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 - GendoIkari

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 363
26
Keep in mind I'm talking about teaching the game to newbees. Yes, Tidal Pools is simple to execute but the complexity comes in when is a good time to have it. So that is some of the complexity I am referring to. Not just the complexity of how the card works, but when it is most useful or when to avoid it. For the old cards it was more straight forward to tell them good always, rarely or never (some of those were gotten ride of - good riddance), or in combination with x. For more of these new card the answer can be only "it depends".

Well this seems like a different complaint, one that's seems like a very weird thing to complain about. That's not complexity, that's depth of strategy. Why should new players need to be told whether a card is good or not? Clearly the whole fun of the game for a new player is in making that determination for themselves and then either being proven right or wrong. There in no way at all that I can see "it's not obvious how good this card is" as a drawback for any card for any new players.

Quote
And yes, at the table even our group of 4 experienced players miss things. We're shuffling our deck and getting a new hand or looking at our hand trying to figure out how we want to play it or even miss leaving duration cards out when we clean up because there are lots of cards out there, had to figure out how much $ you had and what to buy, and when you clean up, you rake the cards in forgetting about duration cards or a supplies until the next turn when you wonder if you had duration cards you forgot to leave out. It happens.

Yes and my group has on multiple occasions accidentally shuffled in a newly-played duration card during cleanup. That's not an issue with any new cards; that's an issue with duration cards as a whole. *Edit* I saw your other reply where you addressed this; I understand what you mean now.

27
Rules Questions / Re: Urchin "while in play"?
« on: July 18, 2022, 08:53:55 pm »
Back to your original question, are you interpreting the “first” on Kiln to mean you haven’t actually started to play the card (Attack) yet? Clearly you have started to play it, but the official FAQ regarding Moat’s reaction does lend itself to your question. I think Moat’s reaction triggers, but then takes a back seat to what Kiln says (because of the “first”) before the Moat holder can act on that trigger. Meanwhile your Urchin shows up after the Attack was initially played. (Per another ruling, Kiln’s trigger has the same timing as the Adventures tokens.)

Pretty sure he used Kiln as the example because Urchin has a "first" and so does Kilk; he was picking something that had the same timing window. If Kiln didn't say "first", then there wouldn't be a question to ask, by the time Kiln triggers and lets you play the Urchin, it is clearly too late for Urchin to do anything, because it is no longer during the "when play, first" timing. Moat, Kiln, and Urchin all have the same timing, they trigger after the card is put into play, but before the on-play instructions of the card are followed. Yes you have started to play the card, but that's not really relevant to the question; what's relevant is that the trigger window is the same.

28
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: July 18, 2022, 02:58:14 pm »

And with regards to trashing, well, trashing already mandates paying big attention to the card as you loose it. Discarding less so.

I'm pretty sure I remember Donald basically saying this exact thing about why Fortress wasn't a reaction; that trashing is already something you pay close attention to.

29
Rules Questions / Re: Urchin "while in play"?
« on: July 18, 2022, 02:54:04 pm »
This seems different to me, because the text on Urchin is something you do when you play the card (the thing you do is to set up a future trigger). Reactions in general already have special text that applies at special times, they aren't when-play abilities.

As I understood it, AJD's suggestion was with a dividing line, so not a when-play ability.

Ah, yeah I completely misread it. Then his suggestion changes the card far less than using the new "this turn" wording would. It remains a "while this is in play" ability but without actually using those specific words. I guess whether that's good or not depends on the very specifics of why Donald wants to get rid of "while this is in play". Things like people thinking Throne Room should work with it when it doesn't, like old Goons, don't end up mattering, though only because you can't trash a card twice. And the types of people who think that Throne Room worked with old Goons aren't the types of people to thinking about things like "well technically it triggered twice because you played the card twice, it's just that you can only successfully trash it with 1 of those 2 triggers, you could choose either one but not both".

30
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: July 18, 2022, 01:59:48 pm »
It was a question back when, should I color when-gain and when-trash.

The key thing for me is to draw your attention to a card you're not paying attention to. Moat isn't involved in anything when you get attacked; it has to draw your attention. Well. Gaining a card means you're already paying attention to it. You can argue that you're also paying attention to the card you're discarding, but it can be e.g. "your hand" due to Minion.

But now someone like me is going to point out that Count can trash "your hand", and if Fortress is in it, you still have to know to deal with that.

There's also something of a consistent explanation about public vs non-public locations. A card being trashed is moved to a public place. A card being gained is moving from a public place. A card being discarded may be going from a private place to another private place.

31
Rules Questions / Re: Urchin "while in play"?
« on: July 18, 2022, 01:37:22 pm »
An old question that I suddenly realized could be relevant in a corner-case. Is Urchin equivalent to "while you have this in play, when you play another Attack"?

If you play an Attack, and gain a copy via Kiln "first", and play Urchin then (via Sheepdog>Mouse>Vassal), does Urchin trigger?
I'm going with, no, because you didn't play another Attack card with the Urchin in play.

Obv. Urchin should be "this turn"; it's not something getting emergency errata errata though.

I'm prettty sure that according to the ruling about Goons entering play in the when-buy window when you have bought a card (and other rulings like that), Urchin should trigger. That is, if Urchin is indeed "while you have this in play", which it sounds like you're saying. When you play Urchin, you're still in the "before resolving" window of the played Attack card, which is when Urchin triggers.
It resembles the Livery stuff that's gone back and forth.

The wording on Urchin makes my ruling seem clear. Really the problem is that you don't want to word Urchin that way.

Ok, I guess I see what you're saying. "With this is play" is part of the trigger. Which means Urchin is not "while this is in play, when...".

I remember back in a somewhat recent Livery rules discussion thread, I argued for a similar interpretation of Livery, that "this turn" could be interpreted as "from now until the end of turn", and that it would be part of the triggering condition itself, not just a time limit during which the thing could trigger.

32
Rules Questions / Re: Urchin "while in play"?
« on: July 18, 2022, 01:33:53 pm »
Does it even need "this turn"? "When you play another Attack card, you may trash this from play" would seem to have it covered.
Yes, it does. “This turn” tells you how long the ongoing trigger is in effect for.

In what circumstance would the presence of absence of "this turn" make a difference, though? (I agree that the version without "this turn" would probably want a dividing line, but I'm not asking about whether the dividing line would make a difference just the "this turn".)

Not having "this turn" would be super awkward, even if the outcome would be the same. You'd have to do this:

1. Play Urchin.
2. Discard Urchin like normal in clean-up.
3. On a later turn, play an attack.
4. Urchin triggers. Follow the instruction "trash this to gain a Mercenary".
4a. Fail to trash Urchin due to the stop-moving rule.

Every time throughout the entire game that you play an attack card, repeat steps 4 and 4a.

4a would be "fail to trash Urchin because it's not in play"; the stop-moving rule is never invoked. (Recall my wording is "you may trash this from play".)


Indeed I missed the "from play" part.

Quote
Just like how it's already the case that every time throughout the game that you play an Attack card, every other player's Diplomat triggers, the follow the instruction "you may reveal this from your hand", and then fail to reveal it when it's not in their hand.

This seems different to me, because the text on Urchin is something you do when you play the card (the thing you do is to set up a future trigger). Reactions in general already have special text that applies at special times, they aren't when-play abilities.

33
Rules Questions / Re: Urchin "while in play"?
« on: July 18, 2022, 10:38:19 am »
Does it even need "this turn"? "When you play another Attack card, you may trash this from play" would seem to have it covered.
Yes, it does. “This turn” tells you how long the ongoing trigger is in effect for.

In what circumstance would the presence of absence of "this turn" make a difference, though? (I agree that the version without "this turn" would probably want a dividing line, but I'm not asking about whether the dividing line would make a difference just the "this turn".)

Not having "this turn" would be super awkward, even if the outcome would be the same. You'd have to do this:

1. Play Urchin.
2. Discard Urchin like normal in clean-up.
3. On a later turn, play an attack.
4. Urchin triggers. Follow the instruction "trash this to gain a Mercenary".
4a. Fail to trash Urchin due to the stop-moving rule.

Every time throughout the entire game that you play an attack card, repeat steps 4 and 4a.

34
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance + Royal Galley
« on: July 15, 2022, 11:42:41 pm »
This would be the same with Band of Misfits or Overlord, right? Or is there something about Inheritance I’m missing that matters to this question?

35
Rules Questions / Re: Elder on original Oracle
« on: July 14, 2022, 11:03:27 am »
I just noticed that original Oracle says "you choose one: either he discards them or he puts them back on top in an order he chooses."
I guess if I play with that card and Elder, it would let me discard Tunnels and then topdeck (and draw) them.

Wouldn't stop-moving rule apply here? The "put them back" ability expects the cards to be in the "temporarily revealed from the top of your deck" place, but instead they have moved to the discard pile. Even though the new discard pile rule allows you to pull stuff out of the discard when required; Oracle doesn't know to look in the discard.

My thinking is that Oracle discarded the cards, so it expects them to be in the discard pile, so it doesn't lose track. Compare to Vassal. (This is why it's important to think of abilities as units. Oracle's play ability consists of all the instructions you do when you play it. Each individual effect or instruction can't lose track; only abilities track cards and can lose track of them.)

Good point, I think you're right. Then it just becomes a question of the awkwardness of going by old card wordings combined with new cards. Was it ever ruled that Cellar should actually be played differently with Way of the Chameleon based on which edition of Cellar you are using? Because I do believe it was ruled that old Nomad Camp never visits your discard pile (despite the wording implying it does), and that old Envoy doesn't cause you to draw (which mattered for your -1 card token).

So it would feel more natural to me to also rule that old Cellar and old Oracle don't interact with things that specifically look for "+cards" or "choose one". But indeed that is a potential problem for people playing IRL who don't look such things up.

36
Rules Questions / Re: Elder on original Oracle
« on: July 14, 2022, 10:46:49 am »
I just noticed that original Oracle says "you choose one: either he discards them or he puts them back on top in an order he chooses."
I guess if I play with that card and Elder, it would let me discard Tunnels and then topdeck (and draw) them.

Wouldn't stop-moving rule apply here? The "put them back" ability expects the cards to be in the "temporarily revealed from the top of your deck" place, but instead they have moved to the discard pile. Even though the new discard pile rule allows you to pull stuff out of the discard when required; Oracle doesn't know to look in the discard.

37
Minion + Trail is a really strong combination. If you play a Minion with one or more Trails in hand, you draw additional cards for each Trail plus a Village effect for each one - especially useful if, as in the game where I found this combo, there are no villages, letting Minion + Trail fill the Village role. It's also a fairly useful counter to your opponent's Minion - with a single Trail in hand, you end up with 5 cards, and with more than one Trail, you end up with a net increase in handsize

Seems like this should work the same with Cellar, Storeroom, Forum, or Warehouse as well.

38
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Summary of all errata
« on: July 04, 2022, 12:11:02 pm »
As far as I know, Nomad Camp’s change was not functional; though the new wording is correct as to how it functions, while the old wording was not. It had already been ruled that Nomad Camp doesn’t ever go to your discard pile. (Same as Envoy).

39
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: July 01, 2022, 01:54:46 am »
Interesting. I’m going to use the word “acquire” to denote a card becoming your card (i.e. it is included in your deck at end of game, unless at some point it is “unacquired”).

Ways to acquire a card:
* Anytime you gain a card, in any way and for any reason.
* A card is passed or put into your hand (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Masquerade, Fortress
* Anytime you Exile a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours).
* Anytime you set aside a card (assuming it wasn’t already your card). Precedent: Inheritance
     * (unless the original instruction later moves the card somewhere else you don’t control(?), e.g. the Supply) Precedent: none?
* Anytime you play a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Trail
—hypotheticals—
* A card is put or passed into a zone you control, e.g. deck, play area, Tavern mat (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: none, other than the scenarios already covered

That was fun. Did I miss any? I thought I could come up with more hypotheticals, but alas I am tired this week.

And I’ll leave it someone else for the unacquire list. :D

I wish I had thought to use “acquire” instead of “get” when I wrote this thread 7 years ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13116.0

I think Trail / playing a card is the only thing to add to my list since last time I edited it.

You missed Exchange. And actually we both missed buying a card. A card you buy becomes yours before you gain it, although with the new errata removing all on-buy triggers, I don’t think this distinction would ever matter.

40
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: June 30, 2022, 06:20:11 pm »
I don't know how I feel about the fact that playing a card from the Trash automatically means that the card is now part of your deck. We know from many other Command card examples that playing a card, leaving it there, does not cause the card to become part of your deck. It seems somewhat counterintuitive that "leaving it there" now means not only that the card doesn't move, but it also has an extra meaning that the card doesn't become part of your deck. I guess there's a new rule that any card that ends up in your play area automatically becomes part of your deck?

That's not an "extra meaning" for "leaving it there"; that's the entire meaning of "leaving it there"—you leave it where it is, instead of putting it in your play area. Trail doesn't say "leaving it there" (i.e., in the Trash), and the text of Trail specifies that the card may be in the Trash, so Trail self-playing from the trash moves it into the play area for the same reason that Golem playing a card moves it into the play area from set-aside-cards land. The stop-moving rule doesn't apply the way it would for say, Throne/Horse because Throne doesn't know to look for the Horse in the supply; but Trail does know to look for itself in the trash.

What I mean is that before Trail, it was never known that a card moving to your play area caused it to be part of your deck. Maybe that should have just been obvious, but nothing ever mattered for it.  Without such a rule, “leaving it there” only would affect a played card’s location; not its ownership. Because that rule exists, “leaving it there” now also prevents the card from becoming yours.

It was the same when Fortress was released. A new rule had to be added, specifically written or not, that says that a card you don’t own moving to your hand causes that card to be part of your deck.

41
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: June 29, 2022, 05:21:41 pm »
2nd editions seem to be a pretty tumultuous event, with all of us opining on which changes we think are good or bad, mourning the loss of our favorite weak, complicated, or unfun cards, and generally complaining about things we don’t like. Some of these changes - like the change to Bonfire - can require change for reasons that aren’t immediately noticeable to most of us. I, personally, was pretty disappointed at the change to Bonfire, said as much in the preview thread, and never stopped to consider that maybe the designer of the game had good reasons for changing it the way he did.

On that note, is there a way that we can get answers to our burning questions in a way that’s more helpful/less hostile? Would it be nice to have a mega thread devoted specifically to 2E questions where we ask “Why did Bonfire change this way?” Should we just be more polite and give you the benefit of the doubt as we ask? Stop clamoring and just wait for the secret history?

Or do you not even enjoy discussing the minutiae of every errata and want us to just let it be?

Thanks for all your hard work in making the game the best it can be. I’m sorry if any of my comments have been annoying to read or sound ungrateful.

Followup to this, in that thread it was said that Bonfire had a second reason for changing which LastFootnote had forgotten about. What was the other reason?

42
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: June 29, 2022, 05:15:05 pm »
I wonder why Berserker isn't a Reaction card; it seems to meet all the requirements.

No "when you gain this" cards are Reactions... Trail is specifically because of the Discard part.

43
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: June 29, 2022, 05:13:14 pm »
I don't know how I feel about the fact that playing a card from the Trash automatically means that the card is now part of your deck. We know from many other Command card examples that playing a card, leaving it there, does not cause the card to become part of your deck. It seems somewhat counterintuitive that "leaving it there" now means not only that the card doesn't move, but it also has an extra meaning that the card doesn't become part of your deck. I guess there's a new rule that any card that ends up in your play area automatically becomes part of your deck?

44
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: June 29, 2022, 05:09:08 pm »
Any reason why Haggler doesn't say "gain a card you bought" kind of like the new Swamp Hag? It seems just like a clearer/simpler version of "gain a card, if you bought it".

45
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 3
« on: June 29, 2022, 04:06:22 pm »
Is Berserker's "if you have an action in play" condition primarily there to stop it from screwing people over in the first 1-2 turns?

46
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 2
« on: June 28, 2022, 01:27:58 pm »
How nuts is Souk-WotChameleon gonna be? It aside, Souk seems fine, maybe not the best buy when you're drawing your deck, but +7 coins... Man, this feels like a card that you just build your deck around.

Does Way of the Chameleon also apply to negative cards and coins? Or just the positives?

It doesn't as stated in the Wiki

And to be clear in the general sense, there's no rule at all that defines what "-2 cards" would even look like. A lot of people think of it as the same as "discard 2 cards", but that's just one choice of interpretation.

47
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Hinterlands 2E Preview 2
« on: June 28, 2022, 10:55:58 am »
Thank you early "spoilers", all 3 of these cards already work with auto-link!

48
Dominion General Discussion / Re: 2022 Additional Errata
« on: June 27, 2022, 01:55:01 pm »
It seems very weird that Highway isn't on the list. Weird enough to make me think that it's about to be cut.

49
Other Games / Temporum Earth United
« on: June 19, 2022, 07:49:43 pm »
If you play Bag of Loot at Earth United, do you end up with it back in your hand? Do your opponents ever put it in their hand? Since there’s no lose track / stop moving rule that I know of, I would think they put it in their hand, but then you play it from their hand and put it in your hand at the end.

50
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Prosperity 2E Preview 3
« on: June 13, 2022, 10:45:56 am »
What makes Collection + Stampede different than Fortress+Bishop, for example? Even if Collection gives far more points-per-turn, that shouldn't matter, should it? All that matters is that you've build a deck which generates any number of points per turn where you don't want to buy any card to add to the deck.

The difference is that you can beat Fortress+Bishop by building an engine that uses Fortress and Bishop to score points faster than the golden deck can, whereas Stampede's 5-card limit prevents you from incorporating it in an engine, and nothing can beat 50 VP/turn.

I think most Bishop/Fortress kingdoms won't have an engine alternative that gets more than 12 VP per turn and can be set up as fast as the Golden deck.

IMO, the best solution is to just add an official rule to resolve games in which neither player can force a win - which can happen not just with golden decks, but also with Possession, Smugglers and others.
 
Such games should either be declared a tie, or the game should end after a certain number of turns in which the game does not make any progress - say, when the total number of cards in the supply has not decreased over 20 consecutive turns, and the VP difference between the players has not changed either.

Either solution would mirror chess rules (the stalemate rule / the 50-turns rule), a game which has been known for centuries to produce lots of "un-endable" games by design.

There's also the unrealistic but possible situation where it's literally impossible for the game to end, as opposed to the game won't end because a player would have to choose to lose in order to end the game. Both players trashed all their Copper and then bought a debt-cost card, etc.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 363

Page created in 0.175 seconds with 19 queries.