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 ... 43 44 [45] 46 47 ... 57
1101
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 27, 2015, 12:23:22 pm »
So to clarify: If I transmute Estate-Scout do I gain Gold+Transmute? I suppose not, because the card is already in the trash when the second part of Transmute is resolved. However when I trash Estate-Fortress, it goes back to my hand, doesn't it?
If you Inheritance Scouts and then Transmute an Estate, it was an Action-Victory card, so you gain a Duchy and a Gold.
The rules for Band of Misfits say when you use Procession on it and play it as, e.g., Fortress, you "gain an Action card costing exactly $6 ($1 more than Band of Misfits, which has left play and so is no longer copying Fortress)." So there, you don't care about what a thing was at the time it was trashed, but what it is at the time you're evaluating the instruction.

But here, you say you do care about what a thing was when it was trashed.

What's the difference? Do you check costs at the time of evaluation, but types at the time of trashing?
The key difference is how much time I have spent on these questions and what materials I had access to at the time.

I don't see a conversation with Doug about it, so possibly it just randomly ended up that way on isotropic.

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.

When-trashed things however trigger when trashed and so will happen even if the card loses that ability then.

What about if you Inheritance Urchin? "When you play another Attack card with this in play, you may trash this. If you do, gain a Mercenary from the Mercenary pile."
You did trash it, so I suppose you gain a Mercenary? (It seems like BoM-as-Feast: Even though the gain instruction comes after the card is no longer Feast, it works.)

1102
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 27, 2015, 11:15:57 am »
Here's the total score for Adventures. 34 out of the 50 cards show people. (Counting each set of 5 Traveller cards as one card for these purposes.)

ADVENTURES
Male: Alms, Borrow, Bridge Troll, Duplicate, Ferry, Giant, Hireling, Miser, Pathfinding, Peasant/Soldier/Fugitive/Disciple/Teacher, Quest, Ratcatcher, Raze, Training, Transmogrify, Travelling Fair, Wine Merchant
Female: Artificer, Caravan Guard, Guide, Lost Arts, Messenger, Page/Treasure Hunter/Warrior/Hero/Champion, Ranger, Save, Storyteller, Swamp Hag
Both: Ball, Bonfire, Pilgrimage, Plan(?), Royal Carriage, Scouting Party
Unknown: Raid

Percentage of female cards: 39.4%

Most of the female cards had been previewed already when I last did the count, so we have a more traditional (for Dominion) distribution than it seemed then. It's a higher percentage of female cards than most other sets, but not close to Cornucopia's 61.7%. Adventures does have the highest number of female cards though (13).

This changes the total Dominion score to:

MALE: 127.1 = 74.7%
FEMALE: 42.9 = 25.3%

UNKNOWN: 9

EDIT 2015-04-28: Changed Royal Carriage to "both", and Raid to "Unknown".
EDIT 2015-05-04: Added Expand (from Prosperity) as a female card, changing the total slightly.

1103
Rules Questions / Re: "Resolve"
« on: April 27, 2015, 10:11:28 am »
A general description of "resolve" is not needed? It's clear that you can resolve other abilities (like Reaction abilities, or later Duration abilities) on Action cards too, not just on-play abilities. The point must be just to point out that for Coin of the Realm and Royal Carriage, Resolving an Action means resolving everything that happens when you play an Action card.

1104
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Quality of card images on wiki
« on: April 27, 2015, 10:00:21 am »
When I had a scanner, there was an option called "reduce moiré". Without checking that, I got the "newspaper" version. Checking that, no problem. I'm sure your scanner has the same or something that works the same.

1105
Rules Questions / Re: Mission, Outpost
« on: April 27, 2015, 09:56:30 am »
Only the ambiguity with Expedition, which exists with regular Outpost and is already clarified in the rulebook.  I think using "if" is fine though, especially since this effect only matters at a specific time (drawing during clean-up phase) rather than having a continuous effect like regular "while in play" clauses.  I would think of it more along the lines of Embargo.

You're probably right about "if".

However, there is one thing that I realized. This is very subtle, but has been brought up on these forums before regarding Embargo, Duchess and the set-up of Trade Route and Young Witch. These are rules not tied to a specific copy of a card, but they are still given on each card. By a strict ruling they each trigger once for each card. With Outpost2 referring to "Outpost2" instead of to "this", it gets the same problem. You would draw 20 fewer cards instead of 2.

Donald has said that Embargo, Duchess etc are not precisely phrased. Outpost2 would be joining that list with your version. But of course almost nobody playing Dominion will think of it, so in practice it doesn't matter.

1106
Rules Questions / Re: Mission, Outpost
« on: April 26, 2015, 12:56:36 pm »
EDIT: This also gets rid of the weirdness of unused Outposts staying out until the player-to-left's turn, since the "if" can be checked before your Clean-up.

Yes, that was the point in the first place.

@Jeebus, I think "If at least one Outpost2 is inplay" works fine.  It's not like it's wordier or harder to understand.  It's just a matter of taste.  I prefer removing the ambiguity with Outpost, but it's explained in the FAQ anyway. :P

Is there ambiguity with the text I proposed?
The reason I don't like your version as much, is because it doesn't have "while this is in play". It has "if" instead of "while". I guess it would work the same, but maybe there could be some timing/wording confusion with some other card... Or maybe not.

1107
Rules Questions / Re: Mission, Outpost
« on: April 25, 2015, 10:29:12 pm »
Quote
Outpost 2
$5 - Action-Duration
If the previous turn wasn't yours, take another turn after this one.

While this is in play, draw 2 fewer cards at the end of your Clean-up phase.

It really disincentivizes playing more than one though.  You could have it not stack by saying "If at least one Outpost 2 is in play".

What about: "While this is in play in your Clean-up phase, only draw 3 cards (instead of 5)."

Playing Procession on Outpost would give you two turns with no penalty in any case (except losing the Outpost).

I think it mostly amounts to the same thing, except saying "draw 2 fewer cards" meshes better with Expedition.

I mean it doesn't make you draw 4 fewer cards if you play two Outposts. You can just have:

If the previous turn wasn't yours, take another turn after this one.
---
While this is in play in your Clean-up phase, only draw 3 cards (instead of 5).


You don't need "If at least one Outpost 2 is in play", so in that sense it's better I think.

1108
Rules Questions / Re: Mission, Outpost
« on: April 25, 2015, 12:59:00 pm »
Quote
Outpost 2
$5 - Action-Duration
If the previous turn wasn't yours, take another turn after this one.

While this is in play, draw 2 fewer cards at the end of your Clean-up phase.

It really disincentivizes playing more than one though.  You could have it not stack by saying "If at least one Outpost 2 is in play".

What about: "While this is in play in your Clean-up phase, only draw 3 cards (instead of 5)."

Playing Procession on Outpost would give you two turns with no penalty in any case (except losing the Outpost).

1109
Rules Questions / Re: Mission, Outpost
« on: April 24, 2015, 05:25:08 pm »
Did you intentionally use "Outlook" to refer to a new theoretical card, or is that a typo?

Typo. Thanks.

I don't want to do this work myself, without it being for a card, but I am optimistic that I could do better on Outpost. It's not necessary to prevent multiple Outposts in the same turn - that's just power level and you can be charged/penalized for it - it's only necessary that you can't go infinite.

Ah. Then I'm pretty sure this would do nicely:

You only draw 3 cards (instead of 5) in this turn's Clean-up phase. If the previous turn wasn't yours: Take an extra turn after this one.

You could play several in a turn, or Throne them etc. It would work like Possession then, giving you several turns. But you couldn't play it (with any effect) on an Outpost, Mission or Possession turn.

1110
Rules Questions / Mission, Outpost
« on: April 24, 2015, 03:20:50 pm »
It seems clear that Mission's if the previous turn wasn't yours is similar to Outpost's this can't cause you to take more than two consecutive turns.
The result of both is that you can't get the card to give you two turns in a row.

It got me thinking, why couldn't Outpost have this wording too? And the answer is that it wouldn't work the same. Since if the previous turn wasn't yours is evaluated on-play, it would give you an extra turn per Outpost you play in the same turn. Only Outpost-on-an-Outpost-turn would fail as before.

The reason it works on Mission is because it's restricted to one buy per turn.

So would there be any way to avoid all this Duration confusion, and have a "failed" Outpost (or Throne Room etc) get discarded just like a "failed" Tactician?
How about a wording like on Fool's Gold or Crossroads: If this is the first time you played an Outpost this turn: Take an extra turn after this one.

But wait. Now Outpost-on-an-Outpost-turn actually works. :(
So I guess: If the previous turn wasn't yours and this is the first time you played an Outpost this turn: Take an extra turn after this one.

Could it be improved on?

1111
Rules Questions / Re: A timing question
« on: April 24, 2015, 12:01:32 pm »
OK, lets ask other way: I would have guessed, that you look at the start of your turn, wether there are cards, which claim"resolve me now". If there are more than one, you make a list of them. Then you resolve them. And only them already on the list. If a NEW card could make it to the list due to the resolving, it is to late for those.

The whole thread seems to claim, that that there is special phase "At the start of your turn" before the standard action phase. And if anything in resolving during that phase results in new "at the start of your turn" cards, then those can / must be resolved also. Did i deduce that right?

It's not a special phase, it's just a moment in time, like any other event in Dominion (when you trash a card, when you buy a card, when you play a card etc). The thing is that everything that happens in that moment is resolved one at a time, until they are all resolved. Only then is the moment over. Like you said, it's a list of things that happen in that moment. But a new thing that could make it on the list, will be added to the list, if the moment is not over yet. It's not too late. (But nothing can be removed from the list.) That's what this thread was about.

1112
Rules Questions / Re: A timing question
« on: April 23, 2015, 03:07:19 pm »
There's no contradiction, just a set of rules for handling things happening. They don't tell you to do conflicting things. There could be different rules but we have the ones we have.

Ok, thanks for confirming that I got it right. It seemed a little inconsistent (which was the word I should have used), but as you're saying there's no contradiction.

1113
Rules Questions / Re: Caravan card cleanup
« on: April 22, 2015, 11:39:33 pm »
Didn't notice that it was a Duration. :p Thanks!

1114
Rules Questions / Caravan card cleanup
« on: April 22, 2015, 10:13:06 pm »
If I play Caravan Guard on another player's turn, when does it get discarded? In the Cleanup of that turn, or not until Cleanup in my own turn?

I see in the rule book that Duplicate is discarding in the turn you call it, even if it's another player's turn.

1115
Rules Questions / Re: A timing question
« on: April 22, 2015, 10:09:55 pm »
I don't think it's a contradiction. 

In the Mandarin + Royal Seal interaction, two effects trigger at the same time.  They go into a pool which you resolve one at a time, and you can choose the order to resolve them.  You keep resolving things until the pool is empty.

With Princed TR + Guide, the pool is for "start of turn" and it has "Princed TR" in it.  You resolve that effect.  You play TR, which you then use to play Guide twice.  Now you go back to the pool and you see that there is another effect there -- Guide on your reserve mat can also be called at the start of your turn, so you can do that now.

So you're saying that whatever is added to the pool can never be removed, even if the condition that added them is gone. But if an adding condition appears, the thing gets immediately added. Why does the pool update for new conditions appearing, but not for old conditions disappearing? It still seems contradictory.

1116
Rules Questions / A timing question
« on: April 22, 2015, 09:52:21 pm »
I realized that I'm still a little confused about resolving effects that happen at the same time.

In this post, which was thumbed by Donald, it's said that if my Prince plays my Throne Room, and I choose to TR a Guide, then after playing and resolving it twice, I can call it from the Tavern mat afterwards. So the Guide was placed on the Tavern mat in the beginning of my turn, and since it's still the beginning of my turn, I can call it right away. It was of course not on the Tavern mat when I started resolving effects that happen in the beginning of my turn.

A comparison is made with the age-old Moat and Secret Chamber. The Moat was not in my hand when I started resolving effects that happen when the other player played an Attack. The comparison seems reasonable.

However, in some ways this seems to contradict the rule that says that when several effects happen at the same time, you resolve all of them even if the conditions changed. See this thread. I buy a Mandarin with Royal Seal in play. I resolve Mandarin's when-gain first, putting all Treasures on top of my deck. I can then resolve Royal Seal's when-gain even though it's no longer in play. (Procession playing a Band of Misfits-as-Fortress also seems to be a version of this.)

So if several effects trigger at a certain time, I even resolve an effect that had the triggering condition changed before I could resolve it. But I also resolve an effect that had the triggering condition change the other way: the condition didn't allow resolving it at first, but changed in the meantime. It's not exactly a contradiction I guess, but it's damn close. Or am I thinking about this wrong?

1117
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 15, 2015, 06:14:57 pm »
2. The action token tells me "when I play a card from this pile, +1 action".  If my token is on BoM, then I'm playing a card from that pile, so I get +1 action.  If my token is on Woodcutter, then I'm not playing a card from that pile, so I don't get +1 action.

As I've showed, you're not playing a BoM. (The exception being when no action cards costing less exist in Supply.)

So the only way a token on the BoM pile could kick in, is if we interpret the BoM-as-Sea Hag as being "from" the BoM pile, even though we're not playing a BoM. We would have to focus on were the card physically is from. In that case it sounds reasonable to say that the card is not "from" the Sea Hag pile. But the previous ruling says that it's "from" both...

1118
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 15, 2015, 01:00:28 pm »
Was there a case before where whether we actually played BoM mattered?

Yes, with Conspirator, as has been mentioned before.

My understanding is that in the brief moment between you choosing to play BoM and BoM actually being in play, BoM is both itself and the card from the supply you chose. Bom says "Play this [...]", so you are playing BoM, there is no "would" wording involved. Then once it's on your play area, it's only the card you chose, until it leaves your play area.

BoM's instructions are not like any other Action card's instructions. All other cards' instructions are triggered when the card hits the table and is in play, after any when-play effects from other cards (like Moat's reaction or a previously played Urchin). So it's always like this:

1) Choose to play an Action card.
2) Put it in play.
3) Resolve when-play effects from other cards.
4) Resolve the card's instructions.

(There is an exception if the card can't be put into play, because it's in the Trash for example. Then step 2 fails, but we still do the other steps.)

If BoM worked like this (which it doesn't), it would be like this:

1) Choose to play BoM.
2) Put it in play as BoM.
3) Resolve when-play effects from other cards.
4) Resolve the card's instructions:
4A) Choose a card from Supply costing less: Choose Sea Hag.
4B) Put BoM-as-Sea Hag in play. (This fails since the card is already in play.)
4C) Resolve when-play effects from other cards.
4D) Resolve BoM-as-Sea Hag's instructions.

We know it doesn't work like this. It would mean two cards are played, BoM-as-BoM and BoM-as-Sea Hag. Conspirator would see two played cards. The only way BoM can work is if it's a before-play (or a when-would-play) ability, just like Trader is a when-would-gain ability.

1) Choose to play BoM.
2) The when-would-play triggers: Choose a card from Supply costing less: Choose Sea Hag.
3) Put BoM-as-Sea Hag in play.
4) Resolve when-play effects from other cards.
5) Resolve Sea Hag's instructions.

So a BoM is never played. It's in step 4 that we check for tokens on piles.

Again, see here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12906.msg482494#msg482494

1119
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 14, 2015, 06:55:18 pm »
But Band of Misfits *is* the card it's emulating until it leaves play. If you Throne Room a BoM that has been Lost Arts'd, you only get +1 Action. You played a BoM, but once it's in play, it's no longer a BoM. Similarly, I would assume that "Band of Misfits" can never contribute to Horn of Plenty's different names in play.

My point is that it isn't a BoM the first time either. See my previous post.

1120
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 14, 2015, 05:15:59 pm »
Suppose there was a card, Band of Little Misfits. It's Band of Misfits but only costs $4.

I play Band of Misfits as Band of Little Misfits as Woodcutter. There's a token on Band of Little Misfits. Do I get it? My feeling was that people in actual games would feel like they did.

I think the "Throne BoM, how many +Actions for a token on BoM" question comes down to this specific already-special-cased Throne / BoM interaction. You get at least +1 Action, since BoM itself gives you that. Then there's some "lock in" concept that makes Throne / BoM / Feast work as per expectations and the rulebook. The second time, it's already Feast. So I would guess you only get +1 Action. To really "know" I would have to study that ruling and the FAQs and well man the rulebook that won't answer this is out Saturday, surely I can put you guys off until then.

Yessir. But here's something to consider.

I don't think it matters whether TR "locked in" the card or not. If you get +1 Action from the BoM pile, you should get it twice with TR.

I assume that the token's effect happens on "when play" (because that's what Lost Arts says). As I showed a couple of posts ago the token's effect happens after the BoM has already turned into e.g. Sea Hag. So if you still get +1 Action from the BoM pile when you play it as a Sea Hag the first time, nothing has changed the second time.

(But to me it would make more sense that you didn't get it from the BoM pile at all when you play it as another card, for the same reason I just stated.)

1121
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 14, 2015, 01:49:07 pm »
Also, what is the final verdict of playing Throne Room on BoM when the +1 Action Token is on BoM. Do I get +2 Actions from the token effect? If so, then this also supports the interpretation that BoM is simultaneously from both the BoM pile and the pile of the card chosen to play it as.

It would seem to be the only interpretation that makes sense. If the card, when it's played, is both from the BoM pile and the chosen card's pile, then with TR you get every token bonus from both piles twice.

1122
Adventures Previews / Re: Previews #5 - Lost Arts, Borrow, Inheritance
« on: April 14, 2015, 11:27:50 am »
Let's assume Lost Arts and BoM apply both at the same time, on-play, before the card effect happens. Shouldn't you be able to decide what happens first, meaning that you can effectively have it either way (including the option to not get an action*)? Mysteries above mysteries...

To me the only way to interpret BoM is that the instructions happen before play. When-play instructions, like Moat reactions for instance, happen after the card has hit the table, and Lost Arts falls into this category: "When you play a card from that pile, you first get +1 Action."

So it seems that the card you play is actually the card you chose (and not "BoM"), when you resolve Lost Arts:

1) Choose to play BoM.
2) Resolve the before-play instructions: Choose Sea Hag, and set up the card to be Sea Hag from the point it's in play to it leaves play.
3) Play the card, turning it instantly into Sea Hag.
4) Resolve any when-play instructions:
- (4A) Lost Arts gives +1 Action if there is a token on the Sea Hag pile.
- (4B) Players can reveal Moats.
5) Resolve the card's instructions, which are Sea Hag's instructions.

The effects in step 4 are simultaneous, but we resolve the current player first, so +1 Action happens first.
Maybe we could consider "BoM turning into Sea Hag" as a when-play instruction instead, but that would mean that the BoM is first played as a BoM (step 3), and Donald's statement contradicts this. ("You cannot play a BoM.")

In order to also get the effects of a +1 Action on the BoM pile, (4A) needs to also check the BoM pile. That would mean that the card (even though it's not a BoM) is "from" the BoM pile while at the same time it's "from" the Sea Hag pile. It seems a little strange to me.

1123
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 10, 2015, 05:11:26 pm »
Out of curiosity, what kind of discussion were you hoping for? I don't see how this leads into anything other than RSP, unless you wanted just a post with stats.

I wrote that already. Just scroll up. (Edit: Ok, it's on page one. The point is, you haven't read the thread.)

1124
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 10, 2015, 03:33:09 pm »
XerxesPraelor, werothegreat, Seprix, Gherald, popsofctown.
PLEASE stop posting about this topic here. Go to the other thread:  http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11646

I said so in the OP, and three people have repeated it. What is it going to take?

Theory, instead of moving this thread too, can you just delete the offending posts? (Or move them to the other thread)

1125
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Male and female cards (again)
« on: April 10, 2015, 01:40:21 pm »
Quest seems to be indeterminate, and Tracking quite obviously has both.

Ooh, haven't seen those cards! Where are they?
EDIT: Found the "French" thread, thanks.

Pages: 1 ... 43 44 [45] 46 47 ... 57

Page created in 0.102 seconds with 20 queries.