What's the functional difference in Embargo?
"Embargo was changed so each Curse gained per token on a pile is a separate event, rather than gaining all of them at once."
Is this actually a functional difference? It was ruled with first edition wording that the gains still happen one at a time (if there was only 1 Curse left, you could still reveal Trader twice to gain 2 Silvers). Is there another on-Gain effect that could come into play here?
I’m secretly hoping that at some point they will release a rewording update pack. Even in base and intrigue there were a few cards that got small rule changes by rewording the cards. Maybe there are enough out of date (but not deprecated) cards now that there would be a market for an update pack to adddress those - including cards that need the coin token to coffers rework.how many cards were reworded?
All of Dominion 2nd Edition, as of Renaissance, will include 322 Kingdom cards, 34 Events, 21 Landmarks, and most likely no more than a total of 23 Artifacts and Projects.
When Royal Carriage refers to "still in play," it implicitly means in your own personal play area. That's my obscure ruling that will have no effect except to confuse people who read the wiki or look at Punchball's document.
World A:
4: I first do the Border Village effect. I gain a new card which covers up the Border Village in my discard, and since I only know the top card of my discard, I cannot top-deck Border Village with Watchtower. I can still reveal Watchtower to top-deck or trash the newly gained card, revealing the Border Village below it, but I don't know if this was the same Border Village as before. Furthermore, since I resolved the Border Village `gain' first, revealing the Watchtower can only refer to the most recent gain, and not one before it.
If your game is simple enough, or has a small enough set of cards that you're careful with, it doesn't need such a rule (for example Temporum doesn't have it); past a certain point you need it. You might actually lose track of a card; what then?
These days I think I would go the other way on Throne / Feast; if you can't put a card into play and it isn't there, you don't follow the instructions. That seems like it would work, and well, to follow the instructions we have to know what they are, and this means they're always there when you have to follow them. So it just seems better.
Note again that Thrones look special but are just the easiest way to get the problems they create. Playing a card a single time can also generate problems.
But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.
I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.
Then it has another timing than Tunnel, since Tunnel can't be "as you discard this", unless you change the ruling that you can't Watchtower a Tunnel-gained Gold when you discard your whole hand.
Not sure why that follows. Even if Tunnel were" as you discard this", you wouldn't be into that timing until all cards, including Watchtower, are being discarded.
But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.
I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.
I suppose you just have to keep track of which cards/events have lost-track of which other cards...
Welllll, if you discard a Faithful Hound and four Coppers, technically you then have to search through your discard pile to retrieve the Hound and set it aside. So it's not like there's nothing in the game that implicitly makes you do that anyway.
Yeah, Tunnel and Faithful Hound are messed up. I think it was said back in Tunnel discussions that “when you discard this” really ends up needing to be played as “as you are discarding this.”
Does an attack not could as a "payload", or does "payload" only mean $$s?
(i.e., could Hag or Familiar be a "payload" that you want to make sure you play a lot with an engine - but need gold for $$s?)
But since this is so difficult, let's make it real.I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that it is very uncommon to have a board where 6 cards are of no consequence.
Let's say you have Seahag, Junk Dealer, Margrave, Village and nothing else of great consequence. There is no way to gain cards here except buying them with Silver and Gold. You're not going to be buying much purely from Junk Dealer coins! I say, build the engine. As far as I can interpret Faust, he says don't build it. I'm even more sure if you add something more worthwile, like Wild Hunt, Tournament, Bridge Troll, Highway, Groundskeeper, Enchantress, Distant Lands, Orchard, Triumphal Arch...
Is one of you talking about an engine with Gold/Silver in it and one about an engine with Gold/Silver gainers in it?
I'm not entirely sure what you mean with your new case, but I guess you mean it's not worth building an engine because you can't consistently play enough payload cards.My point is that if you want Gold/Silver in your deck, then the engine you can build isn't usually very good. So often you might be able to build an engine, but some form of BM is better.
But my point is that there are also cases where you want to and can play payload cards as often as possible, but the only or main way of getting cards is buying them with coins from Silver and Gold. So you want the engine. I don't think that's so uncommon. Or even cases where there are Action-based coins and/or gainers, but also Silver/Gold gainers that you use in addition, to get more buying/gaining power quicker.
I don't think I ever* build engines where I want Gold/Silver gainers if there is no TfB. That's just asking for your engine to stall.
*slightly exaggerated
Ah well. But then aren't you just referring to my first case - no better payload? I thought that to include cases where there are cards that are better payload, but not enough of them (or not enough terminal space etc.), so some of your payload has to be Treasures.Yeah well, I would include the case where you get 1-2 Silvers that you then trash in the framework of "no treasure strategy". I just took that to mean "a strategy where you want Silver/Gold(/Copper) in your final deck composition".There is a (large) middle ground between a big money strategy and a no-Treasures strategy.Not that large, actually. You have the case where there's no better payload for the engine. But having that and still an engine that's better than BM is kind of rare. The second case is where you use money for TfB, in which case the only important thing about the Treasures is their price point and the fact that some cards gain them easily. Then there is Platinum, which is enough cash in a single card to usually work in an engine.
Wait. Even when there are "better payload" for the engine than treasures, you might need treasures as payload too. If there is no Action-based coin and no (or not enough) straight gaining, you need treasures to get cards. But you usually want the engine anyway, to attack, to trash, to get VP tokens, etc. In those cases you need treasure as payload (in addition to the other payload cards). Or what am I missing?
Of course you often get 1-2 Silvers even when you want a (virtually) treasure-less deck. But you weren't talking about that and neither was I. As I said, I'm talking about the cases when you need Treasure to buy cards throughout the game. I won't specify further, because you can just re-read my post.
Yeah well, I would include the case where you get 1-2 Silvers that you then trash in the framework of "no treasure strategy". I just took that to mean "a strategy where you want Silver/Gold(/Copper) in your final deck composition".There is a (large) middle ground between a big money strategy and a no-Treasures strategy.Not that large, actually. You have the case where there's no better payload for the engine. But having that and still an engine that's better than BM is kind of rare. The second case is where you use money for TfB, in which case the only important thing about the Treasures is their price point and the fact that some cards gain them easily. Then there is Platinum, which is enough cash in a single card to usually work in an engine.
Wait. Even when there are "better payload" for the engine than treasures, you might need treasures as payload too. If there is no Action-based coin and no (or not enough) straight gaining, you need treasures to get cards. But you usually want the engine anyway, to attack, to trash, to get VP tokens, etc. In those cases you need treasure as payload (in addition to the other payload cards). Or what am I missing?
There is a (large) middle ground between a big money strategy and a no-Treasures strategy.Not that large, actually. You have the case where there's no better payload for the engine. But having that and still an engine that's better than BM is kind of rare. The second case is where you use money for TfB, in which case the only important thing about the Treasures is their price point and the fact that some cards gain them easily. Then there is Platinum, which is enough cash in a single card to usually work in an engine.
