Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

1

Simulation / Re: Mountain Pass: guess the bid

« on: June 10, 2016, 02:50:27 pm »

18, to stop liopoil from winning by The Price is Right rules.

2

Dominion: Empires Previews / Re: Empires Previews #1: Debt

« on: May 13, 2016, 12:23:43 pm »

Note that this ruling is actually consistent for the concept of "paying": to [over]pay, you spend/deduct resources from the pool of resources you've produced that turn.  Debt is not a resource that you produce and spend, so you cannot pay it.

Debt as a concept didn't exist in the Guilds rulebook, so quotes from it aren't particularly convincing. It seems like common sense to me that you "pay" a debt cost by taking on debt.

3

Dominion: Empires Previews / Re: Empires Previews #1: Debt

« on: May 13, 2016, 12:11:43 pm »

But I'd argue that doesn't make sense.  You have Stonemason on board.  You decide to 'Overpay' with 5 Debt.  You gain 5 Debt tokens, and, uh.. fail to gain anything, because nothing costs 5 Debt.  (I should mention there are no 'Debt cost' cards on the board.) But now you have 5 Debt, which I guess you can go ahead and spend 5 Coin to pay off, if you had it.  Or keep it around to prevent yourself from buying something.

Similarly if you have a potion, you can overpay with it even if it wouldn't get you anything. Hell, there are some cases where you can overpay with coins and not get anything. So far, this isn't weird.

This kind of weirdness doesn't exist with Potion.  You add Potion to your currency by playing a certain card (namely, Potion).  You spend those Potions as you do Coins.  If you can't generate Potion, then you can't spend it.

And you add "debt currency" to your pool by taking debt tokens under certain circumstances.

But I shouldn't be responding to this. I have already admitted that the ruling makes sense, what I am objecting to is that no matter how you justify the ruling it is still different from what you'd expect given how debt costs are presented on cards (identical to potions) and how debt costs behave with cost comparisons (identical to potions). It is better in the long run if we can point to an alternate cost/currency and say "it works like this" without making an exception for any given cost and the only way to do that is to say "you can overpay with anything" or "you can only overpay in a currency the card originally cost".

If Debt worked like this, it would be the same:
"I take a number of red hexagons, and for each one I take, I get one element of "Debt" currency for each one. Then I pay that currency to buy cards that cost Debt."

But that isn't how it works.

The problem is that in practice that's exactly how it works outside of one specific type of card (overpay cards).

4

Dominion: Empires Previews / Re: Empires Previews #1: Debt

« on: May 13, 2016, 11:40:48 am »

Even if overpaying with debt is strange, it's stranger still that debt acts like an alternate cost similar to potion in all ways except for overpay cards -- where you can overpay with potions but not debt. Yes, you can justify it by making some sort of distinction (ie, potions are something you have but debt is something you gain), but it would be far easier to remember a consistent rule. Either you can overpay with any "currency" or you can only overpay with currency that the card originally cost. For example, for Stonemason you should be allowed to overpay with both debt and potions or with neither.

That, and consistency is important if we ever have more overpay cards or alternate currencies in the future.

Seems like the correct thing to do is simply not consider Debt to be 'currency' like Coins and Potions are.  And they are different.  Debt it something that affects your play in a specific way: you cannot buy cards when you have nonzero amounts, and you may spend Coin to reduce Debt.  You don't really 'spend' Debt like you do Coin and Potion.

Edit: Like, you can't 'Overpay' with Debt because you don't 'pay' with Debt.  Debt is just something that you gain when you buy certain cards:

That reddish hexagon means you don't pay for City Quarter or Royal Blacksmith up front. Instead you take some tokens that say how much you owe.

And I could just as easily say that you "pay" a debt cost by taking debt tokens just as you pay a potion cost or a coin cost by removing that many potions/coins from your pool. I already mentioned that you could make any distinction you want between potion costs and debt costs and it would be valid -- but it would be inconsistent. I was already surprised to find out that you could overpay with potions, now I must remember that you cannot overpay with debt when in all other cases potions and debt work the same way. It might not be difficult to remember (it probably will be for some people), but the point here is future-proofing. I don't want to have to remember 100 different edge cases and exceptions when we get to the 30th Dominion expansion.

5

Dominion: Empires Previews / Re: Empires Previews #1: Debt

« on: May 13, 2016, 11:23:45 am »

Even if overpaying with debt is strange, it's stranger still that debt acts like an alternate cost similar to potion in all ways except for overpay cards -- where you can overpay with potions but not debt. Yes, you can justify it by making some sort of distinction (ie, potions are something you have but debt is something you gain), but it would be far easier to remember a consistent rule. Either you can overpay with any "currency" or you can only overpay with currency that the card originally cost. For example, for Stonemason you should be allowed to overpay with both debt and potions or with neither.

That, and consistency is important if we ever have more overpay cards or alternate currencies in the future.

6

Dominion: Empires Previews / Re: Empires Previews #4: Landmarks

« on: May 12, 2016, 02:08:23 pm »

Battlefield does.

Whoooops.  You (and the others) are right.  Slip of the mind.

Why is that? is it said in rules?

The rules specify what you can do, not what you can't; for anything game-related, you can't do it unless the rules allow you to.

Now, the one with a good memory becomes a strictly better player than the one with the bad, isn't it?

Yes. Fortunately you can play online with a point-counter, or you can agree to play a variant with your friends where you are all allowed to write down notes.

Well, better memory doesn't make for a strictly better player because you still need to know what to do with that information.  There's more to being a good player than knocking what's in your deck, though it certainly helps. 

I always find it odd when people try to use the "loophole" of, "well the rulebook doesn't say you can't".  Rules are permissive, not restrictive, because they can't cover ever possible real life scenario.  Some other things that the rule book doesn't explicitly forbid:

- rigging your shuffle so key cards are more likely to be near the top (there was actually a big thread years ago where somebody tried to argue that this was acceptable)
- secretly marking the cards so you can tell what's in your opponent's hand
- setting fire to your opponent's deck

Dominion is a game that rewards many skills and talents, memory included.  As it is, plenty of Dominion players prefer testing their ability to find strategies and make tactical decisions and aren't as keen on the memory aspect, so they like to play with VP counters or even full-blown deck trackers.  And that's fine if it's what you like, and if all the players agree.

I could be equally hyperbolic by saying that the rules don't permit you to talk, breath, or remember things at all. While rulebooks are permissive in theory, there are always unwritten assumptions which is why sometimes rulebooks must explicitly state restrictive rules (such as a "no talking" rule used in various games where in all other cases it is assumed players are permitted to talk even if the rules don't say that).

I doubt Donald would say that notetaking is allowed -- based off the rule that you can't look through your discard pile even -- but to claim that an act as innocent as notetaking is cheating cannot be justified by it's lack of inclusion in the rules.

7

Dominion: Guilds Previews / Re: Overpay cards and the best cards lists

« on: June 14, 2013, 06:08:55 pm »

Totally agree with kn1tt3r here. Also, we want to evaluate the strength of a particular card.
Let's say Masterpiece is the worst $3 card, the third worst $4 card, the 43th best $5 card, and the 6th best $6+ card (just examples), what does it say about its strength? (Nearly) Nothing!

It says that a $3 copper is awful, a $4 Copper + Silver is still awful, a $5 Copper + 2 Silvers is okay, and a $6 Copper + Gajillion Silvers is amazing.  It's impossible to value Masterpiece's overall strength, as it (and other overpay cards to a lesser extent) is an entirely different card if you buy it at $3 or #6.

8

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: A triple duration attempt: Musketeers

« on: December 03, 2012, 12:25:05 am »

Steal the wording from Outpost.

Musketeers:
Action/Duration - $3
+$1
At the start of your next turn, +1 action.
If you discard this from play next turn, draw up to 6 cards (instead of 5) in that turn's Clean-up phase.

9

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Floodgate

« on: November 19, 2012, 02:59:08 am »

As written, can't I buy four in a row and end up with my whole deck in my hand?

Minus at least 4 monies worth of action and treasure cards, yes.

10

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Cash4Gold

« on: November 19, 2012, 02:53:03 am »

+1 Card
+1 Action
You may trash a treasure other than copper from your hand.
If you do, +coin equal to it's cost.
If you trashed a Gold, +1 buy.

Not sure how strong this if you're going for a treasureless deck (buy Silver/Gold, buy your power actions, transition out).
Also pretty good with Ill-Gotten Gains.

11

Game Reports / You discard a Gold, Gold, and a Silver (Margrave + Possesion)

« on: October 17, 2012, 12:13:10 am »

Shame you can't see discards in the logs, but I won against a double-possession engine after realizing something.

   — gc2's turn (possessed by Tadashi) —
   gc2 does nothing.
   (gc2 reshuffles.)

To be fair, he would have won if he bought more possessions and didn't trash all his gold to spice merchant, but it was funny.

http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201210/16/game-20121016-210732-b29e40a6.html