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 ... 243 244 [245] 246 247 ... 374
6101
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Giant
« on: April 04, 2015, 12:38:31 pm »
Buying 0 or 2+ copies of Giant seems to increase the chance you will play it an even number of times, which is good.  Right?

I don't think this is right...  with 2 Giants, I'm not sure that your chances of playing it an even number of times increases over just 1 Giant. Let's say for 1 Giant, there's a 50% chance of playing it an even number of times... this should be about true on average. For 2 Giants, each one still has that 50% chance of being played an even number of times. So there are 4 options, each with a 25% chance of occurring:

Giant 1 played odd #, Giant 2 played odd # - Even number of Giants played
Giant 1 played even #, Giant 2 played even # - Even number of Giants played
Giant 1 played odd #, Giant 2 played even # - Odd number of Giants played
Giant 1 played even #, Giant 2 played odd # - Odd number of Giants played

Still comes out to 50/50.

Now if you're drawing your entire deck each turn, then this changes; because you won't ever end the game while your Giant hasn't been found in the current shuffle. In that case, 2 Giants would mean you always play even; 3 would mean you have a 50/50 chance of playing even or odd.

6102
Inheritance could make Messenger-ing estates really nice.

Any ideas about the best card to play Lost Arts on? My current vote goes to Envoy.
And the worst card? probably Prince? Although that's not nearly as interesting as the best.

Borrow is one of my favorite events (there's two I can't really choose between). More tactical decisions almost every turn, bye bye heart breaking streaks of $7 hands in the endgame.

So I can now tell the interesting story I had about Hireling... I once put my +1 Action Token on Hireling. Yup. Even though it's a one-shot in terms of how often you play the card. I did it so that I could play multiple on the same turn; then moved my Action Token somewhere else.

6103
Wow, the wording was more specific than I remember. Yeah, easy call there.

Yeah, it was done that way pretty much to prevent any form of Throne-Room + Treasure Map ever working.

6104
Uh, estates play like they are the card without ever taking on the card's nameship. If you played Estate as Treasure Map and then trashed Treasure Map from the hand, I think that would work.

You could play Estate as Treasure Map and then trash a (real) Treasure Map from your hand, but you will not get any Gold because you did not "trash 2 Treasure Maps."

6105
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Messenger
« on: April 04, 2015, 10:05:32 am »
There's the +Buy card, for whomever was asking.  ;)

Whoever*  ::)

"Whom" is used in any case where you'd use an object pronoun, such as "me" or "him" or "them".  Do you ever say "for I" or "for he" or "for they"?  No, you say "for me" or "for him" or "for them", so you'd say "for whom", and since it doesn't matter which "whom" it is, it is "for whomever".

This is a bit tricky though. I'm one of those people who (not whom) normally can't stand hearing the wrong use of who vs whom. But in this case upon first reading I thought whoever was correct (though I now see you are right). It's because "whomever was asking" by itself is wrong; it would be "whoever was asking".

Gendo is right and Wero is wrong; the case of whoever is determined by the smallest clause it's actually in. It's acting as the subject of was asking. It's not the object of for; the object of for is the entire clause whoever was asking.

(That's the standard rule, anyway)

I think the problem is arising from the fact that English annoyingly abbreviates the starts of dependent clauses. To have no ambiguity, it should be "for him, who", but English let's you scrunch that up.

So what you're saying is that we need more commas.

6106
The card doesn't read like you can buy it once per turn; it reads like wero is suggesting. The "once per turn" precedes the moving-token-getting-money clause. It doesn't say anything about only being able to buy it once per turn (though why would you want to, really).

See here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12906.msg478752#msg478752. All events that start with "once per turn:" are saying that you can only buy that event once per turn; and are not related to the effect of the card. However, looking again, I do find Borrow to be a little confusing, because the "+1 Buy" is written BEFORE the "once per turn" part.

Linking to your own post doesn't convince anyone who was questioning you of anything at all. Moreover, it's not that I am actually claiming you are wrong per se, more that that is not how the card reads by itself.

Well I didn't know if you had seen that post; it's also worth noting that Donald +1'd it, which does pretty much mean that it's correct. But yes, I agree that the card wording by itself is confusing. But if the "once per turn" were not meant to stop you from purchasing it only once; then there would be no need to have it there at all... the "if" clause would already prevent it anyway. The only thing "once per turn" does is stops you from buying an unlimited number of this event. Which could matter if there were ever a card similar to Goons that gives you something when you buy an event.

6107
Let's say that Transmute is referring to the state of the card at the moment it checks (like Procession); thus it will no longer be your Estate with all that means.
Does this apply to all "Trash for X" cards? For example with a Quarry in play your inherited Scouts are worth 0, so if they get swindled, you may end up with a Curse. And if you Salvage them, you get +0$.
Wouldn't salvage come before quarry anyway?  Also first post.

Not with Black Market, or the new card Storyteller.

Welcome to the forums!

6108
Not read through everything, but quick thoughts:

Inheritance/Baron seems crazy good.  Baron helps spike $7 early, and then Baron turns into: "+1 buy, choose one: discard action card X and +$4, or gain action card X", which seems really nice.


I'm not so sure... if you have 2 Estate/Barons in your hand, then you get +$4 and a buy... those could have been Silver and Woodcutter for the same effect. And you don't want to be gaining more and more Estate/Barons because they're terminal.
Baron would combo well with Inheritance but not by using Inheritance on Baron itself.  Inheritance/Nonterminal + Baron would be good I think.

Yes. Baron will make it much easier to hit that $7 quicker.Quite possibly on turn 3-4 with a little luck.

6109
The card doesn't read like you can buy it once per turn; it reads like wero is suggesting. The "once per turn" precedes the moving-token-getting-money clause. It doesn't say anything about only being able to buy it once per turn (though why would you want to, really).

See here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12906.msg478752#msg478752. All events that start with "once per turn:" are saying that you can only buy that event once per turn; and are not related to the effect of the card. However, looking again, I do find Borrow to be a little confusing, because the "+1 Buy" is written BEFORE the "once per turn" part.

6110
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Messenger
« on: April 04, 2015, 09:19:29 am »
There's the +Buy card, for whomever was asking.  ;)

Whoever*  ::)

"Whom" is used in any case where you'd use an object pronoun, such as "me" or "him" or "them".  Do you ever say "for I" or "for he" or "for they"?  No, you say "for me" or "for him" or "for them", so you'd say "for whom", and since it doesn't matter which "whom" it is, it is "for whomever".

This is a bit tricky though. I'm one of those people who (not whom) normally can't stand hearing the wrong use of who vs whom. But in this case upon first reading I thought whoever was correct (though I now see you are right). It's because "whomever was asking" by itself is wrong; it would be "whoever was asking".

Gendo is right and Wero is wrong; the case of whoever is determined by the smallest clause it's actually in. It's acting as the subject of was asking. It's not the object of for; the object of for is the entire clause whoever was asking.

(That's the standard rule, anyway)

Assuming you're correct, Flip5ide was right, not I. Or, I was right in my first instinct, but I did say in my post that I thought Wero was right, which makes me wrong.

6111
Not read through everything, but quick thoughts:

Inheritance/Baron seems crazy good.  Baron helps spike $7 early, and then Baron turns into: "+1 buy, choose one: discard action card X and +$4, or gain action card X", which seems really nice.


I'm not so sure... if you have 2 Estate/Barons in your hand, then you get +$4 and a buy... those could have been Silver and Woodcutter for the same effect. And you don't want to be gaining more and more Estate/Barons because they're terminal.

6112
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Messenger
« on: April 04, 2015, 09:09:03 am »
There's the +Buy card, for whomever was asking.  ;)

Whoever*  ::)

"Whom" is used in any case where you'd use an object pronoun, such as "me" or "him" or "them".  Do you ever say "for I" or "for he" or "for they"?  No, you say "for me" or "for him" or "for them", so you'd say "for whom", and since it doesn't matter which "whom" it is, it is "for whomever".

This is a bit tricky though. I'm one of those people who (not whom) normally can't stand hearing the wrong use of who vs whom. But in this case upon first reading I thought whoever was correct (though I now see you are right). It's because "whomever was asking" by itself is wrong; it would be "whoever was asking".

6113
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Giant
« on: April 04, 2015, 09:02:13 am »
Is it just me, or does the attack only happen on the +$5 part of the Giant?

The +$1 has a period after it.  The +$5 has the comma and then describes the attack. 

Ultimately, the rulebook will clarify.

You are definitely correct. Welcome to the forum!

6114
Does the set-aside card for Inheritance count as part of your deck for Gardens/Vineyard purposes? I would imagine it does.
Yes.

Now this I wouldn't have guessed. Because you never gained that card; I assumed it wasn't in any way part of your deck.

6115
Thanks; that was really useful. I understand there will a FAQ on this, but, in general, I can see where if card text refers to the card name, and it ain't "Estate", then you're all done. Is the use of the word "this" neutral enough for you to play "as if" it were the same card?
"This" means the card, whatever that card is. It works when the card gets Inherited.

So specifically, Urchin's card text reads: When you play another Attack card with this in play, you may trash this. If you do, gain a Mercenary from the Mercenary pile.

This leads me to believe that if you put your Estate token on Urchin, you can trash an Estate played as an attack if you play another attack (which could be another Estate played as if it were an Urchin). Is that right?
Yes.

And then there's cases like Pirate Ship, whose text reads: Choose one: Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure that you choose, discards the rest, and if anyone trashed a Treasure you take a Coin token; or, +$1 per Coin token you’ve taken with Pirate Ships this game.

(Emphasis added by me.) In this case, it seems like if you put your Estate token on Pirate ship, that you can take choice 1...but then have to put the Coin token gained some place that's not the Pirate Ship mat since the second choice tells you that only Coin tokens "taken with Pirate Ship" yield money. But by the same token (heh), maybe you can play Estate and take the second option and get money for the tokens on your Pirate Ship mat, if there are any. (Again, no suggestion you would actually want to do that, but...seems possible.
I am tentatively ruling that it counts all of the tokens on the mat. Obv. that's not what it literally says.

Pirate Ship has that wording due to originally having no mat. And then not having the work put into it to have the best possible wording once it had a mat. Trade Route was similar but then it got a better wording that accounted for the mat. That's just some history, it's not really relevant but there it is.

In my opinion, this is the only sensible ruling. Literal wording isn't as important as intention and clarity.

6116
Yeah Pirate Ship Estate is going to be a rules issue no matter what I think. I'm pretty sure that the intent of Pirate Ship is that you get a coin for each token on your Pirate Ship mat no matter what. But then again the card says what it says. Either you have to disobey that part of Pirate Ship's wording, and allow the Estate Ship tokens to count; or you'd have to ignore the Estate Ship's wording about putting the token on the mat. Because once a token is on the mat, there's no tracking where it came from.

6117
Looking at the FAQ, you guys haven't asked yet if Estates can be revealed as Young Witch's bane. No, they can't be.

Clearly, because Bain cards are cards "from that pile". But yeah, that will surely be asked eventually.

6118
Aha. Or Cultist, that would work too. So the aim is to start the next turn with four cards, but there are ways of getting around that. And the token moves off the deck as soon as it's used.
Yes; the bit about removing the token is written on the token, which is why you-all wondered about it. I did not have an image of the token to include.

Are the tokens poker chip type things?

6119
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Messenger
« on: April 03, 2015, 06:27:50 pm »
The more I think about this, the more it seems really strong. I want to play this in Big Money and wreck your engine. Yeah, I said it. Just dishing out silvers all day long makes my money deck better, your engine... less clear. Definitely looking forward to it, anyway.

Your problem here is that you have to buy a terminal for every Silver you want to dish out, and you don't want many terminals. Once you have 1 or 2 (or less if you have terminal draw), you'd much rather have just a Silver than a Silver and a Messenger.

So I just buy a silver. Really, though, I imagine you can get quite a number of terminals - 3, 4? The silver isn't all that damaging anyway, it's more that it's not so helpful. And I, the money player, get to open triple Silver, following up with quite a bit more. I get my deck quite thick with silvers nice and quickly. And it's quite a while before I would rather have no Messenger than Messenger. Also, I have a decent amount of pile control for a money deck.

But you don't get Silver any quicker than you would by just buying Silver normally.

6120
Question for playtesters: How did you playtest this expansion? Did you just pick 10 Kingdoms out of the 235 (I thought it was 236, but others say 235) Kingdom cards, and keep doing that until the new cards came up? Did you start with Base+Adventures? Adventures alone? Did you go "I think this combo has potential/is broken" and pick a kingdom to test that idea?

I'm trying to figure out how best to learn this expansion myself when I can get my hands on it.

Not at all. I didn't want to play any game that didn't have 2 events, and all 10 cards chosen from Adventures.

6121
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Messenger
« on: April 03, 2015, 05:25:48 pm »
The more I think about this, the more it seems really strong. I want to play this in Big Money and wreck your engine. Yeah, I said it. Just dishing out silvers all day long makes my money deck better, your engine... less clear. Definitely looking forward to it, anyway.

Your problem here is that you have to buy a terminal for every Silver you want to dish out, and you don't want many terminals. Once you have 1 or 2 (or less if you have terminal draw), you'd much rather have just a Silver than a Silver and a Messenger.

6122
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Giant
« on: April 03, 2015, 05:20:49 pm »
Whether Giant is mostly a curser or a trasher depends on the situation. Against a thick deck, it's mostly a curser, making the attack not much different from Witch. Against a thin deck, it's mostly a trasher, and the attack is comparable to Knight's (in some ways better, in some ways worse). But the attack only hits once every 2 plays. The average +$3 is better than Dame Sylvia's +$2, but maybe not better than Witch's +2 cards and Sir Destry's +2 cards. This makes me think that Giant will be weaker than those cards, unless there is some way to favourably manipulate the Journey token.

Being weaker than auto-buys doesn't say much about its power level though. I think it'll be good enough to run in the right situations, but not an auto-buy. I like that in a card.

I don't get this... the what matters is the percentage of cards in the opposing deck that cost the right amount. How thin or thick the deck is shouldn't change how often it curses vs trashes.

I think the logic is, a thin deck has gotten rid of estates and coppers and thus generally has a high density of trash able targets and vice versa.

I see. But man, that completely assumes that my strategy of thinning out everything BUT Coppers and Estates isn't being used!

6123
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Giant
« on: April 03, 2015, 05:15:41 pm »
Whether Giant is mostly a curser or a trasher depends on the situation. Against a thick deck, it's mostly a curser, making the attack not much different from Witch. Against a thin deck, it's mostly a trasher, and the attack is comparable to Knight's (in some ways better, in some ways worse). But the attack only hits once every 2 plays. The average +$3 is better than Dame Sylvia's +$2, but maybe not better than Witch's +2 cards and Sir Destry's +2 cards. This makes me think that Giant will be weaker than those cards, unless there is some way to favourably manipulate the Journey token.

Being weaker than auto-buys doesn't say much about its power level though. I think it'll be good enough to run in the right situations, but not an auto-buy. I like that in a card.

I don't get this... the what matters is the percentage of cards in the opposing deck that cost the right amount. How thin or thick the deck is shouldn't change how often it curses vs trashes.

6124
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Giant
« on: April 03, 2015, 05:08:16 pm »
This is just totally outclassed by the other cursers, right?

Giant is not usually a curser.  It's a trashing attack that gets to be a Curser if the trashing fails.

You understand my question well enough to answer it, but you'll spend time criticizing the way I posed it and forgo the time it takes to answer what I asked.

I don't read it that way at all... I didn't see his response as a criticism of the way you posed your question; but rather as a good answer to that question. The point is that for something to be outclassed by cursers; that thing generally needs to be a curser. Otherwise you're comparing apples and oranges. The helpful question to ask here is how it compares to other trashers; not how it compares to other cursers.

6125
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Adventures^^
« on: April 03, 2015, 04:44:55 pm »
Quote
Expedition (Event) $3
During this cleanup phase, draw 2 additional cards.
Well, thats funny...



I think your wording is even a little clearer; considering how many people were wondering when Expedition actually happens.

Pages: 1 ... 243 244 [245] 246 247 ... 374

Page created in 0.193 seconds with 19 queries.