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] 4 5 ... 57
Rules Questions / Re: Overlord-Wine Merchant
« on: March 16, 2019, 03:39:37 pm »
I disagree. Under this interpretation, a once played Improve could 'improve' cards for the remainder of the game.

So you mean because Improve doesn't say "at the start of Clean-up this turn".

Yeah, read literally it would apply to all Clean-up phases after the card was played (but it would make no difference, since you can't trash a card more than once). Encampment also says this. The implication is that they apply "this turn", but to be technically correct they should have said so. Note that Scheme (1st edition) actually did specify this, saying exactly "at the start of Clean-up this turn".

As Crj concluded, "at the end of your Buy phase" (on Wine Merchant) means any and all Buy phases. (Goons, Peddler etc. work the same way.) Based on this it would work the same way as an on-play instruction, read literally. But sure, you could also choose to assume that "this turn" is implied, like on Improve and Encampment. The problem is of course that the ability doesn't make any sense as an on-play instruction. That's why it's impossible to infer anything.

Rules Questions / Re: Overlord-Wine Merchant
« on: March 16, 2019, 01:24:51 pm »
Yes, it would work beyond the current turn - and actually for the rest of the game, which would present a tracking problem. But for this card it wouldn't matter in practice that you can't track it, since you can only discard it from your Tavern mat and since you can't discard it more than once. A Goons without a dividing line on the other hand...

Rules Questions / Re: Overlord-Wine Merchant
« on: March 15, 2019, 10:15:37 pm »
Irrelevant sidetrack time: It would actually work if there were no dividing line on the Wine Merchant.

Rules Questions / Re: Inn and Watchtower
« on: March 11, 2019, 05:39:29 pm »
This is an old ruling, which is also most likely the reason it works like that in Dominion Online:

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: March 09, 2019, 09:20:14 am »
Well, almost all the rules confusion that has stemmed from Inheritance and Band of Misfits has been because of cards changing in the middle of a turn (which is avoided with Capitalism and Necromancer, for different reasons). Crj's hypothetical Landmark has the same problem with Transmute, Ironworks etc.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: March 08, 2019, 05:44:49 pm »
e.g., my inherited estate is a certain card and your inherited estate is a different card

Or more relevant, my Estate is a certain card right before I trash it and a different card right after.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Star Chart and the new shuffle rule
« on: February 27, 2019, 12:49:50 pm »
With Stash you don't get to see the cards you're shuffling. That's why Stash has a different back.
Edit: That's not really the reason of course. In any case you wouldn't be allowed to see the cards after shuffling.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Star Chart and the new shuffle rule
« on: February 27, 2019, 12:33:54 pm »
I'm almost positive this is the only affected card (plus old Stash). As you imply, with Star Chart you get to see all the other cards -- the ones you don't have left in your deck -- so at least you have a lot more info than you would with old Stash under the new shuffling rule.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: A Question About First-Player Advantage
« on: February 27, 2019, 12:19:29 pm »
Yeah, the added randomness is pretty much the only reason I prefer a lower player count in Dominion.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: A Question About First-Player Advantage
« on: February 26, 2019, 08:14:35 pm »
Ok, I see. Yeah, I thought something had to be inaccurate in the way it was described, but I couldn't figure out what.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: A Question About First-Player Advantage
« on: February 26, 2019, 07:10:28 pm »
markus says:

[fixed from earlier version]

I'm probably dumb, I don't get these stats. They seem to say that out of 43,898 games, P1 won 3,419 games. But that would be crazy.

Rules Questions / Re: Face Down requirement for Knights and Ruins?
« on: February 25, 2019, 11:58:49 am »
I agree about Knights, but for Ruins I have definitely always just kept them face-up, while telling people to try to not reveal the next one. That usually works out, and it would almost never matter anyway if one was accidentally revealed.

Rules Questions / Re: Face Down requirement for Knights and Ruins?
« on: February 22, 2019, 02:13:57 pm »
Hhelibebcnofnena wrote the correct rules for Ambassador. The rules are exactly what the card says. You put up to 2 copies from your hand to the supply pile. So if you want to return 2, they both have to have the same name (of course also matching the one you revealed). Then each other player gains a copy from the supply; again this means the same name.

Rules Questions / Re: Debt clarification
« on: February 22, 2019, 02:04:19 pm »
There is not need the clarify that buying a card (or Event) that doesn't cost any $ counts as buying, since the rules already say that you do indeed buy these. In the Empires rulebook it's clear that these cards work like all other cards, you buy them using a Buy. The Alchemy rulebook says the same about Vineyard, and indeed, the Dominion rulebook says the same about Copper and Curse.

Rules Questions / Re: Trashing a Gladiator that's under a Fortune?
« on: February 21, 2019, 12:01:27 am »
It's not? I guess it makes sense that is has to "have" track first, but I thought the card just had to be somewhere where it isn't expected at the time it has to be moved. I could be wrong though.

You are right about this, as we see in the famous Throne Room + Mining Village example.

But the Gladiator doesn't refer to any specific card, so it can't lose track of it. It's like when a Marauder is played, you can't choose any of the lower Ruins, but that's not because the Marauder is losing track of any particular Ruins. It's just because that's the rule, only the top card is available.

Rules Questions / Re: Trashing a Gladiator that's under a Fortune?
« on: February 20, 2019, 04:13:40 pm »
Donald has confirmed earlier that you can look through split piles.

The rules do state (or imply) that you can only choose cards that are on top of piles, for instance with Band of Misfits. Given this as a rule, it's pretty clear that you can't choose to Salt the Earth a Castle hidden in the pile. It's not immediately clear that trashing a hidden Gladiator with Gladiator falls under this rule though. But Donald's ruling makes the rules consistent.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Slow-Playing Detection?
« on: February 20, 2019, 01:17:44 pm »
This got me thinking. Isn't the behavior of slowplaying that the player uses almost max time, or at least a big percentage of max time, for each and every click? I would think it would be a pretty easy thing to identify.

I don't really like a time difference between the players. This could give false positives with very different playing styles, especially in long games (although I guess the latter could be addressed with a percentage instead of minute count).

But something along the lines of Dingan's first suggestion should work. I think the allowed time per click currently is 4 minutes. For instance, let's say you get a "mark" if you take more than 3 minutes per click 3 times in a turn (or every time if there are less than 3 clicks in the turn). You can't get marks the first two turns in a game. If you get marks for two consecutive turns, you can be force-resigned. To make sure nobody games the system by slow-playing only every other turn, the total number of marks should also matter. For instance, after 4 marks you can be force-resigned. Hmm, one problem could be that slow-playing < 3 minutes still works. To solve that, taking more than 1 minute per click 4 times in a turn could earn you half a mark; this would count towards your total only.

Another great thing about this system would be that if a player is actually force-resigned based on "marks", and this happens a certain number of times, they could get auto-banned. No involvement from Stef or anybody else is needed.

In terms if sets with "duds", I don't view any set as having many duds, except Alchemy, Hinterlands, and probably first edition base game.

Alchemy is pretty bad, 4 of the cards means that 33% are duds. I don't see Prosperity as being so bad; it has maybe 4 dud cards, but two of those are not awful (Trade Route and Royal Seal). Seaside has like 2 dud cards (plus a semi-dud in Pearl Diver). But I don't get why Hinterlands isn't mentioned more often. Hinterlands has 4 awful cards, plus a couple semi-duds.

In terms of flavor, I think Seaside should be on the list. I know several people who rate it as their favorite expansion (not having gotten anything since Guilds/Dark Ages probably) just because it's the set with the strongest flavor of all the earlier ones.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion current Popularity?
« on: February 18, 2019, 01:58:08 pm »
For me it's pretty bad that people are posting rules questions on Discord, especially if it's a new question and Donald replies only there. It would be really bad if an actual ruling was made only on Discord. But in general I also want to catch rules question I know the answer to, because it helps me see new parts of the rules that people can be confused about, or even lead me to consider some other interaction I hadn't thought about. (I'm talking about maintaining my rules document.)

I just don't personally have the time or inclination to participate in that kind of chatting, and certainly not to monitor it constantly. And as far as I can figure out posts are not categorized in any coherent way, so searching for stuff is pointless (or maybe impossible anyway).

(Additionally, I prefer little but pithy content to just a lot of content just for the sake of it.)

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Dominion Woodcutter Logging Services
« on: February 18, 2019, 01:01:24 pm »
Hmm, I installed this, checked out a log of an old game, then went to start a new game and I immediately lost the game.
Hmm, that's definitely weird. Did you pull just a single log, and did it crash or anything when you did?

Just one log.
I don't think it crashed. It did many things in the client. Since it was the first time I used it, I'm not sure if it did anything unusual.

I would say they aren't official anymore. Donald X. has said on BGG (and probably elsewhere too), "I recommend that you stop using the replaced cards". My understanding is that they are no longer part of the Dominion canon, and not worth the trouble ranking. They also weren't ranked in 2017.

Donald has specifically said that they are official and part of Dominion.

Dominion Online at Shuffle iT / Re: Dominion Woodcutter Logging Services
« on: February 14, 2019, 02:47:11 pm »
Hmm, I installed this, checked out a log of an old game, then went to start a new game and I immediately lost the game.

The graph is not working for me in any browser in Windows 7. Is it supposed to be there?

Rules Questions / Re: Complete Dominion rules document
« on: February 07, 2019, 03:29:08 pm »
pg 9: I think it would be better if the paragraph for Fate brought up Will-o'-Wisp. I know you bring it up on the same page with Swamp's Gift, but it may be better if it was all in one paragraph. Even the Nocturne rulebook does this.
I might change this if there's a new version.

pg 41: Under "cards that let you cheat," you should also mention how Quest doesn't require you to reveal discarded Curses.
Good catch, will add it.
EDIT: Actually, I remember that I already considered but decided against it, because it's so marginal. It's different than Opulent Castle, because with that card there could be information that you in theory don't want to reveal (exactly which Victory cards you're discarding). With Quest there is no such consideration.

pg 58: Under Fortune you say you can spend Coffers if you played Fortune with another ability. Is that allowed? If my Venture reveals Fortune, I get to spend Coffers?
Yes, correct. The ruling is around here somewhere.

Also in all of section VI, the Boons written as "Sky's Gift, The" Is this intentional? Cause it just looks weird.
It's intentional, and quite normal in encyclopedias etc. when the entry is not alphabetized by that word ("the", "a", "an"...)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 57

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 18 queries.