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 ... 12
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: November 22, 2019, 10:48:30 am »
I'd say it's a fair reason you can't really do a "only sideways cards" mini-expansion or something, though.

There's Summon. Do people buy less of Summon than other promos?

If one player resigns, the other players starve to death.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Teaching Dominion
« on: October 17, 2019, 11:47:49 am »
First Game set

* Poacher

I thought Woodcutter had been replaced by Merchant, not Poacher, in the First Game set. Did this change in a later printing?

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Semi-Interesting Dominion Moments Thread
« on: September 26, 2019, 04:43:23 pm »
This is obsolete because errata, right?

Yes, this situation is no longer semi-interesting.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« on: September 25, 2019, 03:41:46 am »
5. Costs don't go below $0.

The cost in $ of a card can't go below $0.

It might be worth it to point out that there is still the concept of a negative coin cost that comes up when you Develop Coppers.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: August 27, 2019, 01:26:31 am »
In designing which choices are worthwhile to have in a game, my document states:

Is this referring to a document you're writing?

Can captain play as a card from an empty supply pile?

Note that Captain is not played as anything.

I never said anything claiming the opposite...
"Leaving it there" doesn't stop the Captain from being trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.

You misunderstood this. You read it as "The instruction is not sufficient to prevent Captain from being trashed..." It was intended as "The instruction is not necessary to prevent Captain from being trashed..."

I wasn't as precise as you but my claim was correct, i.e. Captain stays where he is. That the card he copies also stays where it is is less relevant, except for piling and covering up (for example if Encampment would get set aside, you could pull off tricks like getting at Plunders) issues.
What you mainly care about is that you kill off your BoM if you play it as Death Cart whereas your Captain survives if you play it as Death Cart. Whether the Death Cart in the Supply that you copied gets trashed or not is of secondary relevance.

You are incorrect. The "leaving it there" phrase does not apply to Captain; it applies to the card Captain plays. It says that the card Captain plays does not get moved into play.

It is true that Captain stays where he is, but that's simply because that's what cards do. If nothing says to trash it or return it to a supply pile, then it stays in play. When you use Captain to play Death Cart, nothing says to trash Captain, so nothing happens to Captain.

You are possibly missing that you do not play Captain as the other card (the way you do with BoM). Captain says "Play a non-Duration Action card from the Supply..." It does not say "Play Captain as " the card. Captain does not become the card.

You focus on mechanical details, I focus on practical implications and comparisons with existing cards. In my opinion both perspectives are useful but you seemingly think otherwise.

If you want to compare to existing cards, you should be comparing with Necromancer, not BoM.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: May 01, 2019, 12:04:36 pm »
Because if the bolded text is taken literally, then people who didn't buy Fleet simply aren't a part of the game any more; they don't exist. Similar to a multi-player Magic game when one player loses.

But, we know that the bolded text is NOT to be taken literally, because those people in fact are still participating in the game. They gain Curses when someone plays Witch, etc. It's not that they don't participate in it, it's that they don't get an extra turn from Fleet's effect.

Even so, if a card specifically said to give an extra turn to, like, a friend who didn't even start playing the game, why wouldn't it be able to do that, Fleet or no? (Assuming it detailed where they were supposed to get their deck and starting hand from.)

EDIT: I guess you're saying that you can interpret it as though the seating order has changed and you can no longer refer to a non-Fleet player as "the player to your left." I guess I could see that. But I wouldn't call that a literal interpretation of anything. I'd call that making assumptions that some text means a bunch of things it doesn't actually (literally) say.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: May 01, 2019, 11:13:50 am »
Nothing at all indicates that players without Fleet do extra turns. How should the average player (or a translator) guess that? ... just for players with this. seems simple and straightforward. I don't know of a rule which could enlarge that specified group. Without knowledge of this thread tasked to write a FAQ i would have written
  • players without Fleet get no turns during Fleet round. Especially can't such player get possessed.
  • players with Fleet execute other extra turns pending from before Fleet round or initiated in Fleet round as usual.
Hey, Donald wrote something sounding just so:
Fleet doesn't create extra turns; it creates an extra round of turns, and then only some people participate in it. That's how I read it.
bold by me

Why would the fact that you're in "Fleet turns" stop Possession/Outpost/Mission from working? Those specifically say that some player gets an extra turn after this one. It doesn't say anywhere that the extra turn is contingent on or occurs relative to some player's "normal" turn (or Fleet turn).

I agree, though, that the rulebook should have been much more detailed about what exactly Fleet's text is trying to convey.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Are promos worth it?
« on: April 17, 2019, 04:44:35 pm »
The two new promos are expected in August.

Are they worth it?

Dominion General Discussion / Re: March Madness Kingdom
« on: March 22, 2019, 02:30:21 am »
(There are others you could choose from for these two, Training, Conquest, Dominate, Triumph)


Well I've made a bunch of mistakes, but Quarry isn't one of them.
You got ninety-nine problems, but a ditch ain't one.

You already knew this. ;)

Dominion Articles / Re: Glossary Update
« on: February 26, 2019, 12:19:43 pm »
"Stop card" should be in there somewhere.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: February 21, 2019, 12:20:49 pm »
One could argue that the existence of the supernatural, such as Werewolf, Witch, etc; dictates that it must be set in some other fantasy world, similar to Middle Earth.

Is magic real?

Rules Questions / Re: Trashing a Gladiator that's under a Fortune?
« on: February 20, 2019, 07:32:06 pm »
I think this is covered by the lose track rule: Gladiator A expects Gladiator B on top of its pile, but Gladiator B is in the middle, so Gladiator A loses track and cannot trash Gladiator B.

That's not Lose Track. Gladiator A never had track of Gladiator B, so it couldn't lose track of it.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion.Online issues
« on: February 19, 2019, 06:26:55 pm »
So after years of IRL

Are we talking about the 10 years or the 5 years here?
10 years of IRL.  I started Dominion in early 2009 (I did not know it was 'new' then)
5 years here? I have been on this forum for 5 years??  My first post was in 2017... odd for me not to post for the first 3 years.

I believe Awaclus is referring to the discrepancy he pointed out in this post.

Dominion: Renaissance Previews / Re: Artifact Origin cards as a card type
« on: February 19, 2019, 12:31:40 pm »
Duration doesn't have any meaningful rules associated with it; all cards are cleaned up on that last turn in which they do something. It just so happens that for regular actions, that's the same turn they were played.

Unless something has changed recently, this is not strictly true. The rules for leaving cards in play specifically refer to Durations; other cards are discarded even if they are still doing something. Otherwise, Possession would stay in play at the end of the turn you played it.

Rules Questions / Re: Sauna and Innovation
« on: January 28, 2019, 10:10:00 am »
You wouldn't be calling Coin of the Realm after a Mining Village or Experiment.
You're about to move to the Buy Phase and play Diadem?

"After this turn" effects that have a player take extra turns (i.e. not Donate and Mountain Pass).

Say you play Outpost and buy Mission on one of your normal turns.  After that turn ends, you're in an "after this turn" window and can select one of the two.  Say you pick Outpost.  On your Outpost turn, you play Possession.  When your Outpost turn ends, you have effects for a Mission turn and a Possession turn; you have to do them in that order because of player order.  That means you must still be in that exact same window that started after your normal turn, because if the Possession effect belonged to an "inner" window (like what's described here), then you'd have to resolve it first instead.

Of course, that means "after this turn" really has to mean something more like "between normal/Fleet turns."

Or else you have to treat the timing of those extra turn effects differently from all other triggered effects.

Rules Questions / Re: Caravan Guard - Reaction and +1 Action Timing
« on: January 17, 2019, 01:56:51 pm »
Playing this during another player's turn is similar to playing it during your own turn - you put Caravan Guard into play, get +1 Card and +1 Action, and will get + at the start of your next turn - the very next turn you take. However getting +1 Action during someone else's turn does not do anything for you; it does not let you play other Action cards during that player’s turn.

t. rules

The part that is 'confusing' to me is the

"... get ... +1 Action, ... the very next turn you take ..."  It makes it sound like you get ANOTHER "+1 Action" on top of your default ABC "+1 Action" on the very next turn you take (like an unspent +1 Villager token on your mat.. it is waiting for you to 'use' ... on 'the very next turn you take'.  It seems opposite of the fact that you get you use the +1 Coin on your next turn, but you cannot use the +1 Action?

Those instructions are a list of three items.
  • put Caravan Guard into play
  • get +1 Card and +1 Action
  • will get +$1 at the start of your next turn - the very next turn you take

The part about "next turn" is a part of the third item; it is not intended to apply to the entire list.

Rules Questions / Re: Caravan Guard - Reaction and +1 Action Timing
« on: January 17, 2019, 11:43:43 am »
At the risk of diving deeper down a semantic rabbit hole, "X has no effect" and "the effect of X is nothing" are synonymous.
Those are synonymous, but those aren't the two things we're talking about. We're talking about "the action has no effect" vs. "the act of giving you an action has no effect." The former means off-turn-CG gives you 1 action, and that action has no effect (whatever that might mean); the latter means off-turn-CG gives you 0 actions.

Rules Questions / Re: Caravan Guard - Reaction and +1 Action Timing
« on: January 17, 2019, 10:33:40 am »
You can get something that has no effect.
Sure, but the card doesn't say you get an action that can't be used for anything; it says that "+1 Action" has no effect, where that instruction usually has the effect of giving you an action.

Or maybe you were joking and I missed the joke.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12

Page created in 0.09 seconds with 18 queries.