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.

5101

2012 / Re: 2012 DominionStrategy.com Championships: Final Four

« on: January 26, 2013, 07:49:23 pm »

We
are the music-makers
and we
are the dreamers of dreams.

5102

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: January 26, 2013, 03:08:32 pm »

I really love Kingdom Builder. Not as much as Dominion, but it's great. But like DXV's said, it's a totally different style of game. It started as a spinoff but became its own thing.

Thanks, I am pretty pleased with it. I would have liked to have more scoring cards in the main set; I did not have the technology in time. And I would tweak the boards just slightly so that no arrangement can let you connect two buildings on turn one.

5103

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: January 26, 2013, 03:00:41 pm »

What do people call you IRL? Do you have a preference what we call you online? (e.g., you might hate being called DXV for whatever reason)

You don't have an avatar on here... so if you did, what Dominion card would you choose? Would you choose the Isotropic or Official artwork?

IRL people call me Donald X. Online, if you're talking to me, I prefer Donald X. If you're just talking about me rather than to me, DXV is fine, we'll all know who you're talking about. "That guy."

I've considered using the Nefarious cover guy as a BGG avatar. There's no Dominion card art I feel that special connection to.

5104

Rules Questions / Re: Remake/Fortress and the "Lose Track Rule"

« on: January 26, 2013, 02:19:31 pm »

It's 1 - cards sent to your hand become findable. It's right after the bit with dashes, since it doesn't apply to the when-gain business. "For handling other stuff (like Throne / Mining Village), drawn cards (and cards otherwise sent to your hand) and played cards (including via Throne etc.) would be marked 1."

Actually this doesn't work for Goko though, because it might mark a card 1 that should be 0. However the "findable" notion only needs to apply to cards being tracked, it isn't needed for "pick a card from your hand" and so that approach should still be doable.

5105

Rules Questions / Re: Remake/Fortress and the "Lose Track Rule"

« on: January 26, 2013, 02:17:07 pm »

Let me try using Donald's scheme from this post

I play Remake.  As a default, Fortress' "findable field" would be marked as 1.  Fortress is moved to the trash.  It's findable field is still 1; Remake knows where it is.  Fortress now moves itself back into my hand.  Relative to remake, Goko should now set the "findable field" to 0, since something else has interrupt the resolution of Remake and moved Fortress.  Remake now continues resolving, but if I choose to trash Fortress again (and I totally agree with everyone that Fortress is in my hand again when I make this choice; I never doubted that), it's findable field is 0.  I could at least see this leading to a bug.

It's 1 - cards sent to your hand become findable. It's right after the bit with dashes, since it doesn't apply to the when-gain business. "For handling other stuff (like Throne / Mining Village), drawn cards (and cards otherwise sent to your hand) and played cards (including via Throne etc.) would be marked 1."

"Lose track" deals with specific cards that are expected to be somewhere. If I play Procession, I put a card into play, then later trash it. Procession expects the card to be in play when it's time to trash it, and can't trash it if it isn't.

Remake isn't tracking Fortress - it doesn't care what happened to the first card it trashed. It's done with that, it's moving on. Time to pick a card from your hand. Here's this Fortress, that looks good.

5106

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: January 26, 2013, 12:18:55 am »

Well, you already did Procession that takes a Duration card out of play before it finishes having its effect. Having Herbalist do the same is such a big issue to completely forbid Treasure - Duration?

Well the only reason to do a treasure-duration is to do it. You know. For the sake of the novelty of it. It's not compelling in the face of this. Procession was a cool card that I couldn't otherwise make, but whatever the duration treasure is, odds are I can make a fine action version instead.

Again, I currently have zero expansions planned for after Guilds. And any spin-off that had something similar could plan for this.

5107

Rules Questions / Re: Remake/Fortress and the "Lose Track Rule"

« on: January 25, 2013, 11:07:10 pm »

So I've been thinking about the Lose Track Rule in response to onigame's post about implementing WhenGain effects.

Suppose I have Remake and Fortress in my hand.  I play a Remake.  I choose my Fortress to trash.  Remake moves Fortress to the trash, then Fortress moves itself back into my hand.  I gain a $5 card, say a Duchy.

Now, Remake is not done resolving yet.  I am now supposed to choose a card from my hand.  Can I choose Fortress again?  It may seem that the answer is obviously yes, since it's in my hand.  However, my Remake thinks Fortress is in the trash pile.  That is, this Fortress is not where Remake expects it to be, so can it find Fortress in my hand?

You can trash the Fortress again. Remake just wants you to pick a card from your hand; Fortress is a card in your hand; Remake can pick it. Losing track has nothing to do with this.

5108

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: January 25, 2013, 11:05:25 pm »

On the matter of a Treasure-Duration type, it may have an awkward interplay with Herbalist (or Mandarin).  Scheme topdecks an action when that action is cleaned-up; Herbalist topdecks a treasure when Herbalist is cleaned-up.

Thanks, that would be a good reason not to do one. Scheme struggled to not be confusing with duration cards, and of course Herbalist did not put in that effort.

5109

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 04:18:00 pm »

This is categorically false.  Language is not a census.  You don't define English just as "whatever these people say".  English is a set of rules that we have agreed upon as an effective means of communication.  Sometimes the rules at the periphery are bent a little, and twisted, and ignored, or obsoleted, but that does not mean that the rules don't exist.

I don't know what you mean by census here, but there is no guy, Joe English, who decides that "a girl" is okay but "girl a" isn't, and then we all do what Joe English said was correct. Instead there are just people communicating and it comes about that "a girl" is okay but "girl a" isn't, among these people, due to usage. There is no central authority. Rules of languages are rules people follow, not rules handed to them to follow. Some things are big toggles in your brain (see The Language Instinct for what I mean by that) but the different groups of people end up going one way or another on those toggles, whichever way they end up going.

I don't need you to get this but you are not convincing me otherwise. You seem to be talking about style guides and not languages.

English as a whole would be better if everyone followed the rule. 

English would be better if you could tell how to pronounce a word from how it was spelled, etc. etc. That doesn't change English, and trying to get people to pronounce words differently to make the language better doesn't work, etc. etc.

5110

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 03:10:18 pm »

It's "bad", not "normal" because it's not currently correct usage.  Maybe you don't think there is such a thing as "correct usage" and that language should really just be more like a census, but that's clearly an unsustainable path.

Outside of your blog, or whatever newspapers you own and so on, you don't get to decide what's "correct." If people are saying it, that's the language. Lots of people think they can decide what's "correct," but the language itself pays them no heed.

This has worked for the entire time language has existed, so I would say it's a success story.

There's no law that every aspect of English must be bastardized as time goes on.  Most language evolution occurs out of necessity -- like re-adapting the word "chip".  Unnecessary bastardizations happen, but that's not a justification for encouraging incorrect language use.  Plenty of bastardizations got stamped out too.

I'm not sure what you mean. English is not the oldest language; at one point there were no words in English. When someone started saying "yellow" to mean "that color," it was a neologism. The people speaking whatever they called what they were speaking at the time already had another word for yellow, from whatever earlier language. Some people said oh man you awful people with your new word for yellow. They lost that fight.

The "could care less" ship has probably sailed.  Others (like "chronic") has not yet, and there's no reason why it must.  We should take measures to stop it instead of just watching it happen.

People don't manage to stop usages they don't like from being used (except in the narrow contexts of their newspapers etc.). And sadly you can't just get people to start using your neologism either.

5111

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 02:00:24 pm »

I just don't understand why people are so accepting of bad language usage.  Over time, trends change, and we can't help that.  But that doesn't mean that every particular bastardization of the English language is OK or should be encouraged.

What I don't understand is why you call some instances of normal usage "bad language usage."

Every particular bastardization of the English language that catches on is okay; the entire language is those bastardizations of some previous language.

5112

Dominion General Discussion / Re: The Dominion Cards Lists 2013 Edition: $4 cards (Part 1/5)

« on: January 25, 2013, 01:35:28 pm »

So far, five people have complained that Pirate Ship is way overrated.  I checked all their Council Room pages and none of them really play anything other than two player.

Just sayin'

Speaking as someone who has played thousands of 3- and 4-player games, Pirate Ship is overrated.

5113

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 01:26:00 pm »

I'm not contesting it does nothing, I'm contesting that the word loses any real value, as people have to figure out whether you are using literal in a literal manner or a figurative one to understand what you are saying. Literally.

It's almost always very obvious from context. For example, I could not possibly have actually eaten a million hamburgers. It's too many hamburgers.

5114

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 01:21:37 pm »

If a word can mean it's exact opposite, literally, then that word no longer has any value, literally.

A handy list of examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym

5115

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 01:18:14 pm »

But the hyperbole makes it a figurative comment. Figurative speech is the opposite of literal speech. Since they are not being literal, they are being figurative. Since they are saying they are being literal, while being figurative, it makes the word mean nothing.

It ruins the word.

The comment is figurative, but the word does not mean "figuratively" in those sentences. People have flat-out said that it does and I am just correcting that helplessly.

"Literal" still does a fine job of managing its original "word for word" meaning - when you say "It's a literal translation," no-one thinks you mean, "It's so much a translation, like you wouldn't believe." The "actually" meaning is an interloper on the original meaning; what does the old interloper have over the new one?

And the word doesn't mean nothing there. Like a second "very," it's not doing a lot of work, but it's doing something. Varying that input changes your output.

5116

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 01:12:50 pm »

Take this with 0.001 mol of sodium chloride, as it comes from someone who prefers the Oxford comma.

I say, use as many commas as it takes to get the job done. The extra comma resolves ambiguity more often than it creates it, but if it will create ambiguity, man, get in some dashes there or something, you have more tools than commas available.

5117

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 01:08:45 pm »

All that said... what IS the actual "correct" rules for one-player Possession? What if, on my Possession turn, I play Ironworks to gain a Great Hall? If it were a 2-player game, you would get no bonus from Ironworks. Do you get a bonus here? My guess:

I am Possessing myself... I play Ironworks, choose Great Hall. I am about to gain Great Hall... Possession kicks in and prevents the gain, replacing it with a different gain. Therefore, no bonus from Ironworks.

The game rules don't support one-player. If you want to support one-player in order say to have one-player puzzles online, which I think is reasonable, then for sure you don't want Possession in them, because it just degenerates into, what unintended consequences does playing this only-makes-sense-with-multiple-players card with one player have. And if you have those puzzles then it's up to you how many Provinces you want for them.

IRL if a player drops out and only one player is left, I would say that that player wins. So, you immediately win any one-player games, hooray! Online you can have a bot keep playing for the player who dropped; I would make that a choice, do you want the win or the bot. I don't know if/when that will happen.

5118

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 12:58:12 pm »

It's amusing that the trend with "literally" is actually the opposite direction everyone thinks it is.  It's been used to mean "figuratively" since the 18th century, but that usage is becoming less and less accepted... not more and more accepted!

I am not sure why this is unclear, but no-one uses "literally" to mean "figuratively." "I figuratively ate a million hamburgers." No, no-one ever says anything like that, not even with the word "figuratively." "Literally" is used to exaggerate; "figuratively" is not. There is no plain word-substitution going on here.

Meanwhile, I suspect there is both a slim chance and a fat chance of all of us in this thread agreeing on these usages.  I personally dislike the use of these words to mean their opposites, not because it's wrong, but because most people don't understand that the ironic usage is ironic.

When someone says, "I literally ate a million hamburgers," no-one is confused. They're not being ironic there either; they're exaggerating.

5119

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: January 25, 2013, 03:02:51 am »

Sorry for the highjack. Donald, you have created an excellent game. I look forward to see what you might work on in the future.

With that said:

Dominion started out as "Castle Builder" and you have a game called Kingdom Builder. What can you say about the parallels between the two game concepts?

Thanks, I'm there for you, and so is this thread; talk about whatever you want in it.

The initial premise of Kingdom Builder was, you played cards to put pieces on a board, and put pieces on a board to gain cards. It was a two-step process, whereas Dominion has a one-step process of playing cards to get cards. But it was directly intended to be a Dominion spin-off.

The idea had issues and I sat on it for a while, trying to think of a resolution I was happy with. In the end that resolution was taking out the deck, and just playing pieces to play pieces, again a one-step process like Dominion.

So they both started out as deckbuilding, and they ended up similar in that in both you have an engine that's just one thing, playing cards or placing pieces. Then of course both of them vary the set-up, including the set of abilities available, although it's the variable scoring that really does the work of providing variety in Kingdom Builder.

5120

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 02:42:59 am »

Wow, angry much?

Man, you were the one calling Americans lazy.

And you're making the ridiculous assumption that I'm some kind of elitist grammar maven when I just pointed out, hey, if you don't care at all, that means that you couldn't care less. Don't read too deeply into it. Clearly I am not reading deeply into the irony that people elect to use by using "could" instead of "couldn't," because most people whom I have heard use "could" do not actually identify any mistakes in the literal meaning of the expression. They think that it means exactly what they think it means, and those who give it an extra moment of thought wonder whether the proper formulation uses the positive or negative. Then they decide that it's not worth their time or effort and proceed with using the literally incorrect formulation. Isn't this being "lazy?"

No, they are using an English idiom as it is commonly used; they are speaking English.

Complaining about people using a normal English idiom to mean what everyone knows it means, that makes you a grammar maven, to use the Steven Pinker term that I guess you know all about. Your pet peeve is people saying they could care less; my pet peeve is language prescriptivists.

5121

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 25, 2013, 02:39:38 am »

There are limits to descriptivism!  Unless you think there is literally no such thing as an incorrect usage of language.

It's all about usage. If you switch bus and weasel, you're just some guy doing that. If everyone does it, that's the language. At some middle point, you have alternate meanings that some people like to complain about despite their proven success.

I don't do it to feel superior.  Prescriptivism is not all about being snooty and pointing out mistakes.  Rules are important because incorrect usage makes it more difficult to communicate effectively.  For example, transposition of literally/figuratively make it difficult for me to write "literally" and predict that my audience will understand my true meaning.

No-one ever transposes "literally"/"figuratively." "Literally" does not mean "figuratively" in the complained-about usages. The idea that it is being used to mean "figuratively" is just crazy.

Making it harder for you to use the word "literally" to mean "actually" is just something languages do; sure it would be nice if there were no homonyms and you could tell how to pronounce a word from the spelling and ad infinitum, but whatever, languages have these things whether you like it or not. I'm sure the people who were using "literally" to mean "word for word" were sad when people started using it to mean "actually." Couldn't people just say "actually" if they meant "actually?" Why did they need to spoil the word "literally?"

5122

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 24, 2013, 07:14:55 pm »

I did my research. My research seems to suggest that this unintuitive idiom arose from lazy Americans dropping syllables and not paying attention to actual word meanings. I'm not very convinced that some clever guy took the existing idiom "I couldn't care less" and decided to add a touch of irony by negating the negative, because why would he do that? Doesn't make much sense. It's not like all of a sudden, I'm going "a ha ha, I get it! That's funny! You're funny!"

I don't see why it's remotely relevant what whatever person thought the first time it was said. Language is what it is due to shared usage, which only happens over time. I don't see why you're characterizing Americans as lazy either - as if dropping "n't" is such a time-saver. In fact the overall message I get is that you feel *superior* for your interpretation of the phrase, that's right, and to get that good feeling of superiority, you have to *put down* the other people. They're lazy! Therefore they don't get to decide how words work, while you, the hardworking guy, do. They get to decide though, no matter how lazy they are. And you say "not paying attention to actual word meanings," when actual word meanings are *entirely due to usage.* All they need to do is keep using the words the same way and then that's what they mean. That's how all words get their meanings.

You also put down the idiom as unintuitive. Language is full of such stuff so you've got zilch there. Yes, if you designed your own language and no-one spoke it, you could make everything perfect and it would stay that way.

5123

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 24, 2013, 06:44:42 pm »

It's a sarcastic expression dude. I could care less! In fact I could not actually care less. Get it now?

Similarly people will say "yeah right" when they mean "I don't believe that at all" and so on. That's how sarcasm works.

Either you are trying to be funny or it is not really a sarcastic expression...

I am always trying to be funny and it really is a sarcastic expression. I am not being sarcastic when I say that or this. Since we're on the internet it's hard to ever believe a statement like that; surely I am being double-super-sarcastic. No, it really is a sarcastic expression. You can tell because it's false. Sarcasm uses false statements to indicate the opposing true sentiments. I could care less. As if I could care less, I mean really. Possession in single player games. Man.

Look in your heart, you will see that I'm right. Or do some research. You will find that some people do not get this expression, while others have figured it out, and some people will say "so that's how it is, but don't use it, because some people don't like it." I'm no wuss, over the internet anyway; I'm willing to use a good idiom even if some language prescriptivists don't like it.

Moving on, when people say "literally" in a way other people don't like, as they have been doing for 150 years or so incidentally (not counting the previous meaning some people didn't like), it is an exaggeration. If I say "I ate a million hamburgers," you know I did not actually eat a million hamburgers; "a million" is an exaggeration there. If I say "I literally ate a million hamburgers," that's even more of an exaggeration. They do not somehow mean "I figuratively ate a million hamburgers" but are accidentally saying literally instead of figuratively because they so dumb. How anyone can think that's what's going on is beyond me.

hth

5124

Goko Dominion Online / Re: Possession in one-player games -- Important?

« on: January 24, 2013, 04:27:42 pm »

I could care less. This is not something I would bother trying in a solatire Dominion game.

* couldn't care less

This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine.

It's a sarcastic expression dude. I could care less! In fact I could not actually care less. Get it now?

Similarly people will say "yeah right" when they mean "I don't believe that at all" and so on. That's how sarcasm works.

5125

Goko Dominion Online / Re: I unlocked the governor!

« on: January 24, 2013, 04:23:18 pm »

Wait hinterlands has a campaign?

I believe Trisha is working on it as we speak.