw.
-
I think the new rule is needlessly complicated if you actually do it. How is being required to put your shuffled discard under the draw pile simpler than what we had before?
Also, it sounds really annoying having to count your draw pile when playing lots of cards (like with the Madman Davio mentioned).
-
I think the new rule is needlessly complicated if you actually do it. How is being required to put your shuffled discard under the draw pile simpler than what we had before?
I think the old rule was fine. That being said, the new rule does have the advantage of not having to remember how many cards you've already drawn while you're shuffling, which is something that I sometimes have trouble doing. I'm trying to remember to do it the new way for that reason alone, but it's a tough habit to break.
Also, it sounds really annoying having to count your draw pile when playing lots of cards (like with the Madman Davio mentioned).
I don't see how it's any worse than the old system. Under the old rule you still had to count those cards as you drew them. Realistically you're not going to count them twice in a situation like this.
-
I think the one pro to the new way is you'll never forget how many cards you've already drawn mid-shuffle.
-
Do cards like Cellar do "+1 Card" N times (i.e. reshuffle potentially comes in the middle) or "+N Cards" (i.e. reshuffle comes before drawing any of them)?
(EDIT: Well, Cellar's a bad example since it got a wording update; pretend I asked about Apprentice or something.)
If (for example) your -1 Card Token is on your empty deck and you get +1 Card, do you remove the Token and then decide you don't need to reshuffle, or do you reshuffle but then remove the Token without drawing anything?
-
I don't get this rule. If i play smithy and there are two cards on my deck i draw them correct?
Yes, but before you do, you shuffle your discard pile and place it underneath your deck. Then you draw 3 cards, the first 2 of which are the 2 you had in your draw pile.
-
While Stash is the only thing affected by this change, it's leaving me with some questions about how drawing actually works. So the new rules says that when you play a Smithy, if you have 2 cards in your draw pile left, you don't draw any cards before shuffling. But is this clarified in the rules? I've read the new section under "Shuffling", and it still seems like there's 2 valid interpretations:
1) I need to "do something with my deck" that requires 3 cards. I only have 2 cards. So I'll shuffle first.
2) Drawing is 1 at a time by nature. So at the moment I play Smithy, I need to do something with my deck that requires 1 card, so I draw that card. Then I do that again. Then I still need to do something with my deck that requires 1 card, but I have 0, so I'll shuffle first.
Now obviously the first options is what's intended, because otherwise "put it under your deck" makes no sense. So I guess my question is; is there a general rule about when drawing cards is considered all 1 atomic action? What about "draw up to X" cards? Are those drawn one at a time, checking after each if you've drawn enough?
I think that that was the ruling on "discard down to 3"; that you can discard a Tunnel, then reveal Watchtower to put the Gold on top of your deck, then discard Watchtower as the second card.. but I don't remember for sure.
For Library, it would *have* to be one at a time, because you don't know how many cards you will draw ahead of time. But if you know you are going to have to draw at least 4 cards, (but you might be going through 5 or 6), do you shuffle before beginning if you have less than 4 cards in your draw pile?
When you don't know how many cards you are accessing, you are doing them one at a time, and don't shuffle until you get to that point.
When you do know how many cards you are accessing, if there aren't enough, you shuffle your discard pile first, put it under your deck, then do the thing.
Again the old rule was mystifying with e.g. Lookout.
Obv. just as some people have always done it this way despite it not being the rule, there will be people who don't do it this way now that it is the rule. It makes no difference except for Stash. The entire point of the change is to have a rule that works well. "Do the thing with the remaining cards, then..." always had the issue of "what if the thing really requires all the cards."
-
I don't get this rule. If i play smithy and there are two cards on my deck i draw them correct?
Yes, but before you do, you shuffle your discard pile and place it underneath your deck. Then you draw 3 cards, the first 2 of which are the 2 you had in your draw pile.
Hmm, does this mean that if a Stash was one of the cards remaining in your deck, you can move it so that you don't draw it?
-
I don't get this rule. If i play smithy and there are two cards on my deck i draw them correct?
Yes, but before you do, you shuffle your discard pile and place it underneath your deck. Then you draw 3 cards, the first 2 of which are the 2 you had in your draw pile.
Hmm, does this mean that if a Stash was one of the cards remaining in your deck, you can move it so that you don't draw it?
I assume not... "when you shuffle" on Stash has always meant "when you shuffle, for each stash that's in the pile you are shuffling"...
-
I don't get this rule. If i play smithy and there are two cards on my deck i draw them correct?
Yes, but before you do, you shuffle your discard pile and place it underneath your deck. Then you draw 3 cards, the first 2 of which are the 2 you had in your draw pile.
Hmm, does this mean that if a Stash was one of the cards remaining in your deck, you can move it so that you don't draw it?
I assume not... "when you shuffle" on Stash has always meant "when you shuffle, for each stash that's in the pile you are shuffling"...
I agree with your assumption, but I just wanna point out that in the past there has never been a deck of cards that persists while you shuffle.
-
Tbh the change only really affects Stash if you've got the -1 card token on your deck
-
Tbh the change only really affects Stash if you've got the -1 card token on your deck
You might be misunderstanding the issue. Previously, if you had 4 cards left in your deck at the end of your turn, you would draw 4, be able to look at them, and then decide where you put your Stashes. With the new rule, you can't look at the cards before deciding.
-
Where was the new rule made?
To me it sounds like a bad change that is complicating things.
Before:
When you need to do something with a card in your deck, and there's no cards in your deck, shuffle your discard pile and put it as your new deck.
Now:
When you need to do something with a number of cards in your deck, then start by counting your deck. If there's not enough cards, then shuffle your discard pile and put it below the current cards in your deck.
Or am I missing something?
-
Where was the new rule made?
To me it sounds like a bad change that is complicating things.
Before:
When you need to do something with a card in your deck, and there's no cards in your deck, shuffle your discard pile and put it as your new deck.
Now:
When you need to do something with a number of cards in your deck, then start by counting your deck. If there's not enough cards, then shuffle your discard pile and put it below the current cards in your deck.
Or am I missing something?
This is from the second edition rule book. I agree with you, though I do also see the valid reason for the change; that you don't have to explain how you draw half of your smithy, then shuffle, then finish drawing from it; as well as eliminating the need to remember how many you've drawn so far while shuffling.
-
The new rule is pretty annoying.
Your draw pile is generally a single card long and wide with the rest hidden underneath it. If you want to know how many cards are left, you have to spread them out and count them (making sure not to mess with the current ordering).
Remembering how many cards you drew with Smithy is pretty easy, just set them aside. Even with higher numbers this is not too difficult.
I can understand the reasoning behind the new rule, but the old one is clearly better.
And I wouldn't make it an actual rule, but rather a house rule. If you are playing Embassy and already know that there are 4 cards in your deck, be my guest and shuffle the discard in advance if you wish. Just make sure that your Stashes don't end up in the top 4 after shuffling.
-
While i understand the purpose of the change, i feel it's not a good idea simply because of Stash. It also seems to me that counting the cards is just as much effort as drawing them, meaning you will effectively take twice the time you draw. I get the intention of not having to remember things, and maybe that's worth it. Maybe we're all just old dogs refusing to learn new things. (Does this saying even exist in english...?)
-
Maybe we're all just old dogs refusing to learn new things. (Does this saying even exist in english...?)
Sort of.
-
Tbh the change only really affects Stash if you've got the -1 card token on your deck
You might be misunderstanding the issue. Previously, if you had 4 cards left in your deck at the end of your turn, you would draw 4, be able to look at them, and then decide where you put your Stashes. With the new rule, you can't look at the cards before deciding.
Stash got nerfed! :-[
-
The new rule is pretty annoying.
Your draw pile is generally a single card long and wide with the rest hidden underneath it. If you want to know how many cards are left, you have to spread them out and count them (making sure not to mess with the current ordering).
Remembering how many cards you drew with Smithy is pretty easy, just set them aside. Even with higher numbers this is not too difficult.
I can understand the reasoning behind the new rule, but the old one is clearly better.
And I wouldn't make it an actual rule, but rather a house rule. If you are playing Embassy and already know that there are 4 cards in your deck, be my guest and shuffle the discard in advance if you wish. Just make sure that your Stashes don't end up in the top 4 after shuffling.
Actually I think the new rule allows me to put those Stashes from my discard pile right on top of my deck, on top of cards that weren't drawn yet.
Stash got buffed!?
-
The new rule is pretty annoying.
Your draw pile is generally a single card long and wide with the rest hidden underneath it. If you want to know how many cards are left, you have to spread them out and count them (making sure not to mess with the current ordering).
Remembering how many cards you drew with Smithy is pretty easy, just set them aside. Even with higher numbers this is not too difficult.
I can understand the reasoning behind the new rule, but the old one is clearly better.
And I wouldn't make it an actual rule, but rather a house rule. If you are playing Embassy and already know that there are 4 cards in your deck, be my guest and shuffle the discard in advance if you wish. Just make sure that your Stashes don't end up in the top 4 after shuffling.
Actually I think the new rule allows me to put those Stashes from my discard pile right on top of my deck, on top of cards that weren't drawn yet.
Stash got buffed!?
Mystic/Stash, #NewLegitCombo...?
-
There's a practical way to follow this rule without this being even a little bit of a problem.
When drawing cards, put your hand aside and deal the cards you draw from your deck into another pile, then pick them all up.
This both lets you keep track of how many cards to draw during a reshuffle, and you don't see the cards while shuffling for the remainder.
Stash is lame anyway.
-
The new rule is pretty annoying.
Your draw pile is generally a single card long and wide with the rest hidden underneath it. If you want to know how many cards are left, you have to spread them out and count them (making sure not to mess with the current ordering).
Remembering how many cards you drew with Smithy is pretty easy, just set them aside. Even with higher numbers this is not too difficult.
I can understand the reasoning behind the new rule, but the old one is clearly better.
And I wouldn't make it an actual rule, but rather a house rule. If you are playing Embassy and already know that there are 4 cards in your deck, be my guest and shuffle the discard in advance if you wish. Just make sure that your Stashes don't end up in the top 4 after shuffling.
Actually I think the new rule allows me to put those Stashes from my discard pile right on top of my deck, on top of cards that weren't drawn yet.
Stash got buffed!?
No, I'm pretty sure not. But that's actually a good question. The rule isn't clear on that point. Does "anywhere in your deck" include the unshuffled remained of your draw deck, or only the discard pile that you're shuffling?
-
The new rule is pretty annoying.
Your draw pile is generally a single card long and wide with the rest hidden underneath it. If you want to know how many cards are left, you have to spread them out and count them (making sure not to mess with the current ordering).
Remembering how many cards you drew with Smithy is pretty easy, just set them aside. Even with higher numbers this is not too difficult.
I can understand the reasoning behind the new rule, but the old one is clearly better.
And I wouldn't make it an actual rule, but rather a house rule. If you are playing Embassy and already know that there are 4 cards in your deck, be my guest and shuffle the discard in advance if you wish. Just make sure that your Stashes don't end up in the top 4 after shuffling.
Actually I think the new rule allows me to put those Stashes from my discard pile right on top of my deck, on top of cards that weren't drawn yet.
Stash got buffed!?
No, I'm pretty sure not. But that's actually a good question. The rule isn't clear on that point. Does "anywhere in your deck" include the unshuffled remained of your draw deck, or only the discard pile that you're shuffling?
From Stash's wording, you put it in "your deck", and the undrawn cards are technically your deck, aren't they? I'm pretty sure that's not what the ruling will be like, but following the card verbatim leads there IMO.
-
The new rule is pretty annoying.
Your draw pile is generally a single card long and wide with the rest hidden underneath it. If you want to know how many cards are left, you have to spread them out and count them (making sure not to mess with the current ordering).
Remembering how many cards you drew with Smithy is pretty easy, just set them aside. Even with higher numbers this is not too difficult.
I can understand the reasoning behind the new rule, but the old one is clearly better.
And I wouldn't make it an actual rule, but rather a house rule. If you are playing Embassy and already know that there are 4 cards in your deck, be my guest and shuffle the discard in advance if you wish. Just make sure that your Stashes don't end up in the top 4 after shuffling.
Actually I think the new rule allows me to put those Stashes from my discard pile right on top of my deck, on top of cards that weren't drawn yet.
Stash got buffed!?
No, I'm pretty sure not. But that's actually a good question. The rule isn't clear on that point. Does "anywhere in your deck" include the unshuffled remained of your draw deck, or only the discard pile that you're shuffling?
From Stash's wording, you put it in "your deck", and the undrawn cards are technically your deck, aren't they? I'm pretty sure that's not what the ruling will be like, but following the card verbatim leads there IMO.
I agree. But Stash clearly didn't intend this when it was written.
-
My deck has two cards.
My -1 Card token is on the deck.
I play Smithy.
What happens?
A.
1. would draw 3 cards
2. remove -1 Card token
3. would draw 2 cards
4. draw 2 cards
B.
1. would draw 3 cards
2. reshuffle
3. remove -1 card token
4. would draw 2 cards
5. draw 2 cards
C. I can decide.
-
My deck has two cards.
My -1 Card token is on the deck.
I play Smithy.
What happens?
A.
1. would draw 3 cards
2. remove -1 Card token
3. would draw 2 cards
4. draw 2 cards
B.
1. would draw 3 cards
2. reshuffle
3. remove -1 card token
4. would draw 2 cards
5. draw 2 cards
C. I can decide.
I would say: A.
Why would you shuffe? You have enough cards to draw them without shuffling, so no shuffling.
-
My deck has two cards.
My -1 Card token is on the deck.
I play Smithy.
What happens?
A.
1. would draw 3 cards
2. remove -1 Card token
3. would draw 2 cards
4. draw 2 cards
B.
1. would draw 3 cards
2. reshuffle
3. remove -1 card token
4. would draw 2 cards
5. draw 2 cards
C. I can decide.
I would say: A.
Why would you shuffe? You have enough cards to draw them without shuffling, so no shuffling.
I mean, when does -1 card token really work? Instantly when you are ordered to draw? Or just before you actually draw? This matters on this new rule.
-
You already know you can only draw two cards due to the -1 Card token, so why would you be allowed to 'draw three' before the cards decide, "oh yeah, I've got this token so I can only draw two."
-
You already know you can only draw two cards due to the -1 Card token, so why would you be allowed to 'draw three' before the cards decide, "oh yeah, I've got this token so I can only draw two."
Right. The rule, based on Donald's clarification, seems to be that if you "know" how many you'll draw, that's the number you're dealing with. Now, I'm assuming a really strict definition of "know". Say you opened Library/nothing, and haven't yet bought any other action cards. You play Library on turn 4, with 1 card left in your deck. While you technically "know" that you will draw exactly 3 cards, Library as a whole works such that it doesn't know how many will be drawn; normally you might be needing the next 3 or 4 or more cards, depending on how many action cards you find and skip. So Library always draws 1 at a time.
-
The issue is what it algorithmically means to "know" how many cards you're going to draw, and how that interacts with the token.
If it's A (the one people seem to intuitively feel is correct), it's because the -1 Card Token now works by changing a "+N Cards" instruction into a "+{N - 1} Cards" instruction, and, once everything is settled, the final modified instruction decides the number of cards you "know" you'll draw.
Then other questions are raised about "knowing." If you trash four Rats with Chapel, are you supposed to "know" you're going to draw four cards? If you do, now you have a new layer of the game rules where you start having to look at simultaneously-triggered effects and combining them into single packets of "knowledge."
And what if it was three Rats and a Catacombs? Can you split your "knowledge" up so you can "know" you're drawing two cards (and draw them) before deciding what to gain, then "know" you're drawing the other one? Or do you have to "know" about all three draws at the same time and maybe trigger a reshuffle you didn't want yet?
-
I mean, when does -1 card token really work? Instantly when you are ordered to draw? Or just before you actually draw? This matters on this new rule.
The -1 card token applies as the first step of "draw N cards."
-
Then other questions are raised about "knowing." If you trash four Rats with Chapel, are you supposed to "know" you're going to draw four cards? If you do, now you have a new layer of the game rules where you start having to look at simultaneously-triggered effects and combining them into single packets of "knowledge."
And what if it was three Rats and a Catacombs? Can you split your "knowledge" up so you can "know" you're drawing two cards (and draw them) before deciding what to gain, then "know" you're drawing the other one? Or do you have to "know" about all three draws at the same time and maybe trigger a reshuffle you didn't want yet?
Trashing four Rats with Chapel is, and always has been, four separate +1 Card things, not +4 Cards. Similar for three Rats and Catacombs, where you can pick when in the sequence to resolve the Catacombs.
-
Can you clarify the 2 Stash questions? If you are reshuffling with 2 cards left in your draw pile can you:
1) Take a Stash from your draw pile and put it in the shuffled discard pile?
2) Take a Stash from the shuffled discard pile and put it in/on your draw pile?
-
Can you clarify the 2 Stash questions? If you are reshuffling with 2 cards left in your draw pile can you:
1) Take a Stash from your draw pile and put it in the shuffled discard pile?
2) Take a Stash from the shuffled discard pile and put it in/on your draw pile?
A key issue here is, that I get to reword Stash too. The existing wording was already trouble in that it doesn't make it clear that only Stashes being shuffled can be positioned.
For the moment I would play that your Stashes are marked cards, and you are allowed to take advantage of that, but get no special privileges beyond that; it simply is a card that you can distinguish from the back. That was always the intention and I bet that's how it will end up. The text on the card is just trying to make it clear that you aren't cheating when you make use of knowing which cards are Stashes, and group them at the top or whatever; again I will fix that text.
-
Can you clarify the 2 Stash questions? If you are reshuffling with 2 cards left in your draw pile can you:
1) Take a Stash from your draw pile and put it in the shuffled discard pile?
2) Take a Stash from the shuffled discard pile and put it in/on your draw pile?
A key issue here is, that I get to reword Stash too. The existing wording was already trouble in that it doesn't make it clear that only Stashes being shuffled can be positioned.
For the moment I would play that your Stashes are marked cards, and you are allowed to take advantage of that, but get no special privileges beyond that; it simply is a card that you can distinguish from the back. That was always the intention and I bet that's how it will end up. The text on the card is just trying to make it clear that you aren't cheating when you make use of knowing which cards are Stashes, and group them at the top or whatever; again I will fix that text.
So that means if i have 3 stashes in my discard, 2 cards in my draw pile and then play a Smithy, I am allowed to place the 3 stashes on the very top of my draw pile and then draw them instead of the 2 cards that were originally on top?
-
Can you clarify the 2 Stash questions? If you are reshuffling with 2 cards left in your draw pile can you:
1) Take a Stash from your draw pile and put it in the shuffled discard pile?
2) Take a Stash from the shuffled discard pile and put it in/on your draw pile?
A key issue here is, that I get to reword Stash too. The existing wording was already trouble in that it doesn't make it clear that only Stashes being shuffled can be positioned.
For the moment I would play that your Stashes are marked cards, and you are allowed to take advantage of that, but get no special privileges beyond that; it simply is a card that you can distinguish from the back. That was always the intention and I bet that's how it will end up. The text on the card is just trying to make it clear that you aren't cheating when you make use of knowing which cards are Stashes, and group them at the top or whatever; again I will fix that text.
So that means if i have 3 stashes in my discard, 2 cards in my draw pile and then play a Smithy, I am allowed to place the 3 stashes on the very top of my draw pile and then draw them instead of the 2 cards that were originally on top?
I think it's pretty clear from his post that it is not a thing you can do. He just said to treat Stash as a marked card in a shuffle - ie put it wherever you want in the shuffle, not outside the shuffle.
-
Stash says you place it in your deck, not in your "shuffle". Donald's answer hasn't clarified anything about Gendo's explicit questions to me.
He says you can grupt them at the "top". When you shuffle, the "top" of your deck is the card that were remaining in your draw pile.
-
I can hardly wait for a card that says "When you draw this, +1 Card."
-
Stash says you place it in your deck, not in your "shuffle". Donald's answer hasn't clarified anything about Gendo's explicit questions to me.
He says you can grupt them at the "top". When you shuffle, the "top" of your deck is the card that were remaining in your draw pile.
My answer worked for Chris is me, and I can only spend so much time repeating things.
Stash is just a marked card that it's okay to take advantage of. When I have to draw 3 and have 2 cards left and so shuffle, I don't get to put any of those cards-being-shuffled into the 2, whether or not they're Stashes. Stash doesn't change that, it's just marked.
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
-
Stash says you place it in your deck, not in your "shuffle". Donald's answer hasn't clarified anything about Gendo's explicit questions to me.
He says you can grupt them at the "top". When you shuffle, the "top" of your deck is the card that were remaining in your draw pile.
The answer was clear enough for me; to be more explicit it's "no" to both my questions. To rephrase what Donald said, just pretend that Stash has no text or ability beyond Silver. It just has a different back. Because it has a different back, whenever you shuffle, nothing stops you from shuffling as much as you want until all your stashes are exactly where you want them to be. But they could never jump out of or into the set of cards you are shuffling.
-
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
When you shuffle, put this anywhere in your deck (the new bit that you just shuffled, not the vestigial leftover bit of your last deck).
-
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
When you shuffle, put this anywhere in your deck (the new bit that you just shuffled, not the vestigial leftover bit of your last deck).
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
It's not that bad really.
-
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
When you shuffle, put this anywhere in your deck (the new bit that you just shuffled, not the vestigial leftover bit of your last deck).
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
It's not that bad really.
"While shuffling, it's not cheating to use the fact that this has a different back to your advantage, so you can shuffle in such a way that these cards end up in the position that you want."
-
My natural undertsanding of "shuffling" is "randomizing the order of cards in your deck" (once). If you understand it as randomizing until you like the result (as far as you can judge it from the backs), you could just as well argue you can just flip your discard and not shuffle it all.
-
Can we expect a Secret History of Shuffling?
-
My natural undertsanding of "shuffling" is "randomizing the order of cards in your deck" (once). If you understand it as randomizing until you like the result (as far as you can judge it from the backs), you could just as well argue you can just flip your discard and not shuffle it all.
Normally, you're right. But Stash is an exception to this rule. The very fact that Stash has a different back requires a different definition of Shuffling (or a rule saying that you have to close your eyes while shuffling).
-
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
When you shuffle, put this anywhere in your deck (the new bit that you just shuffled, not the vestigial leftover bit of your last deck).
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
It's not that bad really.
While shuffling, it's not cheating to use the fact that this has a different back to your advantage, so you can shuffle in such a way that these cards end up in the position that you want.
How is this a response to my post?
My point was directed at wero, that the wording change doesn't have to be as crazy as his proposed new wording.
-
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
When you shuffle, put this anywhere in your deck (the new bit that you just shuffled, not the vestigial leftover bit of your last deck).
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
It's not that bad really.
While shuffling, it's not cheating to use the fact that this has a different back to your advantage, so you can shuffle in such a way that these cards end up in the position that you want.
How is this a response to my post?
My point was directed at wero, that the wording change doesn't have to be as crazy as his proposed new wording.
Sorry, should have put quotation marks around my post; it was suggesting a possible (purposefully silly, but technically accurate) alternative wording.
-
This may not be clear from the current wording of Stash but it will one day get a better wording.
When you shuffle, put this anywhere in your deck (the new bit that you just shuffled, not the vestigial leftover bit of your last deck).
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
It's not that bad really.
While shuffling, it's not cheating to use the fact that this has a different back to your advantage, so you can shuffle in such a way that these cards end up in the position that you want.
How is this a response to my post?
My point was directed at wero, that the wording change doesn't have to be as crazy as his proposed new wording.
Sorry, should have put quotation marks around my post; it was suggesting a possible (purposefully silly, but technically accurate) alternative wording.
Ohhhhhhhh. I'm with you.
-
Are we getting back into this debate? Do we need to discuss if it's possible to shuffle a single Stash?
-
If you use Apprentice to trash Scrying Pool, is that +{1+1+2} Cards? Or +{2+2} Cards? Or just +4 Cards?
-
If you use Apprentice to trash Scrying Pool, is that +{1+1+2} Cards? Or +{2+2} Cards? Or just +4 Cards?
+4 cards I assume. But that's going with the non-literal interpretation of Apprentice as "Potion counts as 2 coins for the purposes of calculating how many cards you draw".
-
If you use Apprentice to trash Scrying Pool, is that +{1+1+2} Cards? Or +{2+2} Cards? Or just +4 Cards?
+4 cards I assume. But that's going with the non-literal interpretation of Apprentice as "Potion counts as 2 coins for the purposes of calculating how many cards you draw".
I think I'd disagree. Seems like you do +X cards or +1 + 1 + ... +1 (X times) where X is the coin cost, and then do +2 Cards if there is a P.
-
If you use Apprentice to trash Scrying Pool, is that +{1+1+2} Cards? Or +{2+2} Cards? Or just +4 Cards?
+4 cards I assume. But that's going with the non-literal interpretation of Apprentice as "Potion counts as 2 coins for the purposes of calculating how many cards you draw".
I think I'd disagree. Seems like you do +X cards or +1 + 1 + ... +1 (X times) where X is the coin cost, and then do +2 Cards if there is a P.
Well I don't think +1+1+2 is an option at all; the first "+1 card per (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) in its cost" is a single instruction, and you clearly know how many cards you'll be accessing before you start. No reason to treat it different than +3 cards.
Because the +2 Cards is a separate instruction, you could make an argument for it not being part of the same draw. And as literally worded, that's true. But here's a case where the literal wording doesn't match the clear intent of the card, and until the new shuffle rule, there were no functional differences between the wording and the intent.
-
If you use Apprentice to trash Scrying Pool, is that +{1+1+2} Cards? Or +{2+2} Cards? Or just +4 Cards?
+4 cards I assume. But that's going with the non-literal interpretation of Apprentice as "Potion counts as 2 coins for the purposes of calculating how many cards you draw".
I think I'd disagree. Seems like you do +X cards or +1 + 1 + ... +1 (X times) where X is the coin cost, and then do +2 Cards if there is a P.
Well I don't think +1+1+2 is an option at all; the first "+1 card per (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) in its cost" is a single instruction, and you clearly know how many cards you'll be accessing before you start. No reason to treat it different than +3 cards.
Because the +2 Cards is a separate instruction, you could make an argument for it not being part of the same draw. And as literally worded, that's true. But here's a case where the literal wording doesn't match the clear intent of the card, and until the new shuffle rule, there were no functional differences between the wording and the intent.
I agree on the first I think. I'd still say it's +X then +2 and not +(X+2). Unless Apprentice itself gets a rewording.
Edit: It's not clear to me that "potion counts as two coins for the purposes of calculating how many cards you draw" is necessarily the clear intent. In a proposed 2PP card (costs is 2 coins plus 2 P), Apprentice as-is draws 4, your intent looks like it would imply 6.
-
If you use Apprentice to trash Scrying Pool, is that +{1+1+2} Cards? Or +{2+2} Cards? Or just +4 Cards?
+2, +2. "+1 Card per" is a big lump of drawing cards; the separate sentence is separate.
If it's sufficiently important to people we can not reprint Stash. I am confident that the new shuffling rule is better than the old one. I don't mind people venting, but whatever, that's the new shuffling rule, the rulebooks are printed and shipped to distributors; there will be no recall. Lots of people have been using that method for years and it has produced no questions. My feeling was, if Stash got messed up, that was worth it. It's just Stash. How many games will somebody Apprentice a Scrying Pool, triggering a shuffle where the number of cards drawn at once matters due to Stash? It's just poking at the rules, not actually having games messed up.
Incidentally the -1 Card token stuff isn't relevant to this; you can already ask those questions with no Stash and the old rule (no cards left in deck, -1 Card token, told to draw a card, do you shuffle).
I do not think there is a reasonable way to phrase Stash that lets you look at the cards, but Stash hasn't been reprinted with a new phrasing yet, so you-all are welcome to take a shot at it.
-
Poking at the rules is what we do best! I'm willing to bet that even if Stash didn't exist, you'd be getting all these same questions, because man, people want to know.
-
I would rather live with the fact that Stash can sometimes show up before the rest of the cards remaining in a pre-shuffle draw deck, then go without Stash. Scavenger needs his friend.
-
Incidentally the -1 Card token stuff isn't relevant to this; you can already ask those questions with no Stash and the old rule (no cards left in deck, -1 Card token, told to draw a card, do you shuffle).
Sure, but it seems like the answers to those questions could easily have changed under the new rule. Or at least there were multiple ways they could have "stayed the same."
If it's sufficiently important to people we can not reprint Stash.
I'm poking at the rules, but that's not because I think they're causing problems; that's just because I like rules. So it's definitely not sufficiently important to me. I'd prefer Stash stick around. (Of course my other "deprecated" cards aren't actually going to go away, so neither would Stash. ;D)
I liked Haddock's wording for it. It's both precise and concise:
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
And, uh, I guess you can't answer anything about this, so I'll just wonder aloud. You mentioned reprinting Stash and it makes me wonder in what form we might see promo cards reprinted. Or maybe you already said and I missed it.
-
I liked Haddock's wording for it. It's both precise and concise:
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
Note that this does not make Stash function like it used to (letting you see the cards not being shuffled), or make it cease to matter if your draw-4 was 2+2 or what.
And, uh, I guess you can't answer anything about this, so I'll just wonder aloud. You mentioned reprinting Stash and it makes me wonder in what form we might see promo cards reprinted. Or maybe you already said and I missed it.
Currently there are no plans to change how English promos are distributed; RGG gives them to BGG to support BGG, and BGG sells them (and then sometimes they're available other ways briefly, and foreign publishers have a lot of leeway in terms of how they give theirs out). RGG doesn't want to e.g. sell a box of promos, because then he'd no longer be supporting BGG with them. For all I know that may change someday, but it has not changed yet.
They get printed up as "needed." Apparently Black Market is sold out so that one might be first to get a new printing. I don't know when that stuff will happen though, or if Black Market is actually next in line or what (after the new one). One day, and it will be a surprise, I will find out that now some subset of the new images are being made and I will proofread them and all that. Black Market will be a lot better-phrased, saying you can play treasures and stuff. Envoy won't say "draw." You know. Whatever good improvements, like any expansion getting this treatment. And so Stash, it will get a new wording too, trying to be a good one.
As it stands that wording is similar to Haddock's, meaning it does not preserve the ability to peek at those cards, meaning it in turn creates rules questions for certain card-drawers.
-
I liked Haddock's wording for it. It's both precise and concise:
When you shuffle this, put this anywhere among the shuffled cards.
Note that this does not make Stash function like it used to (letting you see the cards not being shuffled), or make it cease to matter if your draw-4 was 2+2 or what.
If you really want that...
While this is in your discard pile, if you would draw, reveal, or look at a number of cards from some location in your deck greater than 1 and greater than the number of cards in your deck, instead do the following that many times: perform that operation on one card from that location in your deck, then look at the top card of the trash (so they're really separate operations).
or
In games using this, if you would shuffle this, instead use the 1st edition shuffle rules.
-
If you really want that...
Well, I'm just saying. I don't have it and so far that's why it's not happening.
In games using this, if you would shuffle this, instead use the 1st edition shuffle rules.
Now you're talking. We can get that shorter though.
In games using this, it's 2008. It's okay that this card is marked.
-
Lots of people have been using that method for years and it has produced no questions.
I have never seen anyone count their draw pile everytime they draw, then potentially shuffle the discard, lift up the draw pile, then place the shuffled discard under it. I also can't imagine anyone actually doing this. What people might do is start drawing cards, not make use of their ability to look at their hand before shuflling the discard, then continue drawing. Maybe they even set aside some cards instead of starting to draw, but still the cards are not part of the draw pile any more when they shuffle (you might argue that they are not drawn yet either, but they're definitely no in the draw pile)
-
Lots of people have been using that method for years and it has produced no questions.
I have never seen anyone count their draw pile everytime they draw, then potentially shuffle the discard, lift up the draw pile, then place the shuffled discard under it. I also can't imagine anyone actually doing this. What people might do is start drawing cards, not make use of their ability to look at their hand before shuflling the discard, then continue drawing. Maybe they even set aside some cards instead of starting to draw, but still the cards are not part of the draw pile any more when they shuffle (you might argue that they are not drawn yet either, but they're definitely no in the draw pile)
I always look at the so-far drawn cards before shuffling, for reasons of anticipation (oh my first 4 cards for next turn contain 2 terminals, will my 5th be a Village? C'mon,Village!)
-
Lots of people have been using that method for years and it has produced no questions.
I have never seen anyone count their draw pile everytime they draw, then potentially shuffle the discard, lift up the draw pile, then place the shuffled discard under it. I also can't imagine anyone actually doing this. What people might do is start drawing cards, not make use of their ability to look at their hand before shuflling the discard, then continue drawing. Maybe they even set aside some cards instead of starting to draw, but still the cards are not part of the draw pile any more when they shuffle (you might argue that they are not drawn yet either, but they're definitely no in the draw pile)
I'm not sure why you're saying that as a reply to me.
No-one counts their draw pile when playing Smithy, and no-one has to; but everyone every time counts the cards they're taking, because that's how you draw 3 cards as opposed to any other number. And when the draw pile didn't have 3, they've counted it. I have seen multiple people see that it's not 3, shuffle the rest without having added the 1-2 cards to their hand, actually how in the world he must be making this up stick the 1-2 cards on top, then draw. I don't know where they got the idea; it was nothing to do with me.
I am sure lots of people will not move the cards to the deck top when the thing being done is drawing, since usually it's obviously not necessary. More people perhaps will not instantly add the cards to their hand, which would be great, since adding them instantly to your hand increases the chance you will forget how many you've drawn already (historically I have put them on the Smithy). The big thing though is, that when it's something trickier, it's handled.
-
Lots of people have been using that method for years and it has produced no questions.
I have never seen anyone count their draw pile everytime they draw, then potentially shuffle the discard, lift up the draw pile, then place the shuffled discard under it. I also can't imagine anyone actually doing this. What people might do is start drawing cards, not make use of their ability to look at their hand before shuflling the discard, then continue drawing. Maybe they even set aside some cards instead of starting to draw, but still the cards are not part of the draw pile any more when they shuffle (you might argue that they are not drawn yet either, but they're definitely no in the draw pile)
I'm not sure why you're saying that as a reply to me.
You claimed that lots of people were already using the new rules, which require you to do waht I described (including putting the shuffled cards under the rest of your draw pile), I stated my doubts about that.
I'm pretty sure people will find it ridiculous when I actually follow the new rules.
-
You claimed that lots of people were already using the new rules, which require you to do waht I described (including putting the shuffled cards under the rest of your draw pile), I stated my doubts about that.
I'm pretty sure people will find it ridiculous when I actually follow the new rules.
The new rules do not at any point tell you to count how many cards are in your deck.
I have actually seen multiple people, not instructed by me or the rulebook to do so, put the non-shuffled cards on the shuffled cards before drawing.
-
You claimed that lots of people were already using the new rules, which require you to do waht I described (including putting the shuffled cards under the rest of your draw pile), I stated my doubts about that.
I'm pretty sure people will find it ridiculous when I actually follow the new rules.
The new rules do not at any point tell you to count how many cards are in your deck.
I have actually seen multiple people, not instructed by me or the rulebook to do so, put the non-shuffled cards on the shuffled cards before drawing.
Some people just march to the beat of their own drum.
-
If Stash is being opened up again, would it be worth giving it a slight buff, especially now one of its enablers is out of print?
-
If Stash is being opened up again, would it be worth giving it a slight buff, especially now one of its enablers is out of print?
I can't give it a buff. It can change in functionality very mildly ala Moneylender, and can either be a victim of the rules change or change to preserve itself, but getting +1 Buy or whatever is out of the question.
-
It looks like I can phrase Stash in a way that preserves its old functionality after all.
-
It looks like I can phrase Stash in a way that preserves its old functionality after all.
Cool.
Fwiw, my intended wording was made assuming that you WANTED the functionality to change with the new shuffling rules. (Or that you weren't bothered if it did change.) It was only to deal with the potential "can I actually topdeck my Stash onto the bit of my deck I'm not shuffling" issue.
It's hardly a significant deal either way, however we want it to be done. Interested to see what the new wording that preserves the functionality might be, I haven't thought much about it.
-
Here's a question. Will the new online platform have all the cards with the unpublished new wordings? For instance Stash or Embargo which will be functionally, albeit subtly, different... In the other thread it seemed like an Embargo rules question for the online platform was based on the new wording that hasn't been published.
-
Here's a question. Will the new online platform have all the cards with the unpublished new wordings? For instance Stash or Embargo which will be functionally, albeit subtly, different... In the other thread it seemed like an Embargo rules question for the online platform was based on the new wording that hasn't been published.
You'd want to ask this where Stef or SCSN would see it. I can tell you that they know the new wordings, and that I'd be fine with them using the new wordings.
-
It's just Stash.
My parents always said they loved all their children equally, but I didn't believe them.