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 - Jeebus

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 57
Wait, how does Lantern cause shapeshifting? Doesn't it do the same kind of thing as Envy and Enchantress (i.e., 'when you play the card do this instead of what the card says')? Is that shapeshifting?

I think Donald is talking about the ruling how an inherited Border Guard works if the player has the Lantern. Initially the idea was that since the card is still named Estate, Lantern would not apply. Then, after some argument (in some thread here I can't find now), it was changed based on the argument that the Lantern would change (shapeshift) the Border Guard under the Estate token, which would then, in turn, affect the ability that the Estates get.

Correct, it's this thread:

Enchantress is the only card that interrupts doing something right before it happens to do something else instead - except for Trader and Possession, which interrupt a gaining instruction. Based on the wording on Envious and Coppersmith and the ruling about Lantern, it must be that Envious "shapeshifts" Silvers/Golds and Coppersmith "shapeshifts" Coppers. Not that it matters with current cards. (Of course in addition there's Capitalism that changes types, and several cards that change costs.)

The first interaction has the Throne Room stay out in Dominion Online, which is the reason I asked the question. It's not like that is a totally unreasonable; a card, that is now a Duration, was played twice by the Throne Room. But literally, as you said, it played a non-Duration card named Band of Misfits the first time.

And it has to be this way, or Royal Carriage would never stay in play when it re-plays a Duration (which is explictly stated in the rulebook).

The second example is more clear cut, because another simple reason that Throne Room/King's Court does not stay out is that the card it played is not in play, so can't be discarded anyway.

You're right, the explanation I gave was valid when TR+Durations worked differently. It used to be that TR would stay in play as long as the Duration had unresolved effects (even if the Duration was no longer in play). But since the rules change that TR simply follows the Duration, that explanation is unneeded and confusing*.

*because it implies that if a normal (non-BoM) Duration played by TR somehow ended up in trash while being resolved, TR would stay in play. I don't think this is possible with current cards though.

I tried the following setup in Dominion Online: Player A plays Ghost which sets aside an Amulet. Player B plays Enchantress. Player A gets one enchanted Amulet (+1 Card/+1 Action effect) and then a normal one. By the letter of the rule the Ghost should stay out another turn, which it does in Dominion Online, even though there is nothing to 'remember' about an additional effect next turn.

Yes, but this is more related to scenarios like playing TR+Gear without setting aside cards both times, etc. Archive, Cargo Ship, Gear, Haven, Outpost, Research, Secret Cave and Tactician can all be played by TR but only have the future ability once, but the TR still stays out.

Yes, GendoIkari is correct.

Play TR + BoM(Duration) - BoM plays itself as Duration, then TR plays the Duration directly. But the rule for TR+Duration is that if TR causes the Duration to be played one more time this turn, TR stays in play. (This is the reason Royal Carriage stays in play when re-playing a Duration.)

Play TR + BoM(Feast) / Bom(Duration) - BoM plays itself as Feast, then TR plays BoM from trash, then BoM plays itself as Duration. TR never played a Duration, so doesn't stay in play. This also applies to King's Court, since KC will always play BoM, not a Duration.

As far as I remember, all this works correctly in Dominion Online - of course also including the Conspirator interaction.

Rules Questions / Re: Haunted Woods / Trader
« on: July 04, 2019, 06:17:51 pm »
Also, this is at least also mentioned in the Hinterlands rulebook (both 1st and 2nd ed.).

From 2nd ed. Hinterlands rulebook:

Many cards in Hinterlands do something "when you gain" or "when you buy" that card or another card.
When you buy a card, you first buy it, then gain it. So, for example, if you have Haggler in play and buy Embassy, you first resolve Haggler's "when you buy" ability, then gain Embassy, then resolve Embassy's "when you gain" ability.
When you gain a card without buying it, "when you gain" abilities will still happen, but "when you buy" abilities will not.
"When you gain this" happens directly after you gain the card; the card will be in your discard pile already (or wherever else it was put) when you resolve that ability.
When playing a card, its "when you gain/buy" abilities no longer do anything.
You can sometimes buy a card without gaining it, such as by using Trader to gain Silver instead. You can also sometimes gain cards when it is not your turn.
The player that "when you buy" things happen for is the player who paid for the card, and the player that "when you gain" things happen for is the player who actually gained the card. Those are normally the same person, but can be different, for example due to the Dominion: Alchemy card Possession.

Rules Questions / Re: Swindler Question
« on: June 11, 2019, 10:05:43 am »
Just to address your logic:

The rules say, "If you have to do anything with your deck ... and you need more cards than are left in your deck, first shuffle your discard pile ..."

You are questioning whether you are the one doing something with your deck when another player plays Swindler. The answer is yes. Swindler says, "Each other player trashes the top card of their deck ..." So your opponent plays Swindler, but you are the one trashing the card.

This also matters for cards that say "when you trash this". They trigger when a Swindler attack makes you trash them.

Rules Questions / Re: Piazza and Duration cards
« on: May 29, 2019, 03:44:04 pm »
Start-of-turn window: Play a card (via Ghost/Innovation/Piazza/Prince/Summon). If it's a Reserve card like Ratcatcher, can call it now. If it's Hireling, Prince, Fool gaining Lost in the Woods, or Treasurer gaining Key, the start-of-turn ability starts now.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: May 19, 2019, 03:36:35 pm »
I don't know if it was the only reason, but without that clause, you could play Royal Carriage infinitely, calling it to reply itself each time. One could argue that this is no different than how you can reveal Moat infinitely for no effect; though it actually matters with Conspirator or any of the token bonuses.

That is a very good point. Citadel has a built-in limit of once.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: May 19, 2019, 03:22:39 pm »
Maybe this has been addressed somewhere, but I can't find it. Why does Royal Carriage have a clause that it can't replay a card that has left play, while Citadel does not have that clause?

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: May 06, 2019, 11:31:28 am »
On another matter, when is it determined which players get the extra turn, at the nominal game end or when it would be their Fleet turn? Possession could cause a player to buy Fleet after "game end" but before it would be their Fleet turn.

This was actually answered up-thread. You could also take a look at the document in my sig for the complete rulings about Fleet.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: May 01, 2019, 07:57:58 pm »
To all, who seem to think that i want to exclude non Fleet player from the Fleet round totally: quite contrary i was always without doubt and said so that they still participate, just only they should not get any turns.:

Right, you did say that.

Only players with Fleet get Fleet turns, but that doesn't mean that the other extra turns only apply to players with Fleet.
That contradicts your own words from above.

No, you're failing to understand my point. Which quote do you mean?

As I said, there is an extra round of Fleet turns. This doesn't mean that there are only Fleet turns. Indeed, the FAQ explicitly says that that is not the case: There can also be other extra turns. But the card only says who gets Fleet turns. It doesn't say who gets or doesn't get other extra turns. Neither does the FAQ. The card gives turns to Fleet players, not to other players. But it doesn't regulate any other actitivity in the extra round.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: May 01, 2019, 01:09:33 pm »
Back to Fleet: After the game ends, there's an extra round of turns just for players with this. Nothing else. No bracketed text. No italicized text. Nothing additional about it in the rules of rulebook. From FAQ we get to know only that other extra turns happen and the last player with Fleet does not get other extra turns. No explicit statement about non-Fleet-players.

So as average player i am stuck with generale rule "do exactly as written, nothing more, nothing less". I would deduct from FAQ i can generate extra turns by Outpost and Mission (if i am not the last Fleet-player) during my Fleet turn and if the player to my left hand has also Fleet i can posses him/her/them (if i am not the last Fleet-player)

I disagree about the FAQ. When I read it, there was no doubt it my mind that extra turns from Outpost etc will happen for all players. Here it is:

The extra turns go in order starting with the next player after the one that just took a turn. Other extra turns, such as from Outpost (in Seaside) can happen in-between those turns...

In the first sentence, the "extra turns" (unfortunate phrase) referred to are the Fleet turns. Other extra turns can happen in between.

The card says "there's an extra round of turns just for players with this". I take the card text to mean that there is an extra round consisting of just turns for Fleet players. I interpret "just for players with this" to refer to the turns, not the round. So it does not mean an extra round just for Fleet players. This is evident when you think of what that would mean, as others have pointed out: All non-Fleet players have to participate in this round, or they couldn't even receive a Curse from Witch. (This is also heavily implied in the FAQ, because it says that non-Fleet players don't sort their cards and count VP until the end.)

So there is an extra round of Fleet turns. The card says or implies nothing about other extra turns, but the FAQ does. It says that other extra turns can happen in between. Only players with Fleet get Fleet turns, but that doesn't mean that the other extra turns only apply to players with Fleet.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: April 30, 2019, 11:08:19 am »
Yet one more way of saying it:

If any player has bought Fleet, there will be a Fleet round after the game would normally end. Only players with Fleet get a normal turn in this round. Otherwise it is exactly as if the game is extented for one normal round.*

*except that these turns don't count for tie-breaker.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: April 29, 2019, 03:58:37 pm »
Do i interpret correctly that the player triggering end condition get extra turns triggered in that same turn, then the other players with Fleet get their "normal" turns plus possible extra turns, but the ending player gets only their "normal" turn without extra turns triggered during that?

Yes, if the "ending player" is indeed the last player to play their Fleet turn. The last player to play their Fleet turn, whoever that may be, does not get any extra turns after that.

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: April 29, 2019, 03:53:25 pm »
I assume Possession works only if the left player has bought Fleet, correct? It does not skip similar Masquerade players which did not buy Fleet?

If Alice plays Possession and ends the game normally, she will Possess Bob - as long as somebody has bought Fleet. First Bob gets a turn (Possessed by Alice), then all Fleet-players get a turn, starting with Bob and ending with Alice.

If Alice ends the game normally, and then Bob plays Possession on his Fleet turn, Bob Possesses the next player - as long as there are more Fleet turns. If Bob is the last Fleet player, he won't Possess anybody, because the game (Fleet round) ends immediately after his Fleet turn. If Alice plays Possession on her Fleet turn, she will not Possess anybody, because she is the last player.

Another good thing about Bandit Camp that hasn't been mentioned explicitly, is that it gives you extra, good cards in your deck (Spoils), which of course can't be trashed, but which also provide padding so that Knight attacks won't as easily hit the Bandit Camp. A Gold is always just one, vulnerable card.

Rules Questions / Re: Why did Summons fail on Blessed Village?
« on: April 27, 2019, 03:06:51 pm »
Summon tracks Blessed Village from the moment it gains it. Gaining BV, you put it in your discard pile. Then the BV's when-gain ability triggers. You gain a Wisp, putting it on top of the BV. This makes Summon lose track of the BV. Now you move on to Summon's next instruction, setting aside the gained BV. But Summon can't move the BV, since it lost track of it.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Innovation / Skulk interaction
« on: April 21, 2019, 11:54:30 pm »
For some reason this does not apply to hands. You can gain a card with Transmogrify (or Mine if you like), physically shuffle your hand around, then react with a Watchtower to trash the gained card.

What I posit is that "top of discard pile" and "rest of discard pile" are different locations WRT lose-track.

Hasn't Watchtower already lost track of it in the first place because you gained it to your hand rather than your discard as usual?

No, gaining to hand or to top of deck does not cause lose-track. (This has been known since Seaside with Sea Hag/Watchtower.) Only movement after gaining causes lose-track.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Innovation / Skulk interaction
« on: April 19, 2019, 01:24:24 pm »
Well, your hand, just like the trash pile, is an unordered pile of visible cards - unlike your discard pile and deck.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Innovation / Skulk interaction
« on: April 18, 2019, 06:22:17 pm »
Ah, theory of relativity messing up Dominion rules as usual.

But no, lose track has always applied to being covered up as much as to literal movement.

I know that the rule specifies that it also applies to covering up cards. What I meant was that you could perfectly well view this as merely a clarification. "The bottom of the pile", "the top of the pile", "position x from the top/bottom of the pile" are defined locations in Dominion. Covering up a card changes this defined position. Actually I always took this as the reason why it's lost track of. If it's considered to have the same position only with a card on top of it, I don't see why the rule couldn't just be that it's not lost track of.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Innovation / Skulk interaction
« on: April 18, 2019, 04:18:36 pm »
Is this always a thing? Card A looses track of card B because another card goes on top, even if card B doesn't move?

You could say that card B did move, because it doesn't have the same location anymore, on top of the pile.

Rules Questions / Re: Necromancing a Mining Village?
« on: April 14, 2019, 02:32:45 pm »
Actually the rules for Necromancer also clarifies this, from the Nocturne rulebook:
Necromancer can be used on a card that trashes itself when played; if the card checks to see if it was trashed (such as Pixie), it was not, but if the card does not check (such as Tragic Hero), it will function normally.

Rules Questions / Re: Trashing an Estate for Pirate Ship
« on: April 09, 2019, 09:54:47 pm »
Or Inherit Crown, with cost reduction.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 06, 2019, 12:39:44 pm »
The artist's intent is one thing, but honestly, if this is about visibility, I'm not sure we should count cards where the gender is not visible. I know now that Tormentor is a woman, but I wouldn't have without this thread.

Fair point. Of course to me Tormentor seemed like a woman when I studied it, but then again, so did Devil's Workshop. But in any case I think I'll just go with what is known here.

I just changed Devil's Workshop from female to male and updated the latest two lists.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 04, 2019, 07:55:58 pm »
Not so sure about the headdress. I assumed it was a coif with a pillbox hat or a hat with a wide band. Something like this picture of Dante (who I'm pretty sure is male!)

Okay, I concede that it's not as straight-forward as I thought. But I still don't think that the kind of bag hat that Dante is wearing is the same as on Market. To me it looks like the Market person is wearing a fillet, which was typically worn by women.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 04, 2019, 03:32:29 pm »
Tormentor is a woman. Devil's Workshop is a man. Time does not permit looking them all up for you.

Thanks. The one I'm most curious about is Flag Bearer. (After that, Skulk.)

I'm not sure why Market is listed as "both". If that figure with the money is supposed to be female it's clearly not doing the job, lol. That card is truly a wasted opportunity.

I'm quite sure that frightening creature with the purse is a woman. The headdress gives it away.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 57

Page created in 0.173 seconds with 19 queries.