Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Rules Questions => Topic started by: AJD on November 03, 2012, 06:59:43 pm
-
The "Buy" operation doesn't target a specific card. It targets a specific card name in the supply. In other words, what you do when you buy a card isn't this:
(1a) Choose a card in the supply
(1b) Pay for it
(1c) Gain the chosen card
It's this:
(2a) Choose a card name of which there is a copy in the supply
(2b) Pay for it
(2c) Gain a copy of the chosen card
We can tell by means of Talisman, whose relevant effect is:
"When you buy a card... gain a copy of it."
As we know, things that trigger on-buy take place before the gain that is the result of the buy. So if you buy a Pearl Diver with Talisman in play, you gain a copy of Pearl Diver before you gain the one that you're actually buying. Naturally you gain the Pearl Diver on top of the pile.
So: if the Buy operation targets a specific card—again necessarily the top one of the pile—then in the case of Talisman, by the time you get around to gaining the bought card, you've already gained it, through Talisman's on-buy effect, and there's nothing left to gain through the actual Buy operation. If the Buy operation targets a card name, then it doesn't care that the Pearl Diver you were trying to buy is already gone from the supply by the time you get around to gaining it; there's no specific Pearl Diver you were trying to buy, and any card named "Pearl Diver" will do.
-
Alternate hypotheses:
—Talisman causes you to gain the second card in a pile, not the top card (not probable)
—On-buy effects take place after the bought card has left the supply, but before you gain it (sounds reasonable, but weird interaction with Trader)
-
I don't really have a rules question here; there's nothing unclear about what to do in actual gameplay. I'm more like doing empirical science on the Dominion rules: we know how the cards actually behave; what does that tell us about the fundamental structure of the rules?
-
How does Talisman work with Knight? Say you have played a Bridge or Highway, so that Knights cost $4. If you play Talisman and buy "Knight", then you could gain two Knights (unless the top Knight is Dame Josephine, who is a Victory card). But if you buy "Dame Anna", you cannot gain a copy of her, because the next knight on the pile is different.
-
How does Talisman work with Knight? Say you have played a Bridge or Highway, so that Knights cost $4. If you play Talisman and buy "Knight", then you could gain two Knights (unless the top Knight is Dame Josephine, who is a Victory card). But if you buy "Dame Anna", you cannot gain a copy of her, because the next knight on the pile is different.
Not quite... you cannot buy "Knight", as "Knight" is not the name of a card. You do choose "Dame Anna", but that's still not choosing a specific card, it's choosing a card name. Any "Dame Anna" will do. There just so happens to only be one. So, with Talisman... my guess is...
Sir Martin is on top. You choose to buy him with Talisman in play (he already costs $4).
You buy Sir Martin. Before you gain him (while he is still on the pile), Talisman kicks in and gains you Sir Martin.
You attempt to gain the Sir Martin that you bought, but you cannot, as there is no longer a Sir Martin in the pile.
Man that's weird. But it's the only way I can see it working...
-
How does Talisman work with Knight? Say you have played a Bridge or Highway, so that Knights cost $4. If you play Talisman and buy "Knight", then you could gain two Knights (unless the top Knight is Dame Josephine, who is a Victory card). But if you buy "Dame Anna", you cannot gain a copy of her, because the next knight on the pile is different.
Not quite... you cannot buy "Knight", as "Knight" is not the name of a card. You do choose "Dame Anna", but that's still not choosing a specific card, it's choosing a card name. Any "Dame Anna" will do. There just so happens to only be one. So, with Talisman... my guess is...
Sir Martin is on top. You choose to buy him with Talisman in play (he already costs $4).
You buy Sir Martin. Before you gain him (while he is still on the pile), Talisman kicks in and gains you Sir Martin.
You attempt to gain the Sir Martin that you bought, but you cannot, as there is no longer a Sir Martin in the pile.
Man that's weird. But it's the only way I can see it working...
I'm certain this is correct. Ruins work the same way.
-
Alternate hypotheses:
...
—On-buy effects take place after the bought card has left the supply, but before you gain it (sounds reasonable, but weird interaction with Trader)
I like this better than your OP. It seems more intuitive. In fact, I'm not sure how it could work any other way. If we have already executed 2c as part of the original "buy" operation, aren't we going to gain first the card we originally targeted anyway?
And it seems we do indeed need to have executed 2c, since if we haven't, then the "when" effect won't trigger...unless you want to argue that the effect is triggering after 2b, instead.
Maybe you could point out in your scheme where the copy gaining would occur -- after 2c? Before 2c?
On another note, I like this thread because it means I'm not the only one thinking about questions that have no practical application to the game.
-
I don't really have a rules question here; there's nothing unclear about what to do in actual gameplay. I'm more like doing empirical science on the Dominion rules: we know how the cards actually behave; what does that tell us about the fundamental structure of the rules?
I did not see this weirdness with Talisman (or it would probably say "when you gain"). You gain the Talisman copy before the regular card (although they're always the same and probably it's best if I don't make different cards with the same name).
"When-buy" triggers after buying but before gaining; this is in the rulebook. I have previously ruled that Workshop etc. involve choosing a specific card, and it would be nice to both stick with that and have buying match it.
I am going to put off making a ruling here, since you didn't need one. For sure I want Talisman to work, so either buying doesn't gain a specific card (as you reasoned), or bought cards go to bought-card-land, or you buy the 2nd card down and there's a caveat to let you see the 2nd Ruins. Bought-card-land with a Trader clause would look awful in a rulebook, and the 2nd card down, that's not happening. I know had a good reason for the Workshop ruling though I don't feel like looking it up. Anyway if it's non-specific then it might be, choose a card in the supply, pay its cost, gain a copy of it.
@Markov Chain: Talisman can't gain a Knight; it can gain a Ruins but only if the next one down is the same one.
-
I don't really have a rules question here; there's nothing unclear about what to do in actual gameplay. I'm more like doing empirical science on the Dominion rules: we know how the cards actually behave; what does that tell us about the fundamental structure of the rules?
I did not see this weirdness with Talisman (or it would probably say "when you gain").
I don't think Talisman could say "when you gain", or it would automatically drain an entire pile, wouldn't it?
I am going to put off making a ruling here, since you didn't need one.
Thanks, then, for thoughtfully responding anyway!
For sure I want Talisman to work, so either buying doesn't gain a specific card (as you reasoned), or bought cards go to bought-card-land, or you buy the 2nd card down and there's a caveat to let you see the 2nd Ruins. Bought-card-land with a Trader clause would look awful in a rulebook, and the 2nd card down, that's not happening. I know had a good reason for the Workshop ruling though I don't feel like looking it up.
Is the Workshop ruling the one that had something to do with Trader and blue dogs? Bought-card-land would be pretty awful.
Anyway if it's non-specific then it might be, choose a card in the supply, pay its cost, gain a copy of it.
Makes sense to me.
-
Alternate hypotheses:
...
—On-buy effects take place after the bought card has left the supply, but before you gain it (sounds reasonable, but weird interaction with Trader)
I like this better than your OP. It seems more intuitive.
The problem is if "Buying" involves paying for a card and removing it from the supply, and then "Gaining" happens, if you reveal a Trader to a card you've bought then they card has already left the supply by the time the Trader has been revealed and something has to cause it to go back to the supply. If "Buying" just involves ''choosing'' the card and paying for it, when you reveal Trader the card is still in the supply.
In fact, I'm not sure how it could work any other way. If we have already executed 2c as part of the original "buy" operation, aren't we going to gain first the card we originally targeted anyway?
(2c) (or (1c)) isn't strictly part of the "buy" operation; it's a consequence of it. On-buy effects happen before (c) but after (b).
Maybe you could point out in your scheme where the copy gaining would occur -- after 2c? Before 2c?
(2a,b): "Buy" the Pearl Diver—i.e., select "Pearl Diver" and pay $2.
—"When-buy" effect triggers: Gain a Pearl Diver.
(2c): Gain a Pearl Diver.
On another note, I like this thread because it means I'm not the only one thinking about questions that have no practical application to the game.
Empirical science!
-
I don't think Talisman could say "when you gain", or it would automatically drain an entire pile, wouldn't it?
Yes, and when-buy solves that problem, but you can solve it other ways if you have to.
ghorsche at BGG asked, "Why can't I pick an empty Supply pile for Workshop?" That is where I said "you pick a card."
-
Alternate hypotheses:
...
—On-buy effects take place after the bought card has left the supply, but before you gain it (sounds reasonable, but weird interaction with Trader)
I like this better than your OP. It seems more intuitive.
The problem is if "Buying" involves paying for a card and removing it from the supply, and then "Gaining" happens, if you reveal a Trader to a card you've bought then they card has already left the supply by the time the Trader has been revealed and something has to cause it to go back to the supply. If "Buying" just involves ''choosing'' the card and paying for it, when you reveal Trader the card is still in the supply.
In fact, I'm not sure how it could work any other way. If we have already executed 2c as part of the original "buy" operation, aren't we going to gain first the card we originally targeted anyway?
(2c) (or (1c)) isn't strictly part of the "buy" operation; it's a consequence of it. On-buy effects happen before (c) but after (b).
Maybe you could point out in your scheme where the copy gaining would occur -- after 2c? Before 2c?
(2a,b): "Buy" the Pearl Diver—i.e., select "Pearl Diver" and pay $2.
—"When-buy" effect triggers: Gain a Pearl Diver.
(2c): Gain a Pearl Diver.
On another note, I like this thread because it means I'm not the only one thinking about questions that have no practical application to the game.
Empirical science!
Good answers. I like how Trader is also explained by this. At this point I'm sold on your model.
-
Gaining a copy of a card has to be triggered after the gain of the card. Otherwise it's not a copy.
-
Gaining a copy of a card has to be triggered after the gain of the card.
And yet this is not how Talisman works.
Otherwise it's not a copy.
This isn't how the term "copy" is ordinarily used in Dominion. For instance, with Ambassador you can reveal a card, return a "copy" of it to the supply, and then have your opponent gain a "copy" of that—and the revealed card and its two "copies" are all actually the same card.
-
Actually, you're making a logical mistake. With amb, you reveal an actual copper, return a virtual copper and have your opponent gain a copy of the copper you revealed. (or estate/curse whatever). To gain a "copy" of a card you bought, you must have gained the bought card first.
-
Actually, you're making a logical mistake. With amb, you reveal an actual copper, return a virtual copper and have your opponent gain a copy of the copper you revealed. (or estate/curse whatever).
I don't know what you mean by "return a virtual copper". Sometimes with Ambassador I return an actual Copper! And when I do, it is often the same one I revealed. And then my opponent gains that same one.
To gain a "copy" of a card you bought, you must have gained the bought card first.
Again, this is untrue; and we know that it's untrue because of how Talisman works.
-
Actually, you're making a logical mistake. With amb, you reveal an actual copper, return a virtual copper and have your opponent gain a copy of the copper you revealed. (or estate/curse whatever).
I don't know what you mean by "return a virtual copper". Sometimes with Ambassador I return an actual Copper! And when I do, it is often the same one I revealed. And then my opponent gains that same one.
To gain a "copy" of a card you bought, you must have gained the bought card first.
Again, this is untrue; and we know that it's untrue because of how Talisman works.
Your opponent never gains "that same one". Let's say, just for the sake of the argument, I really don't believe you ever played a game where this happened, that you returned the last copper in the deck. Your opponent gained a copy of the card you revealed, which was in the deck after you returned it. The fact that it happens to be the same copper that you revealed is totally irrelevant. "Copy" in this case, is telling you to replicate whatever card was revealed. When you tell the computer to replicate whichever card was "bought" there is necessarily a "buy" which means acquiring a card. It's logically impossible to replicate an acquired card if that card was not acquired first.
-
It's logically impossible to replicate an acquired card if that card was not acquired first.
Talisman says, when you *buy* a card (non-vp costing $4 or less), gain a copy of it. A copy of the card you *bought*.
*Buying* isn't *gaining*. Buying is paying for the card; gaining is when you get it. It's like how you can buy a CD on Amazon and then maybe it never shows up. You bought it; you didn't gain it. Get it?
And in fact you can buy a card in Dominion without gaining it, via Trader. But we still know what you *bought*.
-
It's logically impossible to replicate an acquired card if that card was not acquired first.
Talisman says, when you *buy* a card (non-vp costing $4 or less), gain a copy of it. A copy of the card you *bought*.
*Buying* isn't *gaining*. Buying is paying for the card; gaining is when you get it. It's like how you can buy a CD on Amazon and then maybe it never shows up. You bought it; you didn't gain it. Get it?
And in fact you can buy a card in Dominion without gaining it, via Trader. But we still know what you *bought*.
If you say so. So I could (dunno why I would want to) play quarry talisman, buy border village highway, reveal a trader to get border village highway highway silver? Silver instead of the second border village, not gain border village silver.
-
It's logically impossible to replicate an acquired card if that card was not acquired first.
Talisman says, when you *buy* a card (non-vp costing $4 or less), gain a copy of it. A copy of the card you *bought*.
*Buying* isn't *gaining*. Buying is paying for the card; gaining is when you get it. It's like how you can buy a CD on Amazon and then maybe it never shows up. You bought it; you didn't gain it. Get it?
And in fact you can buy a card in Dominion without gaining it, via Trader. But we still know what you *bought*.
If you say so. So I could (dunno why I would want to) play quarry talisman, buy border village highway, reveal a trader to get border village highway highway silver? Silver instead of the second border village, not gain border village silver.
Not quite; you never gain the second Border Village, so you won't gain the second Highway either.
-
If you say so. So I could (dunno why I would want to) play quarry talisman, buy border village highway, reveal a trader to get border village highway highway silver? Silver instead of the second border village, not gain border village silver.
Border Village is when-gain, not when-buy. You can buy a Farmland, use its when-buy ability to Remodel something in your hand, then use Trader to gain a Silver instead of the Farmland.
-
Actually, you're making a logical mistake. With amb, you reveal an actual copper, return a virtual copper and have your opponent gain a copy of the copper you revealed. (or estate/curse whatever).
I don't know what you mean by "return a virtual copper". Sometimes with Ambassador I return an actual Copper! And when I do, it is often the same one I revealed. And then my opponent gains that same one.
To gain a "copy" of a card you bought, you must have gained the bought card first.
Again, this is untrue; and we know that it's untrue because of how Talisman works.
Your opponent never gains "that same one". Let's say, just for the sake of the argument, I really don't believe you ever played a game where this happened, that you returned the last copper in the deck. Your opponent gained a copy of the card you revealed, which was in the deck after you returned it. The fact that it happens to be the same copper that you revealed is totally irrelevant. "Copy" in this case, is telling you to replicate whatever card was revealed. When you tell the computer to replicate whichever card was "bought" there is necessarily a "buy" which means acquiring a card. It's logically impossible to replicate an acquired card if that card was not acquired first.
Ok, so this might not be the main topic of this thread, and is really just a nitpick, but if I'm understanding you right, it sounds like you're misunderstanding Ambassador. When you play an Ambassador, if you choose to return more than zero copies of a card to the Supply, the opponent to your left will always gain a physical card you returned.
-Play Ambassador
-Reveal card X
-Put 0-2 copies of card X on card X's Supply pile
-Opponents, in turn order, (attempt to) gain one copy of card X from the top of card X's Supply pile
More on topic, I really like the weirdness with Talisman/Sir Martin where you can simply fail to gain the card you bought :D (at least, failing to gain it at the usual time for gaining your purchases)
-
It's logically impossible to replicate an acquired card if that card was not acquired first.
Talisman says, when you *buy* a card (non-vp costing $4 or less), gain a copy of it. A copy of the card you *bought*.
*Buying* isn't *gaining*. Buying is paying for the card; gaining is when you get it. It's like how you can buy a CD on Amazon and then maybe it never shows up. You bought it; you didn't gain it. Get it?
And in fact you can buy a card in Dominion without gaining it, via Trader. But we still know what you *bought*.
If it makes it any clearer (it doesn't), imagine that the CD was a blue dog. :P
-
Imagine that the CD was Blue Dogs, by Blue Dogs (http://www.amazon.com/Blue-Dogs/dp/B0000000MM).
-
And in fact you can buy a card in Dominion without gaining it, via Trader. But we still know what you *bought*.
So, for example, I can buy a Village with Talisman in play, would-gain a copy of it via Talisman, reveal Trader, gain a Silver, then would-gain the bought Village, decline to reveal the Trader again, and gain a Village?
-
So, for example, I can buy a Village with Talisman in play, would-gain a copy of it via Talisman, reveal Trader, gain a Silver, then would-gain the bought Village, decline to reveal the Trader again, and gain a Village?
Yes, you could take two Villages, a Village and a Silver, a Silver and a Village, or two Silvers.
-
And Village and Silver is not the same as Silver and Village (Watchtower).
-
It appears that in Dominion speak, "a copy of card X" is basically shorthand for "a card (any card) with the same name as card X." It does not mean "a clone of card X," and it is not the opposite of "card X itself." In fact, any time you see a named reference to, e.g., Curse, you could always replace that with "a copy of Curse" and not change the meaning. "Copy" is only used when name of the card being referenced is contingent on gameplay, rather than a set part of the card's effect, but should otherwise operate the same as calling a card by name.
I can't think of anything wrong with saying that Buy targets a specific card in the supply, and then gains you a copy of that card from the supply. The Gaining part of buying is only retrieving information from the targeted specific card, not moving it, so it's allowed to track accurately even if the original target has changed location. That makes Talisman work correctly, even despite strange timings.
-
I did not see this weirdness with Talisman (or it would probably say "when you gain"). You gain the Talisman copy before the regular card (although they're always the same and probably it's best if I don't make different cards with the same name).
A question came to my mind when I read this. Suppose Pearl Divers are embargoed, and that there is only one Pearl Diver remaining in the supply. If I buy a Pearl Diver with a Talisman in play, do I gain a Curse ?
-
A question came to my mind when I read this. Suppose Pearl Divers are embargoed, and that there is only one Pearl Diver remaining in the supply. If I buy a Pearl Diver with a Talisman in play, do I gain a Curse ?
Yes; Embargo triggers on when-buy, and you bought a Pearl Diver.
-
It appears that in Dominion speak, "a copy of card X" is basically shorthand for "a card (any card) with the same name as card X."
Yes, there are ten (or whatever) copies of each card. None of them is the original, they are not copying each other, they are copying the cards Donald used when he was playtesting them.
-
I once tried to write a post about timing in Dominion and all of the events that can trigger during the play of game - from setup (Young Witch, Colonies/Plat, Shelters, etc.) to finish (Island, Native Village, etc.), but man, that was a lot of work.
I also noticed that a lot of things in Dominion don't really exist, it was like trying to understand quantum mechanics.
You can buy a card, but never gain it.
You can even gain a card, but never get it.
You still get money from cards which are no longer there.
Cards are trying to locate cards which have been magically moved.
It's so confusing! :D
-
I once tried to write a post about timing in Dominion and all of the events that can trigger during the play of game
I did one of those!
-
I once tried to write a post about timing in Dominion and all of the events that can trigger during the play of game
I did one of those!
I read it, but I thought it was incomplete.
But then I found out that trying to be complete made that the post wouldn't make a lot of sense or be very useful.
In effect, it would just be an algorithm in pseudocode that isn't readable by humans anymore. ;D
-
Argh Argh Argh.
I actually understand how Talisman works with unique cards and with "the last card"
It's clear to me that Talisman gains the "copy" when the card is bought but before the card is gained from the purchase. And in the case of "unique-card" or "last-card", if another effect deflects the gain, the bought card is still sitting there ready to be gained as the purchase resolves.
But I have to say that for a LONG time, my group was allowing extra gains from a Black Market purchase. This because the text on Talisman doesn't refer to the supply, just to the card being purchased. We felt that the Black Market "dealer" had a line on where these not-in-supply cards came from...and a Black Market stock of 10 or 12 of each (even though we did take the "marker card" out of the Black Market deck once a card was purchased). We only countermanded this when the card was Unique (which was the case for purchasable cards only in Dark Ages.
It takes reading the THIRD SENTENCE of the rulebook description of Talisman before the directive "comes from the Supply" is given. (By the way, in the base game rulebook, not only is "Supply" not specifically defined, but it also randomly appears with the initial letter capitalized, and without.)
However, I still think the combo (and therefore the game, itself) is more fun if we continue to allow the Talisman to copy a purchase from the Black Market.
-
What if Talisman said "After you buy and gain a card, gain a copy of it." That way buying applies to the specific card selected, and Talisman still works.