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.

101

Rules Questions / Re: Hands of non-Fleet players

« on: January 10, 2019, 10:02:28 am »

During the Fleet turn, do the non-Fleet players keep the hands they drew in their last Clean-up? This matter for Moating etc.

Yes, they're still fully in the game, just not getting a turn.

So Smugglers and Treasure Hunter look at the last turn they really had and not the Fleet turn they skipped, right?

102

Rules Questions / Re: Procession a Band of Misfits-as-Catacombs

« on: January 09, 2019, 01:32:47 pm »

Generally, card wordings refer to the "current state" of a card (itself or another), with minimal exceptions (I mentioned Ritual, Jeebus added Treasure Map).

I'd throw Smugglers in there, too, even though it's slightly different.

103

Rules Questions / Re: Spend Coffers tokens at any time

« on: January 06, 2019, 07:10:50 pm »

That thread was based on an earlier discussion where this was made clear, but I'm not sure what thread that was.

You may mean the one that Gendo linked to in his reply in this thread.

104

Rules Questions / Re: Throned Enchantress

« on: January 05, 2019, 11:49:04 pm »

"Following Y's instructions" isn't still occurring, and that's the problem. It doesn't say to "replace" Y's instructions with Z, then execute Y's now-changed instructions, it says to ignore Y's instructions entirely and do the entirely unrelated thing Z. Ignoring the instructions and getting +1 Card +1 Action are completely independent events. The former event can't stack, but the latter arguably can.

So, I wouldn't call "ignoring the instructions" an event; I'd call that, like, an event failing to occur. And I'd say the word "instead" creates a dependency between the event that would have occurred and the event that is to occur in its stead. If the first event would no longer occur, then it has no stead in which another event can occur.

(They are, of course, separate events in that, like, Ironworks doesn't think it gained a Silver when you use Trader to replace its gain.)

The most relevant comparison is with Swamp Hag. "Gain a Curse when you buy something" stacks, so there's no reason not to think "+1 Card and +1 Action when you play your first Action card" doesn't as well.

The big difference here is that Swamp Hag never uses the word "instead," so it never replaces one event with another; it just tacks on a new event after the event that triggered it.

Imagine a Bog Hag that says "the first time any other player would gain a card on their turn, they gain a Curse instead." If you played two Bog Hags and your opponent gained a card, then that effect would not stack because there's only one (first) gain event in whose stead another event could occur. (Ninja'd.)

105

Rules Questions / Re: Throned Enchantress

« on: January 05, 2019, 08:34:47 pm »

It seems to me that the clearest interpretation consistent with other Dominion rulings is that +1 Card, +1 Action should take place twice, i.e. it should act like a Lost City. (This of course is not what anyone plays.)

Consistent with what other rulings? There are very few things in Dominion that cancel an event that's about to occur and replace it with another event. Besides Enchantress, I count Trader and Possession. (Maybe Fleet.)

After revealing Trader to replace "gaining an X" with "gaining a Silver," nobody assumes that the original "gain an X" is still occurring for the purpose of being able to reveal a Trader again to gain a second Silver (and so on, ad infinitum).

So why should it be different with Enchantress? After one Enchantress replaces "following Y's instructions" with "+1 card; +1 action," why should one assume that "following Y's instructions" is still occurring for the purpose of having a second Enchantress effect replace it?


(In M:tG, this kind of thing is called a replacement effect. You can't "double replace" an event there, either.)

106

Dominion Articles / Re: The Top 20 Best Designed Cards

« on: January 04, 2019, 11:15:29 am »

Is Council Room still the only +Cards with +Buy?  That is a cute and subtle point of power for Council Room, and instructive too.

Ranger, Margrave, Tragic Hero, Silk Merchant. Wharf. Powered-up City. Tactician if you want to count that.

107

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Semi-Interesting Dominion Moments Thread

« on: January 03, 2019, 06:11:33 pm »

In a 3-player IRL game today, I passed a Province when someone else played Masquerade in order to have all unique cards in my hand for Menagerie to kick off my engine so I could buy the last two Provinces. Otherwise my engine would have stalled that turn.

How confident were you that you weren't going to get passed a duplicate?

They were all on the Tavern mat.

108

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 23, 2018, 01:12:29 pm »

Just to check the corner case on the corner case, am I right that if someone plays Possession during the Fleet round and makes the Possessed player buy Fleet, the Possessed player does then get a Fleet turn

No, this was answered by Donald earlier in this thread.

Although I guess I didn't ask enough to determine exactly when it's too late to buy Fleet meaningfully. Based on the wording on Fleet, I assume it's "after a turn has ended with a game end condition being met." But it might also be "after a player's turn has been skipped in the Fleet round" or "after a player has taken a Fleet turn." (Not that there should be a way to do anything between when the Fleet round starts and the first Fleet turn, but hey, maybe someday.)

109

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Card and Token quality

« on: December 20, 2018, 12:10:05 pm »

Contact RGG; they may let you send the extra tokens back.

110

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.

« on: December 11, 2018, 12:05:50 pm »

Ah, but how much of that time was necessary...

To an alcoholic, is drinking "necessary"?

111

Rules Questions / Re: Reserve cards + Necromancer

« on: December 09, 2018, 10:49:57 am »

Play a face up, non-Duration Action card from the trash, leaving it there and turning it face down for the turn.

No that phrase only stops the card from being moved into play. What stops the card from moving itself is apparently that it has already Lost Track of itself due to being played from an unexpected location.

Necromancer stops the played card from being moved to "in play," and that's all it stops. However! A card that for example trashes itself from play is looking for itself in play, and won't move itself if it's not there.

112

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Order of Types

« on: December 05, 2018, 02:27:55 am »

Tip: If you want to make ASCII art diagrams, put them in a [tt][/tt] block. That way, all the characters are displayed with the same width and you can line everything up the way you want.

+-----------+
| Like this |
+-----------+

113

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Annoying and potentially harmful card anti-synergies

« on: December 04, 2018, 11:11:04 am »

If you play Royal Carriage, then play an Action, then call Royal Carriage, then Royal Carriage is "an Action card you played this turn that's in play", but is it "an Action card you played this turn that's still in play". Answer (by my understanding): no, you've Lost Track. It's now in play again, not still, and you can't play Scepter on it.

Although I agree with your conclusion, it seems like you're implying that this is an instance of the Lose Track rule. The reason Scepter doesn't work here is specifically because it says "still"; I don't believe the Lose Track rule comes into play.

</nitpick>

114

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Bane Marker

« on: December 03, 2018, 10:57:09 am »

It seems like the image is already on the wiki. You can find it on the Young Witch page.

115

Let's Discuss ... / Re: empires: overlord

« on: December 02, 2018, 02:35:45 am »

-i mean seriously. why would you need paradoxes for robot defense when you could just say, alright. you play an overlord and there's count, artificer, archive, graverobber, cartographer, and tactician on the board.

i have no idea what this means at all

In science fiction, one can often thwart an artificial intelligence by presenting it with a paradoxical question, presumably sending it into an infinite loop as it tries to answer the unanswerable. Your above comment humorously suggests that, as an alternative to this method, one could simply ask an A.I. (or "robot") which card to play Overlord as, and that decision would be sufficiently complex to effectively disable the A.I.

I have now explained your joke to you, thereby making it funnier.

116

Rules Questions / Re: Sewers + On-Trashing Draw

« on: November 28, 2018, 04:55:09 pm »

If I have bought sewers, and then use chapel to trash 2 rats, can I draw 2 cards before I decide whether to trash any more cards from my hand with sewers?

When you trash two Rats with Chapel after you've bought Sewers, four effects trigger: two optional trash effects and two draw effects. Those effects can be handled in any order you choose. So, yes, you may choose to draw two cards before you decide whether to trash the up to two cards from Sewers.

Also, If I have bought sewers, and then chapel 2 rats, assuming I can draw 2 cards before I decide, if I use sewers to trash 1 more rats, can I draw a card before I trash a second card with sewers?

Based on the answer in this thread, I'd say you must draw a card from the Sewer-trashed Rats before you can go back to trash a second card from the other Chapel-trashed Rats.

117

Rules Questions / Re: Strange Inventor question

« on: November 26, 2018, 04:28:47 pm »

I assume the "then" on Inventor is meant only to (redundantly) indicate sequence, just like it does on Wishing Well or Cellar. Also, I assume that if it were actually meant to indicate a dependent effect, the FAQ would have pointed that out.

118

Dominion: Renaissance Previews / Re: Pssst.... (Eager anticipation) When's it shipping?

« on: November 19, 2018, 09:54:14 am »

I solve all this using the house rule 'don't look at the back of the top card of your deck'. Takes some practice but it works. Alternatively I could devise some sort of object that obscures your deck.

Setup: Each player puts their Uncertainty Token on their deck.

119

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: November 10, 2018, 03:22:57 am »

Say an extra round starts with player A. Player A has bought Fleet, and player B, to his left, hasn't. If player A, during his Fleet turn, Possesses player B, then has him buy Fleet during the Possession turn, will player B end up getting his Fleet turn, or is it too late for that?

120

Dominion: Renaissance Previews / Re: Fun or interesting combos with Capitalism

« on: November 08, 2018, 11:05:14 am »

Adventurer might not be totally worthless with Capitalism. It'd give Venture/Capitalism a run for its money.

Um, Adventurer + Capitalism almost reads +2 cards. I mean, it skips over Victory cards which is nice... but that sounds terrible.

Hence the "might" (i.e. depends on board) and the "not totally worthless" (as opposed to, like, "decent").

121

Dominion: Renaissance Previews / Re: Fun or interesting combos with Capitalism

« on: November 08, 2018, 10:28:58 am »

Adventurer might not be totally worthless with Capitalism. It'd give Venture/Capitalism a run for its money.

122

Rules Questions / Re: A Couple of Buy Phase Clarifications

« on: November 07, 2018, 07:56:54 pm »

I am interested in further opinions on "Coffers token conversion after Capitalism-Black Market buys."

My opinion is that you should have it work however you initially envisioned it to work, even if the rulebook (and mat, I guess; I haven't seen the mat) could be interpreted otherwise. I feel like only literal-minded programmer types would even consider the possibility that Black Market might stop you from playing Coffers, and even then they would probably say, "Nah, it can't possibly mean that." I figure more than 95% of players (even ones who carefully read the rulebook) would be absolutely dumbfounded to discover that Black Market stopped you from playing Coffers. Mark Rosewater used to say something like, "If you go against players' expectations, you're fighting a losing battle."

123

Rules Questions / Re: A Couple of Buy Phase Clarifications

« on: November 06, 2018, 05:43:56 pm »

It seems like the same literal interpretation should also disallow playing Treasures after buying from Black Market during the buy phase. At least, the 2E base set rulebook says: "You cannot go back and play more Treasures after buying a card; first play Treasures, then buy."

b) But you can play more Treasures as the rulebook talks about playing Treasures before you use the "normal" buys.

But I haven't been able to find where in the rulebook this is, so maybe that's what I'm missing.

124

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Reaction cards

« on: November 06, 2018, 11:01:57 am »

The thing I find odd about Patron is that it doesn't really behave like a reaction. Other reactions are basically triggered abilities that trigger while the card is in a hidden zone and give you the option of somehow proving that the card is there in order to cause some effect. Patron triggers while the card is publicly visible, and there's no choice about whether to get the effect. It would have worked just as well if it hadn't been blue at all.

Not that Reaction really has any rules meaning anyway.

125

Feedback / Re: Chrome Extension for f.ds!

« on: November 06, 2018, 10:24:03 am »

It might be possible to allow plurals to work without the Goldthorpe problem; if I just look for "s" specifically.

What's a Goldthorpe problem? Did you mean Scunthorpe problem? ('Cuz there's an easy way to remember how to spell that.)

The Goldthorpe problem was that the first half of that guy's name was getting autolinked to Gold, and it was annoying. I don't remember who he was; but people were posting about him back then.

Oh, wow. I was going to guess that was a made-up name referencing the Scunthorpe Problem in a Dominion-specific context, but there's actually a playtester for Nocturne (mentioned in the secret history but not the credits) named David Goldthorpe. That's a little bit hilarious.