5726
Feedback / Re: Chrome Extension for f.ds!
« on: June 03, 2015, 03:25:23 pm »Feature request: Coin icons like the ones Gherald has.
Should be simple enough. Will be super easy if I can get the script from Gherald.
Feature request: Coin icons like the ones Gherald has.
I've got the "card" button in the reply box, but no rollover image.
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?title=Special%3AFilePath&file=Artificer.jpg
The image is stored on the wiki as 'Card_Name.jpg', which the wiki is able to use to find the proper address for it. The images themselves are listed under more complicated addresses, so outside of the wiki, I'm not sure if this is possible.
Yeah that's what I was worried about. I could technically copy and host all the images somewhere else; all in the same directory, but that's a lot of work.
Is there a way to just link to the file page on the wiki? That's what the wiki itself does.
Right. The first Duplicate you gain can't be Duplicated.
I like the card; simple and unique. A few nitpicks:
It should be the Reserve type. There was a card during development that optionally put itself on the Tavern mat, just like Barkeeper. It was a Reserve card.
The image is stored on the wiki as 'Card_Name.jpg', which the wiki is able to use to find the proper address for it. The images themselves are listed under more complicated addresses, so outside of the wiki, I'm not sure if this is possible.
Now, it is ALSO true that you can't ever trash something that's currently in the trash. So with Throne Room Feast, even if Lose Track rule didn't exist, it wouldn't get trashed a second time. Which is why Throne-Room Mining Village worked properly even though that was before the Lose Track rule was officially published. But even so, lose track also applies, Feast does not expect itself to be in the trash.
You are correct except for one detail (or maybe I misunderstood you): For TR + Mining Village, it only worked correctly because of lose-track. It's true that lose-track is not needed to explain why MV sitting in the trash can't trash itself. But lose-track is needed to explain why TR doesn't pull MV out of the trash and into play.
Clarity requested?Also, why isn't there a plugin that allows me to type Rats, or even Rats, and produce a link to the wiki and a card image on rollover?
Working on it. This post is the first test; if this works, then then your markup in the quoted text should be automatically changed to a card link. Here we go!
*Edit* Woot! Ok, now to make it so that if you have the extension, links like that will include a hover with the image popup.
Also, why isn't there a plugin that allows me to type Rats, or even Rats, and produce a link to the wiki and a card image on rollover?
I can't think of any card in Dominion that specifically behaves differently depending on if other players have one or not.
I think nothing else doing something is a good enough reason as any to try it out.
Set-asided BoM is not trashed because it is not on-play, even though Feast doesn't explicitly say "trash it FROM PLAY", right?
(Similarly, at TR-Feast case, at the 2nd time, Feast does not trash itself from Trash.)
Right, but the reason why in the case of TR-Feast the Feast doesn't trash itself from the trash is different. Feast does expect to find itself in the trash, but you can't trash something that's already in trash.
What about:
Whenever you play a card from that pile, each other player gains a copy of that card.
Too niche maybe?
Can we get a clarification for cards bought but not gained also? e.g. Messenger gaining Border Village for both players (w/ Quarry in play), and your opponent choosing the last Messenger before you can gain it?I just discovered that if you trash an Estate-Fortress, it comes into your hand, but is no longer "yours" per the rules, so it's just a plain old Estate.Correct, Fortress returning to your hand becomes yours again and the Adventures rulebook does not cover this; ditto cards returned with Possession.
Of course it's just an oversight in the rules:Quote from: Adventures rulebookAn Estate is yours if either it started in your deck, or you gained it or bought it, or you were passed it with Masquerade. An Estate stops being yours if you trash it, return it to the Supply, pass it with Masquerade, or are stopped from gaining it due to Possession or Trader.
Actually, talking about Highway on a Potion-costing card, -$1P isn't less than $0, so shouldn't a Highway (and other cost reducers) make Potion-costing cards cost negative coins?
Maybe I'm recalling incorrectly, but I thought the ruling was that TR-BoM locked in the new identity of the BoM. The BoM goes to the trash and leaves play, but the TR has already been resolved and created two virtual Feasts, as it were.
That was the original ruling. There was a large discussion after Adventures was released where the ruling was changed. Can't quite remember what prompted it. Might have been discussion on how Inheritance works.
"In games using this. during your buy phase, you may spend a buy and trash a Silver. If you do, gain a [card name]." That sounds terrible though, and it doesn't work with Black Market.
Why not just "You may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying this card's cost"? I think that should work.
If it doesn't work, then you could use "When you would pay this card's cost, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead".
This does make me want to see some other ideas with a dual cost, or alternative cost. Though for any possible cost other than Potion, you'd definitely have to use LastFootnote's suggestion of having it in the card text, which elimination the neat interaction that this has where both $4 and PP are costs that it has. In a way Peddler already has this concept, but you could do a lot more with it.
Example
Some Card - $6*
Some effect that's almost good enough to cost $6 but not quite
-----------------------
When you buy this, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying its cost
Not sure if intended, but as written, you still need $6 available in order to get this, even if you don't actually use up the $6.