Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - chipperMDW

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
This is basically what MTG does, except the cards say "You control target player during that player’s next turn."  And that's one of the examples I was talking about where they wrote an entire section of the rules just to explain what that one card did. But now there are multiple other cards that also let you control other players.

Hmm... Mindshaver could be a good name for that Zombie Barber people were talking about earlier.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Best cards to learn specific rules?
« on: July 18, 2018, 09:47:41 am »
I also notice that some players, when buying a card, tend to take that card into their hand, and then do clean-up
I don't see that one. But I do see people confusing their play area and their discard pile quite frequently: gaining to in-play, or playing to the discard pile.

I also see a lot of people throwing their Victory cards into play along with their Treasures. Which can matter.

I'm not sure there's any specific card or cards which demonstrate why these are wrong, though. Any engine will do.

The first one I see very sparingly, the second a lot.

Bonfire would work for the second. I can't quickly think of a simpler one.

I was thinking Pilgrimage.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 13, 2018, 05:11:32 pm »
Have you ever had to choose different artwork or a different concept for a card due to it being printed in a certain country? I know China in particular will censor, like, human skeletons, which could have been a problem for something with Nocturne's theme.

every one of these garbage tangents ends up there anyway

Pro Tip: Never make an insightful post in a thread like this one because your respect will just disappear* when it gets moved to RSP[G].

* Or maybe just turn invisible.



if only less people would make these mistakes


Couldn't resist.

In retrospect, Donald's post making a grammar mistake works well as a joke about people making grammar mistakes. However, because we know he doesn't playtest his posts as jokes, it's funny only due to happy accident. If only you'd known what you were doing, Donald.

If you had perfect info the game would just be mindlessly clicking buttons.

Chess and Go (and, well, Prismata) feel sad.

What does Delayed X mean?

I mean, this is how I think about it:

Code: [Select]
Card           |  Cost to Play        This Turn                  Next Turn  |   Net
Copper         |  -1 Card             +1 Coin                               |  -1 Card +1 Coin
Guardian       |  -1 Card                                        +1 Coin    |  -1 Card +1 Coin
Peddler        |  -1 Action -1 Card   +1 Action +1 Card +1 Coin             |  +1 Coin
Caravan Guard  |  -1 Action -1 Card   +1 Action +1 Card          +1 Coin    |  +1 Coin
Laboratory     |  -1 Action -1 Card   +1 Action +2 Cards                    |  +1 Card
Caravan        |  -1 Action -1 Card   +1 Action +1 Card          +1 Card    |  +1 Card
Den of Sin     |  -1 Card                                        +2 Cards   |  +1 Card

Cards with the same net effect (over this turn and the next) are listed together in a group.

Guardian has the same net effect as Copper, but the coin part is shifted over into next turn, so Guardian is like a delayed Copper. Same logic for Caravan Guard being like a delayed Peddler.

Caravan is like a Lab that has +1 Card of the net effect shifted into next turn. Den of Sin is like a Lab that has +2 Cards of the net effect shifted into next turn (leaving -1 Card for this turn). Den of Sin is not "more delayed," but it has more of its effect delayed.

or even when you draw an Exorcist dead with Gear (save Exorcist and an Estate)

What would it mean to draw a Night card dead?
In the case of Exorcist, typically drawing it with only 0-cost cards.

That's true in general, but crj was using that phrase to describe a situation where you play Gear to draw Exorcist, and you have both the Exorcist and an Estate in hand when you're deciding what to put back for Gear. I'm not sure how the Exorcist could be considered to have been drawn dead in that situation, presuming you'd like to trash the Estate with it. I believe he momentarily forgot that Exorcist was a Night card and was thinking you could draw it and somehow not be able to play it.

(He had already separately covered the case where you draw Exorcist without an Estate, in which case it of course makes sense to set hold back the Exorcist.)

or even when you draw an Exorcist dead with Gear (save Exorcist and an Estate)

What would it mean to draw a Night card dead?

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Fix the worst cards
« on: June 14, 2018, 01:29:08 pm »
I was thinking at least Harvest and Navigator, perhaps.

You mean Vest and Gator?

Dominion FAQ / Re: Counterfeit Clarification
« on: June 06, 2018, 11:03:32 am »
Thank you so much, chipper.

No problem. I'm glad I helped!

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Trashing the Engineer
« on: June 01, 2018, 12:40:51 pm »
Several people in this thread have already talked about the case of trashing Engineer to gain a cheap card and then rebuying the Engineer. This usage makes Engineer work a little bit like Capital in that it effectively converts another card's coin cost into a debt cost.

Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance + Island (or Great Hall or Mill)
« on: May 30, 2018, 11:16:28 am »
You can't Inherit Victory cards.

Likely to prevent this sort of thing from being a question.

It didn't work.

Dominion FAQ / Re: Counterfeit Clarification
« on: May 29, 2018, 09:40:43 pm »
The best way to think about this may be to imagine you have a line of dials in front of you. One says how many actions you can play, one says how many cards you can buy, one says how much spending money you have.

At the start of the turn, those dials get set to 1 action, 1 buy, no spending money.

OK. That makes a lot of sense.

But just so I'm clear (because I think what I'm about to say is right): +X Cards are the first thing you do.

So if you play, say, a Wandering Minstrel:

  • Draw one card.
  • Reveal the Top 3 cards of your deck (etc.).
  • If you have another Action - either from the card you drew or already in hand - now you play that.


When you play a card, you do everything on that card (save for anything below a dividing line) in order.

As allowed during your action phase, you play Wandering Minstrel. (And as with all action cards played at this time, this is done at the cost of reducing your action count by 1).  Following the instructions on the card, you:

   1. Draw one card.
   2. Increase your action count by 2
   3. Reveal [blah blah blah]

At that point, you've finished playing Wandering Minstrel and, since you're still in the action phase and your action count is at least 2, you may play another action card from your hand.  And maybe another one after you finish playing that one.

Imagine that you represent actions by using beads or tokens. (You could even actually do this for a few games if it helps.) The game gives you one action "token" at the start of your turn. In the action phase, you are allowed to play an action card at the cost of giving up one of your action "tokens." Some action cards say "+1 Action" or "+2 Actions"; when you play those, you take that many action "tokens" back. If you have any action "tokens" left after playing an action card, you may play another one, again handing in one of your action "tokens." When you run out of action "tokens," or when you decide you're done playing action cards, you move on to the buy phase.  At the end of the turn (or at least before the beginning of your next turn), you lose any action "tokens" you didn't spend.

Since you're familiar with the wiki, you might take a look at Diadem and see if that makes the idea any clearer.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: May 25, 2018, 01:12:51 am »
The Secret History for Wedding says it used to have a different bonus that you decided not to use until a future expansion. Was that receiving a Boon?

Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: May 18, 2018, 05:20:08 pm »
Hmm, interesting. I'm re-reading that thread. Assuming you were correct (you gain a BoM), isn't it the case that if we go by the interpretation that I wrote (and you agreed on), then it's not using last-known information?

Namely this: Gain a copy of [a card that the player to your right gained on their last turn] costing up to $6.

So the only past information is the names of the cards that your opponent gained (i.e. the names when s/he gained them). That's not something to track, because it's not information connected to a card. It's just something that is taken from the past game state. It's like you said, Treasure Map and Ritual do the same. They don't look at specific cards, but just information from the past game state.

Yeah, I think I see what you're saying. Although it's not so much about what information is remembered as it is about why something is trying to recall it. Smugglers (and Treasure Map and Ritual) are specifically looking for information about a past moment. The last-known information we were talking about earlier in this thread was not meant for things specifically looking for past info, but for things that were actually looking for present info but needed to settle for falling back on past info.

So I think that means Smugglers is not relevant to this thread after all. Never mind!

Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: May 18, 2018, 01:26:29 pm »
Smugglers may be worth mentioning here.

Your right hand opponent gains a BoM, then plays it BoM as Caravan; he gains nothing else on his turn. On your turn you play Smugglers. Do you gain BoM because that's what it was when your opponent gained it? Or do you track the specific BoM and gain a copy of what it is at the moment (Caravan)?

I ask because, in this thread, I asserted that you'd gain a BoM in that situation. I note that this wasn't actually confirmed, so, considering what's been said here, maybe I was wrong about that.

If I was wrong (i.e. you gain a Caravan), then Smugglers also needs to track all gained cards and know what they currently look like. That's useful as an example of something needing to know about a "lost" card for reasons other than playing it.

If I was correct (i.e. you gain a BoM), then Dominion is already using something like last-known information.

Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: May 12, 2018, 12:34:05 pm »
I don't think the other player's card can ever end up in play through this mechanism.
Oh, it surely can!  Suppose your opponent inherited Caravan Guard.  And somewhere in your action chain, after Ambassadoring the Estate, you play an Attack, and your opponent responds by playing several Estates, one of which may or may not have been the Estate you gave to them. 8)

Oh, I see. I misread that part in Violet CLM's post. Neat!

Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: May 12, 2018, 12:11:12 pm »
It's something to think about. We aren't necessarily talking about a Throne Room; an effect could just play a card once, and somehow the card could vanish before being played (e.g. Summon if it didn't say "if you do"). So the rule can't be about what the card was the first time - there may have been no other time. However at some point we knew what card we were talking about, so we can refer to that. It would probably be a confusing rule, though to be fair it covers cases that are confusing any which way. It would be really simple to just not let you play a card without being able to put the physical card into play - like I said, a fine solution for some other game.

(Bolding mine.)

Exactly. Since the rules specify the moment a set of instructions lose track of a card, you can just take the info known prior to that moment. In the Not-Summon situation, the card goes to your discard pile (or wherever it's overridden to go to) and Not-Summon knows where it is and what it looks like at that point. Then a thing happens (e.g. Watchtower or Border Village) and suddenly, from Not-Summon's perspective, the card is gone. Not-Summon still plays the thing it remembers the card looking like last time it saw it.

As I like to point out, the actual problem situation we are talking about is extremely obscure. So, the rules weight it adds wants to be correspondingly tiny.

I understand. I just feel like there's a way to structure the rules so that the "holes" are closed. I think using last-known information would cut off a whole class of weird interaction issues. If it's guaranteed that nothing ever needs to know anything about a card except for what's currently visible or what's remembered about it from the last time it was, then all of this BoM/Fortress/Inheritance/Quarry/Mandarin/Transmute/Procession stuff becomes moot because, no matter where a card gets bounced around during an interaction and no matter what it ends up looking like, the rules already have it covered so that players don't need information they might not have access to. That way, you can design cool, weird things like Inheritance and know that the weird situations they create are fine and already have answers.

I appreciate this new ability to play other people's cards, because it makes the "if it's still in play" wording on Royal Carriage meaningfully distinct from "if you still have it in play." All you have to do is play a card that a different player already has in play, and then you can call Royal Carriage in response to that. Huzzah!

I don't think the other player's card can ever end up in play through this mechanism. (Did it?) In the case described in the OP, the Throne Room says to play the Estate a second time. It has lost track of it, so it can't move it from wherever it is (opponent's discard pile, probably), but it can still produce its on-play effect (which happens to be different from the first time due to belonging to another player at the moment).

Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: May 11, 2018, 10:32:08 pm »
The lose-track change would change Throne / Feast in the original main set; I'm not doing it. People don't know the lose track rule, and the main set rulebook said Throne / Feast worked. For new games this would be a thing to consider; Dominion does not want to mess with that.

I think you can lose track harder and still have Throning Feast work. One way would be to use last-known information for things you lost track of. Throne plays a card in your hand twice. That card's not in your hand anymore after the first play? (Actually true whatever it plays; Feast wouldn't even be a special case.) Ok, just play whatever that card was back when it was in your hand. Throne wants to play an Estate that used to be in your hand but has somehow maybe ended up around the world and in the supply or in your opponent's deck or maybe is still in your hand and nobody really knows for sure where it is? Just play whatever the Estate was when it was in your hand.

There would be complications with BoM, though. The way BoM works now, I guess a Throne would always end up playing it as BoM both times (because that's what it was in your hand) so you'd always get to choose an action to emulate for both plays. If you wanted to change that, maybe you could revert BoM to its old behavior and have it become Feast or whatever as you play it; then Throne would remember it as Feast and play it as Feast twice... which was how that originally worked anyway, I think. (To me, either one of those options seems like an improvement over the current situation where sometimes a Throned BoM is stuck as one card and sometimes it's not.)

Using last-known information would also, I guess, make things like Transmute and Procession work like Ritual and care what stuff looks like just before you trash it, not what it turns into afterwards.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: What is the best knight to inherit?
« on: April 25, 2018, 07:42:56 pm »
10. Dame Josephine

You can't Inherit Dame Josephine.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: A quick Temple tip
« on: April 17, 2018, 11:18:14 am »
This is provided you can spare a card that you feed to the temple and still have $8 for the Province.

Just throw it an Estate.

It's simpler to say "during clean-up, discard all cards you have in play" rather than "during clean-up, check each card in play to see if it's the last turn it did something, discarding them from play."

To clarify, that bit ("last turn it did something") applies only to durations. Possession does stuff past the current turn, but gets discarded on the turn it was played; the Possession FAQ is explicit that this happens, and that it happens because it's not a duration:
Quote from: Alchemy Rulebook
Unlike Outpost, Possession is not a Duration card. It is discarded in the Cleanup phase of the turn you played it.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Scariest art in each expansion
« on: April 03, 2018, 10:09:52 am »
That thing on the First Edition Intrigue box: the one whose head can spin around backwards and is staring right at you.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Playing the new Guilds & Cornucopia!
« on: March 20, 2018, 04:38:39 pm »
Does 2E Cornucopia/Guilds have recommended kingdoms with Alchemy? If so, are they effectively subdivided into Alchemy/Cornucopia and Alchemy/Guilds kingdoms (the way 2E Prosperity and Seaside did it)? And does it have recommended kingdoms using Cornucopia/Guilds alone? If so, do they have 5 cards each from Cornucopia and Guilds? Are there any all-Cornucopia or all-Guilds recommended kingdoms?

If we got A/C, A/G, and C/G, then I think we would at last have recommended kingdoms for all current pairings! And if we didn't get any all-Cornucopia or all-Guilds sets, that means we probably aren't getting an all-Alchemy kingdom (since those are/were all small sets), which would mean we may also have completed the set of recommended kingdoms for the currently released sets!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9

Page created in 0.126 seconds with 19 queries.