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 - Jeebus

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 47
1
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Complexity of Dominion
« on: October 07, 2018, 07:45:28 pm »
The base rules document for Dominion is about 8 pages of relatively user-friendly text with pictures (excluding parts that aren't rules). If you tack on the unique rules for all the expansions, it might take another 6 pages if you condense examples. The currently complete rules document would be about 10-15 pages long, depending on formatting and verbosity of the examples given. Most of the expansions rules documents are taken up by the notes (which aren't rules relevant in nearly all cases) and recommended sets (thank you Donald, these are wonderful).

It wouldn't be as detailed in timing as other documents meticulously made by others here, but would be essentially complete.

Well, my rules document devotes 30 pages to the actual rules for all explansions, including going through all contents and setup of all expensions, with a few pictures and examples, but not including most of the special card-specific clarifications and rulings. And the rules are written pretty densely, more so than in the official rules. Sure, there are some very specific and corner-case rules included (in small print), but since we're comparing it to a very detailed Magic document...

Maybe it's better to compare words. Those 30 pages of Dominion rules amount to about 15,000 words. The Magic document has about 116,000 words, so 13% of the complexity maybe?

2
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Complexity of Dominion
« on: October 07, 2018, 07:35:20 pm »
The closest we have is the wording on Outpost, which says you draw 3 cards for your next turn. This needs to be “applied” before Expedition; otherwise you can logically conclude that if you play Outpost and buy Expedition; you should only draw 3. I think the way it works is that the Outpost rule is actually that it makes you draw 2 fewer cards; rather than makes you draw 3.

I always interpreted it like this: Outpost changes your next hand to 3, so it has to trigger before you draw (effectively "when you would draw your next hand"). You could interpret Expedition and Flag the same way, but since they tell you to draw more cards, I find it more natural to think of them as triggering afterwards ("when you draw your next hand, draw x extra cards"). This way we don't need to apply any extra timing rule or change the math on Outpost.

3
Rules Questions / Re: Band of Misfits as Reserve Cards
« on: October 06, 2018, 08:16:43 pm »
In addition to what GendoIkari said, there seems to be a rule that when an ability is triggered, you resolve it in its entirety no matter what.

Unless you can not do it. Classic example is play a Smithy with an empty discard pile and only 2 cards in your deck. You can not completely resolve that because where does the third card you should draw come from?

That's because of the rule "do as much as you can", which always applies, and changes nothing in this case. When I say "resolve it in its entirety no matter what", I mean just that. Resolving it means following all the instructions while abiding by the rule "do as much as you can".

Quote
What I'm saying is after BoM as a one shot tells you to trash itself, all other instructions on the card are lost, because it's not the one shot anymore. I can use an example without BoM that has the same behavior. Suppose I Inherit Mining Village and then Throne Room an Estate. The first time I play the Estate, I get +1 Card +2 Actions, and I choose to trash the Estate for +$2. The second time I play the Estate, nothing should happen, because the Estate is in the trash and is not mine. The condition giving that card the abilities is gone, therefore the abilities are gone too.

I understood that's what you're saying. When you play a card, you trigger its on-play ability, then resolve that ability fully (see above). If you then play that same card again (via Throne Room or whatever), you play its on-play ability again, but this is not a continuation of the first time you played it. It's completely separate. In other words, the on-play ability is triggered when you play the card, and that's the only time the on-play ability on the card is actually checked.

Quote
This doesn't affect BoM as a card with a when trash ability because when you trash the card with a when trash ability, two things are happening at the same time, the when trash ability triggers, and BoM loses all of its abilities it got from being played as an action card from the supply. You can simply choose to resolve the when trash ability before BoM loses it.

That's cleary false, because it's not optional to put the BoM in your hand.

4
Rules Questions / Re: Band of Misfits as Reserve Cards
« on: October 06, 2018, 05:16:32 pm »
My understanding of the rules and rulings regarding BoM seem to confirm that this is the case as well. If you play it as Island, its removed from play and reverts back to being a BoM on the Island mat. Once BoM as Embargo is trashed, it's out of play and loses all of Embargo's abilities. It doesn't matter that this happens while you're still playing Embargo, BoM can't play abilities it doesn't have and has no access to.

In addition to what GendoIkari said, there seems to be a rule that when an ability is triggered, you resolve it in its entirety no matter what.

It's clear that BoM-as-Embargo reverts back to BoM after it's trashed, before you add an Embargo token. But there is no ruling saying that this has any impact on the ability that has already been triggered. There are just rulings saying that (1) if you play the card again, it's a BoM, and (2) an ability checking the card finds a BoM.

Thare are rulings (even in the rulebook) saying that when you trash a BoM-as-Fortress, the when-trash-ability of the Fortress is resolved, even though you actually resolve it when the Fortress is a BoM. So this supports the rule that you always resolve a triggered ability.

5
It is certainly true that Artifacts reduce the inherent 1st-player advantage (like Noble Brigand and positive-interaction cards do). But that's not the same as having a 2nd player advantage.

I I'm pretty sure that saying that Flag Bearer has a 2nd player advantage, simply means that its presence is to the 2nd player's advantage (on average), not that it changes the game so that the 2nd player has a bigger advantage than the 1st.

7
while gaining is different: you gain each card separately.
I've never seen that stated anywhere, actually.

(Specimen question: when you play Treasure Trove with Watchtower in hand, can you choose to top-deck both the Copper and Gold in either order?)

Yet I have seen it stated many times. Here's one.

8
So maybe it helps to think about it this way: "When you trash a card..." is short for "When you trash any cards, for each trashed card..."
Thinking about it that way gives you a single trigger of Sewers during which multiple cards can be trashed (option 1), which is different from triggering Sewers multiple times (option 3).

You're right, that would not work.

It seems that you were closer with your explanation 1: you effectively stop handling triggers while you trash. We can perhaps view this as another way of phrasing the rule that "you trash all cards at once" (or as I said, "nothing can interrupt in the middle").

Dark Ages says: When two or more cards are trashed at the same time, first trash them all, then pick an order to resolve things that happen due to trashing them.

So we can rephrase it this way: When two or more cards are trashed at the same time, first trash them all without resolving any triggered abilities, then resolve all triggered abilities afterwards.

And discarding cards works the same way, while gaining is different: you gain each card separately.

9
Rules Questions / Re: Order of gaining card vs. on gain effects
« on: October 01, 2018, 02:05:07 pm »
When resolving an on gain effect, is the gained card already on the discard pile, does the effect happen first, or is it simultaneous (i.e. I can choose the order)?

Example:
I buy Cursed Village. The next Hex is Locusts but my deck is empty so resolving it triggers a shuffle.
Do I put Cursed Village in my discard pile before or after I shuffle?

Before.
First you gain the card (which means putting it wherever it goes, usually your discard pile), then "when gain" happens. It's the same with effects like "when trash" and "when discard", etc.

10
This can matter. As a specimen question, you have Sewers and you use Steward to trash two Rats. Are you allowed to draw both cards before you trash anything via Sewers?

Don't be confused. The answer is there if you look for it. Infangthief detailed it very well and Donald replied.

11
Option 3 is maybe the most intuitive one, and is the one implied by Donald in his initial reply, but I cannot (yet) see how this can be compatible with the idea of Steward trashing both cards 'at once'.

The rule is that you trash all cards at once. Nothing can interrupt in the middle.
We assume that "when you trash a card" doesn't mean "when you trash exactly one card", because otherwise it would say that (compare with other cards).
So it has to trigger even when you trash more than one card.

Then the question is (and this questioned has been asked - probably by me - and answered before): Does it now trigger just once, or for each trashed card? The answer is "for each", which is also implied in the phrasing - "when you trash a card": For each card you trash, do this.

So maybe it helps to think about it this way: "When you trash a card..." is short for "When you trash any cards, for each trashed card..."

12
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: October 01, 2018, 09:34:31 am »
It doesn't necessarily entail resolving its play ability. You're essentially asserting that when Enchantress is out, you don't actually play the first Action card you play in a turn. That's nonsense.

This is a super weird hill to die on. Nobody is hung up on this except you. I truly don't get why you think Action cards only count as having been played if you did exactly what was said on the card.

Where does all this hostility come from? Especially from people who are so confused about what they're railing against?

As it turns out, I have never asserted that. I have asserted the exact opposite from my very first post in this thread, and with more detailed examinations later: that you played the card whether you resolved its play ability or not. The part of the discussion you're replying to was purely about timing of "when you play" versus "after you finished playing".

I advise you to read more carefully.

13
My real question is: how does that make sense?
I can think of two possible explanations:

1.
- "Trash 2 cards" means: Stop handling triggers. Trash a card. Trash a card. Resume handling triggers.
- "When you trash a card" is unambiguous.

2.
- "Trash 2 cards" means: Trash 2 cards (all at once).
- "When you trash a card" means: When you trash any number of cards, do this per card trashed.

What do you think? Is it one of those explanations? Or is there a better explanation?

I think you're pretty close on 2. The rulebook says that you trash all cards at once, then resolve any triggered things. It's in Dark Ages at least, I can't check it now, but you can look it up.

14
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 11:13:25 pm »
What you're saying is fine for English in general. The problem is that in this context "when" already means "after", so as far as I can see it's not relevant.

I don't follow.

Ok. In Dominion and most similar games, "when" means "after". "When you gain" means after you're done gaining, and gaining entails moving the card. "When you buy" happens after buying, which entails non-physical act of updating Buys, Coins and potions, and taking Debt tokens. Playing entails announcing a card, putting it in play and resolving its play ability. You're not done until you've reached the end of that list. Saying that "when/after you play" happens after the second thing on that list is completely arbitrary.

15
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 10:45:26 pm »
What you're saying is fine for English in general. The problem is that in this context "when" already means "after", so as far as I can see it's not relevant.

16
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 08:43:29 pm »
Royal Carriage says, after you're done dealing with having played an Action card, not meaning you're done with stuff like calling Royal Carriage ha ha, you get a chance to call this and well you know, what Royal Carriage does. I mean Royal Carriage isn't necessary here, it's exactly the same for Coin of the Realm.

Maybe someone is thinking, but Enchantress changed what the card did so the card never did it so Royal Carriage can't be called. No. That's not what happens. Royal Carriage doesn't say "At the point at which you'd be done following those instructions if only you'd followed those instructions" or "after you follow the instructions or do some other crazy thing like Enchantress," but that's okay, that game is unplayable.

Thanks for replying. So I think you're saying that RC doesn't care whether you followed the instructions or not, is that right? What mattered is that you actually played the card, not what happened when you were resolving it, correct?

So you can call RC after you're done dealing with having played the card. That's when you're normally done following the instructions. (Playing = announcing, putting in play, resolving.)

"In-between Action plays" is a hard-to-phrase concept. I was not happy with the phrasing on Royal Carriage, changed it for the new printings, and still it seems like it could be better. I am not putting in the work here today but note that Citadel has a similar timing and yet a much different phrasing.

Yeah, concluding that Citadel has the same timing was exactly what made me revisit this.

17
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 07:39:03 pm »
(And, indeed, one could even make a case that "after you finish gaining" would mean after all when-gain instructions have been carried out, i.e., not the same as "when you gain".)

Uhm. Since "when you gain" is the same as "after you gain", I guess you're saying that the word "finish" makes a difference? So when you have gained a card, it's after you gained it, but you're still not finished gaining it? You're at a point when it's after you did something but you're still not finished doing it. I think you'll agree that it doesn't make much sense.

18
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 07:32:45 pm »
All the times that treasures say "when you play this" are not "when-play" triggers. Kind of like how old Nomad Camp said "when you gain", but it was just imprecise language, not a when-gain trigger.

And of course this is another thing I dealt with in the much longer treatise I wrote about this, that I decided not to post. And I still won't, because nobody would read it, just like I think almost nobody actually read carefully my three longer posts; they just skimmed them. That's why we get semi-nonsensical answers.

Enchantress doesn't say anything about not resolving the card.

According to how I see it, "following its instructions" = "resolving it". That's the very definition of resolving.
What do you think is the difference?

As I see it, the usual way that you resolve a card is to follow its instructions. Enchantress gives you a new way to resolve it.

I see this the same as how similar things work in Magic. The usual way to deal with a player taking damage is for them to lose life. But when a source has Infect, then instead of losing life, they take poison counters.

The usual way to deal with the instruction to resolve something is to follow its instructions. But if Enchantress was played, then instead of following its instructions, you follow these new instructions instead. The steps you take to resolve it have changed.

Well, thanks for actually adding something to the discussion. I see how it's possible to view it that way, but I think it creates another layer of abstraction that seems a bit unnecessary: Resolving a card is not the same as following its instructions, but involves that as its only constituent part. It seems a lot simpler and cleaner to say that they are the same thing.

But as I said, it could be that you're right, that my original notion of Enchantress is what's wrong. It seemed like Donald was supporting the idea that it was Royal Carriage, but it's hard to tell.

19
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 05:31:23 pm »
"Directly after you finish playing" is identical to "when you play".
Of course it's not!

If you're even confused about that, no wonder nothing else is making any sense to you.

As literally read (as you like to do) it is identical. (If you don't agree, address my comparison to gaining.) But as I said, let's leave it aside. It was just to explain what I meant with "trigger on playing". I rephrased it anyway.

The next paragraph I wrote, the one you haven't replied to, was addressing your point.

20
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 05:09:54 pm »
Well, that's not what you wrote before. You specified that the reason RC works, is that it triggers on playing, not resolving. And that's what Donald supported.
It does not trigger on playing, and I did not write that it triggers on playing:
Royal Carriage: "Directly after you finish playing an Action card..." you did finish playing the action card, so you can trigger Royal Carriage.

"Directly after you finish playing" is identical to "when you play". (Compare "directly after you finish gaining" and "when you gain".) This is more complicated, but I was trying not to make a huge post with all the subtleties. This is what I get. Let's leave that aside.

The point is that you wrote that RC triggers as a result of playing, not as a result of resolving. You wrote, "So they do play the Action card". Importantly, you did not write, "So they do resolve the Action card".

21
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 04:16:09 pm »
Enchantress doesn't say anything about not resolving the card.

According to how I see it, "following its instructions" = "resolving it". That's the very definition of resolving.
What do you think is the difference?

22
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 04:10:03 pm »
Enchantress triggers right as you're about to resolve the card, and then it makes you do something else instead of resolving it.
No, you still resolve it. Enchantress changes how you resolve it: you "get +1 Card and +1 Action instead of following its instructions"

Well, that's not what you wrote before. You specified that the reason RC works, is that it triggers on playing, not resolving. And that's what Donald supported.

There's really no way of communicating about this stuff without being extremely precise. I'm realizing that your first post pretty much added nothing, since, just like you wrote in it, you just repeated what the cards say without giving any clarifications of what you meant with those phrases. For instance, the phrase playing a card, in this context, can be interpreted in several ways.

As to why I think you don't resolve the Enchanted card: As I said, compare with Ironworks/Trader. How do you explain a difference between these two interactions?

23
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 03:34:05 pm »
I wrote a much longer threatise on this, but I'll spare you and stick to a shortened version:

1E Royal Carriage: directly after resolving an Action
2E Royal Carriage: directly after you finish playing an Action

Ingix asks why the Enchanted card was not resolved. According to Donald (in another thread), Enchantress triggers right as you're about to resolve the card, and then it makes you do something else instead of resolving it. The other thing (+1 Card and +1 Action) is not the Enchanted card's play ability; compare with Ironworks/Trader. Also, Donald seems to be supporting that interpretation here. So let's go with that for now.

So then we need to interpret RC as triggering on playing a card whether you resolve it or not, but still triggering after you would have resolved it. This is somewhat clearer in RC 2E, but since it's pretty safe to assume that RC was not intended to be functionally changed in the 2E, we still need to interpret "directly after resolving" as not triggering on resolving (which is pretty far away from "reading exactly what the cards say" by the way, although everybody loves easy answers). If it triggered on resolving, it would not work; compare with Trader/Watchtower.

In any case, the answer seems to be what I already said: RC really triggers when/after you play a card, where play means announce, put in play and resolve, but not necessarily any of those if they are cancelled. (Of course we already knew that it counts as "playing" even when you can't put the card in play.)

24
Rules Questions / Re: What does Enchantress and Royal Carriage do?
« on: September 30, 2018, 03:26:25 pm »
Royal Carriage: Maybe the timing is not "after you resolve the play ability", but "after you finish playing", just like the card says.

This is a super weird sentence. It boils down to "maybe the card does what it actually says it does, and not some other thing that's different than what it says it does." Why is this different than saying "Maybe Throne Room doesn't actually double the effect of playing a card, but rather causes you to play the card twice, just like the card says."

Because I was not being very accurate and assuming that I would be understood from the context. (Clearly not.) I was going by the idea that RC triggers on resolving a card, like the 1E card says and the rulebook still says, but then saying that maybe it instead triggers on playing a card - but not the when-play trigger on 1E Reactions (which is the same as but phrased differently than 2E Reactions), which is before you resolve, but rather after you resolve, whether you resolve or not. I'm writing another post to make this clearer.

25
I get that's what it's supposed to be, but wording doesn't make sense.

How does it not make sense? You discard the Coppers, revealed. And then you draw that many cards.

You discard the coppers, revealed? But no coppers were revealed. There's nothing that says to reveal your hand. The syntax is messed up. How does that make sense?
"Revealed" means "also, reveal those coppers, so that we know they are coppers. By the way sorry for saying this so tersely but there's only so much room on the cards and if it had ever confused anyone in playtesting man I would have changed it."

Was “reveal and discard” considered? It should be basically the same character count.

But where are they revealed from? Often things are revealed from the top of your deck, or somewhere else.

Shepherd says "revealing them" instead of "revealed". A few more characters, but it's not like text size hasn't been slightly reduced on cards before.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 47

Page created in 0.157 seconds with 18 queries.