The sensors are located about a car length back at certain intersections. Sometimes it's optimal to back up if you are the only one waiting to turn.
Personally, I think it would save a lot of card space if Possession just said "Possess the player to your left" and then have the rulebook explain what "possess" means.
They can't say "+1 Coffers" because that's not what they do. They don't each have a unique + because you want to use a term more often before you make people learn it. Well in rare cases you might make people learn a term for one thing, when you can't explain the thing on the card, but that wasn't an issue here.I prefer having a +1 to "take a coin token."
I agree, but the wording change didn't happen for Pirate Ship and Trade Route. Is that because they have quite a different effect from "+# Coffers", or because the idea of changing the phrase came after these revised versions were printed?
With only two remaining "take a coin token" cards, with different effects from "Coffers", I feel that it's fitting these weren't rephrased. Once they're placed on their respective cards, they kind of do the same thing, so I like that you kept the same phrase for these two even in "2nd edition".
Right, this is the premise behind Deal or No Deal. Because each chest is opened randomly, you actually do gain new information with each opened chest, and the expected worth of your chest changes each time.
And the mathiness of Deal or No Deal is pretty neat too. Not as controversial as Let's Make a Deal obviously.
Fun fact: I happened across the show while flipping channels and got sucked in by mistake. The contestant was deciding which box to open, and her family was behind her encouraging her to take her time in making such an important decision. So much math rage that day.
I prefer having a +1 to "take a coin token."
I agree, but the wording change didn't happen for Pirate Ship and Trade Route. Is that because they have quite a different effect from "+# Coffers", or because the idea of changing the phrase came after these revised versions were printed?
With only two remaining "take a coin token" cards, with different effects from "Coffers", I feel that it's fitting these weren't rephrased. Once they're placed on their respective cards, they kind of do the same thing, so I like that you kept the same phrase for these two even in "2nd edition".
The funny thing is that, if the door that is revealed to have a goat was chosen randomly, then it doesn’t make any difference whether you swap doors or not, you have a 50% chance either way. It’s only because the host guarantees that he will open a door with a goat behind it that the odds are skewed in favour of swapping doors.
For a pure reaction:QuoteKing Midas Reaction,
When a player (including you) gains a card costing fromto
, you may reveal this from your hand to exchange the gained card for a Gold.
If you play it on yourself, it's basically a +since it turns a
However, stopping your opponent from gaining Duchies or key engine components could be devastating. Maybe too strong.
- clause; using it on yourself to turn a cheaper card into a Gold doesn't seem that powerful because you still have to have it in hand at the time you buy, and it's not a good card to have to be in your hand. It does need to not work on Provinces though.A rational, if unsporting, player that was losing would go for Possession. )-8
Paul Erdos refused to believe the solution to the Monty Hall problem.
A lot of academics refused to believe it as well:
http://marilynvossavant.com/game-show-problem/
I didn't accept it at first either, but I at least wasn't a petulant little dick about it.
I ate crow when someone suggested expanding the puzzle to 1000 doors. Made me re-examine the math while acknowledging my blinders.
I still think it makes much more sense to ask what the probability is when you first pick, and realize that that probability doesn't change when the host opens another door.
Drop the owner part. How much did the store lose?
The markup is an important distinction, though lost revenue is a thing, but just like many textbook questions, this doesn't figure into the calculation.
My favorite is the woman who talked herself into stating that the store lost $270. Her being wrong was nothing special, but the magnitude in which she was wrong is pretty amazing.
Posting to avoid captcha
".The problem is that the changes were not only wording. There were layout and font changes as well, which apply to every card; not just ones like Throne Room. So if players really want the "second edition" experience, they just need to buy second edition.
I’m aware that many formatting changes were made for appearance and aesthetics. I can’t afford to buy all of dominion a second time though. I’m mostly interested in getting changes to cards that update the rules - so that my existing sets can still be used with the latest one in a consistent way. I wonder how many others would be interested ....
I’m secretly hoping that at some point they will release a rewording update pack. Even in base and intrigue there were a few cards that got small rule changes by rewording the cards. Maybe there are enough out of date (but not deprecated) cards now that there would be a market for an update pack to adddress those - including cards that need the coin token to coffers rework.
All cards you own count for your score and stuff like Gardens etc. . Cards like Island originally said to return them to be nice to the player, spelling out something they didn't need to spell out. But it's like this, by telling out something you didn't need to, if it's lacking, people will think, why isn't it spelled out here, apparently this is different? Lesson learned: Don't spell out things that go by themselves.
Yeah, I've come to terms with this. Gazbag made a good point about Inherited Ratcatchers still counting for points even if they are on your Tavern mat when the game ends. I guess that was the evidence I needed, being as the rules tell a different story.
I'm assuming it's just a product of the rules detailing the "End Game" (1st edition Base and Intrigue) came out long before the first mats (1st edition Seaside). The solution when Seaside came out was then, as you said, to tell the player to do something they probably already assumed they should do anyways, take their cards from their mat and score them. Now (2nd edition Seaside) even that has been put back into obscurity in the expanded rules. I just thought the 2nd edition rules would have cleared this up.
Anyways, it's not such a big deal. I just thought maybe I had stumbled onto some untapped design space and wanted to share. Sorry folks!
*EDIT_02* Here is the actual text from the manual. "Take all of your cards - from your hand, deck, discard pile, play area, and even set aside cards - and sort them for putting them back in their piles. Count up your points." This is a bit off topic, but if a Victory card somehow got onto your Tavern mat and didn't check on itself to be there, would the points still be counted?
I thought the precedent was that "When" happens before anything else happens.
"When another player plays an attack card" happens before the attack.
"When you trash this" happens before you trash it.
The "Game End" seems to be three phases:
(1) Start of Game End.
(2) Take all cards (minus cards on mats if not specified to take).
(3) Scoring.
Since your current version is set aside and will get pulled at phase (2), should you have to specify the condition as being "At the start of Game End" or "At the start of the end of the game"?
I don't think that we can assume that yet. While the very remaining of "take a Coin token" into "+1 Coffers" strongly indicates that DXV has done new stuff with Coin tokens in the upcoming expansion this doesn't imply that there will be nothing with Coffers.Any chance on seeing an update pack for Guilds with the "coin tokens" -> "coffers" cards? If the new expansion is going to call them coffers, we are going to have cards with both terms in the box unless we rebuy Guilds + Cornucopia
The big twist is that Renaissance won't have coffers at all. "There are tokens that let you save coins and actions for later" is actually referring to a completely different mechanic from what we saw in Guilds.
It is like with Durations in Adventures, there was new stuff like Durations that stay out for more or less than 1 turn but also old stuff, i.e. "normal" Durations.
Pretty sure Gendo was joking.
You can just replace Pixie with Mining Village there to get an infinite / “arbitrarily large” amount of coin.
