Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

76

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 08, 2023, 04:58:09 am »

Yeah I think that all makes sense, except that new ruling does still require an understanding that Enchantress is not limited to replacing "FTI as a result of playing a card"; or alternatively an understanding that when Chameleon makes you FTI, it still counts as FTI as a result of playing a card. Come to think of it, that second option is pretty much in-line with the entire main discussion in this thread, the ruling that Sheep's + counts as getting + from playing the card.

Well, I don't agree with the last part. It's rather the opposite: Per the ruling, Sheep's +$2 does not count as FTI. I've been suggesting that it should as one possible solution to the problem as I see it.

No, I wasn't saying that Sheep's + counts as FTI. I was saying that Sheep's + counts as something that playing the card does, just like how Chameleon's "follow the instructions" counts as something that playing the card does.

In this case, the question wasn't whether Chameleon counted as following the instructions or not, it was the question of whether the FTI was a result of playing the card or not (due to the rule you quoted earlier that Enchantress only cares about FTI that results from playing the card).

I still say that the two things are fundamentally different.

Given the new Chameleon ruling, there is no question that we're following the card's instructions. The issue you brought up is just whether that counts as a result of playing the card. We always FTI as a result of playing a card, and the question is, does Chameleon change that or not.

That is not the question with the Sheep (Way) issue. Sheep definitely changes that. As Donald X. said, there's no FTI step.

The Sheep issue is about something the card "makes you do" at the time when you would normally FTI as a result of playing it. This is unlike the Chameleon issue. The problem I have with the Sheep ruling is that "what the card makes you do" consists of following instructions on another card. This is also unlike the Chameleon issue.

77

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 08, 2023, 04:34:31 am »

As I said earlier, I don't agree that any valid model can say that Ways and Ench/Highw trigger at different times. The original reasoning as to why they can override each other is that they trigger at the same time. This is of course also why Enchantress and Highwayman can override each other.

It's clear why Ways couldn't possibly trigger after Enchantress/Highwayman, but why does it not work to say that they trigger first? Leaving aside all the other complications of this thread, it's easy to have a model where Ways trigger frist, yet Enchantress or Ways can still win, player's choice:

1) Start to play a card.
2) Choose Way or no Way.
3) Get to the "when you would FTI" step.
3a) If you chose Way, Enchantress does nothing because you never get to FTI.
3b) If you chose no Way, Enchantress replaces the FTI when you get there.

Why does that not work? It allows Ways to override Enchantress without requiring them to both trigger at the same time.

I was not saying it wouldn't "work" in the sense of matching the outcomes of current rulings. I was saying it doesn't match current rulings in how it works. As I wrote earlier:

The ruling on Ways/Ench/Highw has always been that they all work exactly the same in terms of effect and in terms of timing. Here is Donald X.'s original explanation of Enchantress's timing. Here is Donald X. saying that Ways and Enchantress have the same timing.

Nothing Donald X. has said here has remotely indicated that he changed when Ways trigger by creating a new timing window between "first" (Reactions) and Ench/Highw. There is nothing in the rules or on the cards suggesting this timing difference either, quite the contrary.

The reasoning for the ruling on what Ways/Ench/Highw do in relation to Harbor Village, Moat, etc., has nothing to do with a changed timing either.

And the new ruling on Chameleon works purely based on the fact that we're FTI with it; there is certainly no need to have it trigger earlier.

Making Ways trigger before Enchantress does not solve anything in terms of the Harbor Village ruling either. If one thinks that a card making you do something can be a completely separate phenomenon from you following the card's instructions, the ruling makes sense no matter the timing of Ways; and if one doesn't think that, the ruling doesn't make sense no matter the timing of Ways.

To repeat, Donald X. has from the start stated that Ways and Enchantress work the same, with the same timing. That is the original basis for the ruling. In this thread, after he decided that Ways cause the card to "make you do stuff", he said that it was desirable that Enchantress still work the same way as Ways, so Enchantress should cause that too. Nowhere did he say anything about changing the timing of Ways, and certainly not so that they have a different timing than Enchantress, since this would go against the desired similarity between Ways and Enchantress.

78

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 07, 2023, 10:29:53 am »

Yeah I think that all makes sense, except that new ruling does still require an understanding that Enchantress is not limited to replacing "FTI as a result of playing a card"; or alternatively an understanding that when Chameleon makes you FTI, it still counts as FTI as a result of playing a card. Come to think of it, that second option is pretty much in-line with the entire main discussion in this thread, the ruling that Sheep's + counts as getting + from playing the card.

Well, I don't agree with the last part. It's rather the opposite: Per the ruling, Sheep's +$2 does not count as FTI. I've been suggesting that it should as one possible solution to the problem as I see it.

79

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 07, 2023, 05:53:58 am »

I'll have one more try and then stay shut up unless anyone requires something to be explained more fully.

First let me remind everyone that what I've been trying to do is come up with an explanation that gives all the required results, i.e. I have been trying to find a model, preferably as simple as possible, that would require only rulings about mechanisms to change rather than rulings about results.  I think the following reduces such changes to a minimum.

Treat Lantern and Way of the Chameleon as shape-shifting the instructions on the relevant cards.

Playing a card:
1. Announce it.
2. Move it to the "in play" area.
3. "When you play a card, first..." abilities trigger here.
4. Either use a Way or follow the instructions on the card (in order, top to bottom, stop at a dividing line).  Whatever instructions actually get followed count as what the card does.
5. "When you play a card" abilities trigger here.

Enchantress and HighWayman trigger when one attempts to FTI.

Moat protects against what a card does.

Harbor Village cares about what a card did.

As I said earlier, I don't agree that any valid model can say that Ways and Ench/Highw trigger at different times. The original reasoning as to why they can override each other is that they trigger at the same time. This is of course also why Enchantress and Highwayman can override each other.

Also, it seems to me that your explanation does include rulings about results, since you're including language about "what the card does". Maybe I'm not understanding you. But the way I see it, if we allow the concept of "what the card does" as its own thing, we don't need anything else to explain the ruling, it all falls into place. (My objection has always been that I don't see that as its own thing separate from "the card's instructions that you're following".)

- If you have Enchantress, you cantrip instead. There's no FTI.

The result matches, i.e. one cantrips, but the explanation of why it arises differs.  I don't think this has any impact on any existing cards, but were a future card to say something like "After the next Action you play this turn, if it gave you +card, …" there might be an issue, depending on what Donald X specified the result in that case to be.  My proposed explanation of the mechanism would cause it to trigger.

I don't really understand how your model works that makes the explanation of the interactions different (according to you). In this case, since Enchantress works like Way of the Sheep, your proposed future card should indeed work exactly like Harbor Village + Sheep - according to that ruling.

- If you have Enchantress, you cantrip instead. Harbor Village is blind.

The result matches, but the explanation of it differs.  Harbor Village saw the card doing a cantrip, but it was irrelevant.

- If Highwayman hits it, you do nothing instead. Harbor Village is blind.

The result matches, but the explanation of it differs.  Harbor Village saw the card doing nothing.

I actually wondered why Donald X. said, "Harbor Village is blind." I assume he meant that it doesn't see "+$" but it does see the card doing things (it's just that those things are not +$).

- Highwayman + Way of the Chameleon
-- Your choice!

I had failed to spot that this is one instance where my model gives the wrong result (I think Jeebus and Gendolkari might find the same oversight in their discussion).  When Way of the Chameleon tries to FTI, Highwayman would trigger and have the card do nothing.

Yes, I see that Donald X. updated his ruling for Enchantress + Chameleon, but not for Highwayman + Chameleon. I assume that's just an oversight. Since Highwayman is exactly like Enchantress, any model should give the same result. Everything that was discussed about Enchantress is equally valid for Highwayman.

- Lantern / Chameleon'd Border Guard: Lantern applies.

Matches so long as one considers the applied shape-shifting to be cumulative, i.e. Chameleon shape-shifts the instructions that are now 'on' the card after Lantern has had its way (or possibly in the opposite order).  Matches even more clearly if one doesn't consider Chameleon to be shape-shifting the card.

Lantern can never trigger before Way of the Chameleon; this has been ruled on. Chameleon, like all Ways, trigger before you FTI. Lantern, like Elder, trigger as you're following certain instructions. So there is no need for Lantern to shapeshift.

When it comes to Chameleon, there is a clear ruling that none of these cards cause shapeshifting and that includes Chameleon. Possibly saying that Chameleon shapeshifts would make the new ruling on Enchantres/Highwayman + Chameleon "work better"; I haven't thought it through.

Shapeshifting instructions might cause problems that Donald X. wants to avoid, so he will probably never rule that way. I indicated earlier that it could cause problems with for instance Way of the Rat, but that's not the case, since "gaining a copy" instructions only care about the name. The potential problem would be for something like Capitalism, which looks at the "card text"; I have no idea how real this problem would be, it would depend on a lot of things.

80

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 07, 2023, 02:06:20 am »

Okay, I see what you're saying. The way I have been thinking about it is that in step 4, the FTI is already replaced with (a modified version of) the FTI. So you're still FTI at that point.

Your interpretation is (I assume) what lead Donald X. to rule that Chameleoen does override Enchantress in the first place. In order for the new (reversed) ruling to work, I think we'd have to say that Ways all are like Enchantress, they implicitly start with "when you would FTI after playing the card, instead do this..."; and with the new ruling, Chameleon instead implicitly says "when you would FTI after playing the card, do FTI but with these modifications...". In this way, Chameleon, unlike the other Ways, don't actually make you not FTI.

I think the new ruling is more intuitive for most players. But yeah, if we go into the technical workings, the old ruling probably makes a bit more sense. (But to keep the old ruling, Reckless should of course not work when Chameleon is applied either.)

81

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 06, 2023, 04:24:11 pm »

I know you were talking about playing enchantress in the middle of resolving an action earlier in that post. But the part that I colored blue and bolded was not that part. In that part you were expressing the same doubt you're expressing now. And I replied to that part . I said that enchantress already triggered. (Your first reading of enchantress is the correct one.) I don't see you addressing my reply. What is it that is unclear about it or you disagree with?

82

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 06, 2023, 02:38:23 pm »

But assuming that you indeed can't, do we know the same goes for Enchantress? It is possible to have a scenario where your opponent plays Enchantress after you play your Reckless card but before you follow the Reckless card's instructions a second time (Mouse has Enchantress, your opponent plays a "play this" type reaction). Is there a ruling that Enchantress will not do anything to the Reckless card's second instruction-following?

I would have thought that a newly-played Enchantress would in fact stop a Reckless card's repeat instructions from happening... but if so, I also can't see a good reason that you can't use a Way on the second time.

Assuming that both of those don't work, the question becomes "why not"? If it is as you suggest that Enchantress and Ways only trigger when playing a card makes you FTI instead of other things like Reckless, then Chameleon should in fact avoid Enchantress; the fact that Chameleon makes you FTI wouldn't matter for Enchantress.

Yes it would, since Enchantress already triggered when you played the card (in the "when-would-resolve" window). As I wrote above: Chameleon and Enchantress trigger at the same time, then you choose which to resolve first. If you choose Enchantress, then when you resolve Chameleon it does nothing (since you're not FTI). If you choose Chameleon, then when you resolve Enchantress it makes you do the cantrip (since you are FTI after applying Chameleon).

Unclear what you're talking about here, "yes it would" is what, yes Enchantress would make you do the cantrip? Or yes, Chameleon would avoid the Enchantress? If you meant the first one, then I'm talking about a situation when Enchantress wasn't in play when you played the card. It was played by your opponent during the resolution of your played card, so it should be too late for the now-played Enchantress to do anything, since it looks specifically for "when a card is played" (and also looks for "when you would FTI", but only when you would FTI as a result of playing a card).

I have colored and bolded the sentence I was replying to. I replied, yes it would. Meaning, yes the fact that Chameleon makes you FTI would matter for Enchantress.

You're now saying that you were talking about the scenario where your opponent played Enchantress during your resolution of the played card. I didn't think you were talking about that. I thought you were asking how it was possible for Chameleon to avoid Enchantress at all given the changed ruling on Chameleon. You also said: "exactly how does it work against Chameleon's FTI instruction? It's no longer part of 'when a card is played', it seems." So it REALLY seems like that's what you were talking about.

83

Rules Questions / Re: Replaying Durations that aren't in play

« on: February 06, 2023, 01:59:46 pm »

So I am leaning towards, the BoM rule is in fact only for BoM's, and Procession a BoM a Duration does not keep Procession out.

I guess you still mean that the rule also applies to scenarios like in this thread (Flagship + BoM + Duration)?

I don't understand the question. Flagship is both a Command card and a Duration card.

I was referring to the question in the OP of this thread. Is the ruling that Flagship stays in play? (Flagship is a TR; it's not a BoM, i.e. a card that says to play a card leaving it there.)

84

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 06, 2023, 12:34:13 pm »

Hmm, now I'm surprised that the official FAQ doesn't mention whether or not you can choose to use a Way when following a Reckless card's instructions the second time (after not using a Way during the first time).

Hmm. Well, this is what Donald X. wrote about Reckless:

Reckless as printed actually cares about playing the card, not following its instructions. And this is reinforced in the FAQ. When you play a card, normally, you follow its instructions; Reckless gets in there and says "follow them an extra time." So "Reckless happens whenever you follow the card's instructions" is wrong. You have to be playing the card for (that part of) Reckless to do anything.

(In the rest of that post he made the ruling about Reckless + Chameleon that he has now probably reversed - but because of a different interpretation of Chameleon, not Reckless.)
And:

The timing is "after following the instructions of a Reckless card due to playing it." And what it does then is, it has you follow the instructions again.

But assuming that you indeed can't, do we know the same goes for Enchantress? It is possible to have a scenario where your opponent plays Enchantress after you play your Reckless card but before you follow the Reckless card's instructions a second time (Mouse has Enchantress, your opponent plays a "play this" type reaction). Is there a ruling that Enchantress will not do anything to the Reckless card's second instruction-following?

I would have thought that a newly-played Enchantress would in fact stop a Reckless card's repeat instructions from happening... but if so, I also can't see a good reason that you can't use a Way on the second time.

Assuming that both of those don't work, the question becomes "why not"? If it is as you suggest that Enchantress and Ways only trigger when playing a card makes you FTI instead of other things like Reckless, then Chameleon should in fact avoid Enchantress; the fact that Chameleon makes you FTI wouldn't matter for Enchantress.

Yes it would, since Enchantress already triggered when you played the card (in the "when-would-resolve" window). As I wrote above: Chameleon and Enchantress trigger at the same time, then you choose which to resolve first. If you choose Enchantress, then when you resolve Chameleon it does nothing (since you're not FTI). If you choose Chameleon, then when you resolve Enchantress it makes you do the cantrip (since you are FTI after applying Chameleon).

But I think we need Donald X. to answer the specific question you brought up:
1) Can you choose to use a Way when following a Reckless card's instructions the second time (after not using a Way during the first time)?
EDIT: I  deleted the second question after reading GendoIkari's edit, which I agree with. It's also pretty clear from the Donald X. quotes above that the answer to the remaining question is no.

85

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 06, 2023, 11:58:02 am »

I see. But actually I think we're both wrong when it comes to how Enchantress can trigger a second time. Donald X. has actually specified several times that Enchantress (and Ways) only trigger when you FTI as a result of playing the card. If an ability instructs you to FTI without actually playing the card, that should not trigger Ench/Ways. Compare to Reckless; it tells you to FTI an extra time, but this doesn't trigger Ench/Ways one more time. Chameleon does the same thing. If Chameleon had said "play this card" instead of "follow this card's instructions", then of course Enchantress would trigger again. (I think Ways would too; I'm not sure exactly what Donald meant about not using two Ways, but it doesn't really matter with current rulings anyway.)

86

Rules Questions / Re: Harbor Village and Inspiring

« on: February 06, 2023, 09:46:33 am »

I think I have another way two consecutive Harbor Villages can give you +$1:

1. Play Kiln.
2. Play Harbor Village 1.
3. Before resolving Harbor Village 1, gain Harbor Village 2.
4. Play HB2 with Innovation, and resolve it.
5. Resolve HB1. (This is not "the next Action you play" for HB2, because HB1 had already been played.)
6. Play Militia. Both HB1 and HB2 give you +$1.

87

Rules Questions / Re: Replaying Durations that aren't in play

« on: February 06, 2023, 07:38:48 am »

For sure the second one is true (whether or not the first is); that's the rule that handles tracking for Band of Misfits on a Duration card. Obv. it would be simpler if Band of Misfits didn't work on Duration cards; lack of foresight over a decade ago, plus public outcry, leave Band of Misfits working on Durations. And this rule (about leaving BoM out) is in rulebooks now, in BoM FAQs.

I was actually advocating adding "non-Duration" to BoM (and Overlord and Inheritance) back in 2019. But then I realized that it wouldn't solve all tracking problems, since you could still play BoM to play TR to play a Duration.

So I am leaning towards, the BoM rule is in fact only for BoM's, and Procession a BoM a Duration does not keep Procession out.

I guess you still mean that the rule also applies to scenarios like in this thread (Flagship + BoM + Duration)?

88

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 06, 2023, 03:58:25 am »

If the reversal stands, then the attacks have to trigger before the choice to use a Way happens so that when Chameleon tries to FTI with $/cards reversed it finishes up doing whatever Enchantress or Highwayman said to do instead.

Wait, this isn’t why Enchantress can beat Chameleon under the ruling that it can. It’s not that the attack has already triggered and thus Chameleon fails to override it. It’s that Chameleon says to FTI, which would trigger the attack again (if we say that it also triggered originally when you chose to use the Way; if it’s as you say that Way triggered first, then Enchantress would only be triggering once; not twice).

OK, I understand the logic.

I’m not understanding your idea of the attack triggering before the choice to use a way; what does that mean? Enchantress pretty clearly only triggers when you would follow the instructions; that one is printed on the card. And how can that be something that happens before you choose to use a Way?

I had been thinking in terms of the attacks, when they triggered, setting up an effect that said "When you try to FTI, this is what you're going to do instead."  Having the attacks trigger before the Way choice would therefore override Chameleon, while having them trigger after the Way choice would allow Chameleon to work.

Now that I understand the logic behind the ruling reversal, it makes a lot of sense to me, and I think all the complications disappear just so long as one doesn't try, like Jeebus is doing, to make the Way choice and the attack triggers be synchronous and hence orderable.  Instead make the Way choice occur first and make the attacks trigger (as you have said) at the point at which one attempts to FTI.

Nobody has said that Ways trigger first except you. The ruling on Ways/Ench/Highw has always been that they all work exactly the same in terms of effect and in terms of timing. Here is Donald X.'s original explanation of Enchantress's timing. Here is Donald X. saying that Ways and Enchantress have the same timing.

Nothing Donald X. has said here has remotely indicated that he changed when Ways trigger by creating a new timing window between "first" (Reactions) and Ench/Highw. There is nothing in the rules or on the cards suggesting this timing difference either, quite the contrary.

The reasoning for the ruling on what Ways/Ench/Highw do in relation to Harbor Village, Moat, etc., has nothing to do with a changed timing either.

And the new ruling on Chameleon works purely based on the fact that we're FTI with it; there is certainly no need to have it trigger earlier.

Furthermore, what you're saying still contradicts what GendoIkari said about Enchantress triggering twice. If the "Way choice" happens first, and then Enchantress triggers after that, Enchantress will only trigger once.

Making Ways trigger before Enchantress does not solve anything in terms of the Harbor Village ruling either. If one thinks that a card making you do something can be a completely separate phenomenon from you following the card's instructions, the ruling makes sense no matter the timing of Ways; and if one doesn't think that, the ruling doesn't make sense no matter the timing of Ways.

As I explained in my last post, there are two ways to look at what Ways/Ench/Highw do when it comes to changing what instructions you follow. This presents a further complication and hinderance to discussion. Either they do it right away (have you follow the new instructions), before you actually get to the FTI part (which must be what GendoIkari is thinking), or they change what you're going to do when you will get to the FTI part. The latter is what I've always been thinking, what ChipperMDW's model follows, and what you are saying (at least partially). In the middle of this post I presented two numbered lists explaining these two "models".
EDIT: I'm pretty sure the first option (marked in brown) must be wrong. The only way this can work is that Ways/Ench/Highw change the future instructions.

89

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 05, 2023, 02:48:58 pm »

I'm also not clear on what Dane-m is saying. Again, I don't think the intention is that this timing has changed. So before, the ruling on all Ways, including Chameleon, was that they could help you escape Enchantress and Highwayman. It's like I said:

They all trigger at the same time, and per the normal rules, you choose which to resolve first. After resolving the first one, any others will fail to do anything because at that point you're not following the card's on-play instructions anymore.

I still think that this means (as in ChipperMDW's model) that these abilities all change what instructions we're following, and that they make that change before we're following the instructions.

So, the Way and Enchantress trigger at the same time, then you choose which to resolve first. If you choose Enchantress, then when you resolve the Way it does nothing (since you're not FTI). If you choose the Way, then when you resolve Enchantress it does nothing (since you're not FTI). Then you get to the actual FTI step (which would be whichever you chose).

Now, with the suggested ruling that Chameleon actually makes you FTI, it would be like this (with the same timing):

Chameleon and Enchantress trigger at the same time, then you choose which to resolve first. If you choose Enchantress, then when you resolve Chameleon it does nothing (since you're not FTI). If you choose Chameleon, then when you resolve Enchantress it makes you do the cantrip (since you are FTI after applying Chameleon). Then you get to the actual FTI step (which would be the Enchantress cantrip in any case).

The other way would be to say that Ways/Ench actually make you resolve their instructions while we're still in the when-would window, which I think is what GendoIkari is saying? To me it's weird and counter-intuitive, but it doesn't make any difference for the outcome of the Enchantress + Chameleon interaction. It would be like this, I guess:

Chameleon and Enchantress trigger at the same time, then you choose which to resolve first. If you choose Enchantress, you get the cantrip right away and the card instructions that you're set to follow are cancelled, and then when you resolve Chameleon it does nothing (since you're not FTI). If you choose Chameleon, then it makes you FTI "modified" right away and the card instructions that you're set to follow are cancelled, but before that Enchantress triggers again on the when-would of that FTI and you get the cantrip and those instructions are cancelled too.
EDIT: Actually no, I don't think Enchantress would trigger again, since you're not playing the card again. And that actually means that this way of looking at it must be wrong!

90

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 04, 2023, 04:36:11 pm »

Or, as I wrote to AJD:

If you're following a card's instruction to trash, it means that it instructs you to trash. (or any other words you want to use)
And vice versa, if the card instructs you to trash, it means that you're following its instruction to trash / its instruction to you is to trash. (or any other words you want to use)

Cool tautology.

Aah, but it isn't. Look again.

91

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 04, 2023, 04:34:50 pm »

Let's not forget how Ways/Enchantress and Highwayman all work:

When you would follow the on-play instructions of the played card, instead follow <instructions>.

Ways: <instructions> = the Way's instructions
Enchantress: <instructions> = +1 Card, +1 Action
Highwayman: <instructions> = nothing

They all trigger at the same time, and per the normal rules, you choose which to resolve first. After resolving the first one, any others will fail to do anything because at that point you're not following the card's on-play instructions anymore.

Except that the above model is not what the rules actually say.  It's the model that we've been using to understand how the rules work.  Here's what the rules actually say about Ways:

Menagerie has Ways. Each Way gives Action cards an additional option: you can play the Action for what it normally does, or play it to do what the Way says to do. Playing an Action card for a Way ability means not doing anything the Action card said to do when played.

The only place where 'would' appears in the rules about Ways is:

Enchantress from Empires also changes what an Action card does when played. If you are affected by Enchantress, you can use a Way instead of getting the +1 Card and +1 Action that Enchantress's effect would give you.

I've mentioned previously that sometimes the rules specify the outcome but not the mechanism by which the outcome is achieved.  That's all that's really needed, but we like to envisage a mechanism that helps us to understand the outcomes.  At some stage in the past the model you describe proved adequate to describe the mechanism by which Ways and Enchantress interacted.  It continued to prove adequate when Highwayman came along.  It has now hit a problem when confronted with Reckless.  All that proves is that the model has become inadequate, not that the rules make no sense.

(Edited to correct typo)

They all trigger at the same time, otherwise you can't order them. And they all trigger before you get to the FTI part, obviously. That's what the model I described says. And that's what Donald X. has said before, and he hasn't said otherwise now. What do you actually disagree with?

92

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 04, 2023, 05:16:07 am »

You don't have to keep repeating it, it's clear: Way of the Goat means that Smithy makes you trash. I've been trying to explain how I can't see any difference between a card (in this case Smithy) making you trash and that card giving you an instruction to trash. You still haven't really responded to this (which is understandable if you don't follow).

- An instruction to trash doesn't mean you will necessarily trash. For example, we could have Highwayman cause us to not do the instruction.

Right, but that's not relevant to the question of the difference between being instructed/made to do something and following an instruction to do that thing. It's about instructions being followed; other instructions of course don't make you do anything.

Or, as I wrote to AJD:

If you're following a card's instruction to trash, it means that it instructs you to trash. (or any other words you want to use)
And vice versa, if the card instructs you to trash, it means that you're following its instruction to trash / its instruction to you is to trash. (or any other words you want to use)

93

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 04, 2023, 05:12:23 am »

Also does this mean that Chameleon loses to Highwayman? I'd guess that Highwayman's wording is secretly a shorter version of Enchantress. The longer wording would be something like:

"Each turn, the first time each other player plays a Treasure card, they get +$0 instead of following its instructions"

Hmm, given that there’s a FAQ ruling on Highwayman which says that Ways can be used to counter it, I think you’d have to be right. But it’s not how I would have read the text on Highwayman if I were just reading that; I’d have assumed you can’t choose to use a Way at all, because letting you choose a Way is something that playing a card “does”, and Highwayman says it does “nothing”.

I have an answer to this, but I need to reference something else to support (I hope) my argument:

Playing an Action card has three steps: announcing it; moving it to the "in play" area - the table space in front of you; and following the instructions on it, in order, top to bottom.

Let's expand this.

Playing a card:
1. Announce it.
2. Move it to the "in play" area.
3. "When you play a card, first..." abilities trigger here.
4. Follow the instructions on the card (in order, top to bottom, stop at a dividing line).
5. "When you play a card" abilities trigger here.

There's nothing on the card to tell you to announce it, there's nothing on the card to tell you that you move it to the "in play" area, and there's nothing on the card to say that "When you play a card, first..." abilities trigger at this stage.  These are all things that the rules of the game are doing, not the card.  Similarly there's nothing on the card to say that you can choose a Way, so that is surely also something that the rules of the game are doing.  Effectively there's an extra step (3˝) in the above that says "Choose whether to FTI or use a Way." and step 4 becomes conditional on having made the appropriate choice in 3˝.   Consequently saying that the card does nothing doesn't affect the ability to choose a Way.

This kind of confusion is caused by the fuzziness of the new ruling, in my opinion. Let's not forget how Ways/Enchantress and Highwayman all work:

When you would follow the on-play instructions of the played card, instead follow <instructions>.

Ways: <instructions> = the Way's instructions
Enchantress: <instructions> = +1 Card, +1 Action
Highwayman: <instructions> = nothing

They all trigger at the same time, and per the normal rules, you choose which to resolve first. After resolving the first one, any others will fail to do anything because at that point you're not following the card's on-play instructions anymore.

Your model with the extra step might not actually be in accordance to how these abilities trigger on "when you would follow the instructions". (In my opinion it's impossible to make a coherent model or explanation for this ruling.)

94

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 04, 2023, 05:00:26 am »

Also does this mean that Chameleon loses to Highwayman? I'd guess that Highwayman's wording is secretly a shorter version of Enchantress. The longer wording would be something like:

"Each turn, the first time each other player plays a Treasure card, they get +$0 instead of following its instructions"

Hmm, given that there’s a FAQ ruling on Highwayman which says that Ways can be used to counter it, I think you’d have to be right. But it’s not how I would have read the text on Highwayman if I were just reading that; I’d have assumed you can’t choose to use a Way at all, because letting you choose a Way is something that playing a card “does”, and Highwayman says it does “nothing”.

The phrasing is poor, but the rulebook (as you're implying) says straight that it does the same as Enchantress and Ways, with the same timing.

95

Rules Questions / Re: Replaying Durations that aren't in play

« on: February 03, 2023, 04:02:09 am »

Donald X.,

Is the ruling
a card that plays a card stays in play as long as that card would have stayed in play; or
a card that plays a card that is not in play stays in play as long as that card would have stayed in play?

In other words, if you Procession a BoM to play a Duration, does the Procession stay?

96

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 03, 2023, 03:54:16 am »

Yeah, this Chameleon ruling means that Chameleon is different from Enchantress and from the other Ways. Chameleon counts as FTI; the others don't. If Enchantress also did, then what Dz said would be true.

(I have suggested in this thread that all of them could count as FTI. Then there would be no question as to how/why Harbor Village gives +$1, and Chameleon + Enchantress would work exactly how Dz said. It would also mean that Reckless makes you do the Enchantress/Way effect twice. And the term "this" in Way texts would make more sense.)

97

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 01, 2023, 03:54:22 pm »

The Menagerie rulebook says that you can use a Way to dodge Enchantress.

But doesn't call out Chameleon specifically. Chameleon could be the exception, even though it's not brought up in the rulebook.
FWIW, I think saying that Chameleon (just like Reckless) really makes you FTI is a good call, since my impression is that most people think the phrase "follow the instructions" means exactly that.

98

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 01, 2023, 03:44:46 pm »

The essence of my issue is this:

A card gives you +$ must mean that the card makes you get +$. For instance, with Way of the Goat, the played card makes you trash - according to this ruling.

1. The card makes you trash.
2. The card tells you to trash.
3. The card instructs you to trash.
4. The card orders you to trash.
5. The card's instructions are to trash.
6. The card's orders are to trash.

To me these are synonymous. But according to the ruling, they are not. (This is not about terminology, but about concept. We can add more verbs and nouns.) Where do we draw the line? Between the verbs and nouns? Wherever we draw the line seems arbitrary to me.

I don't understand the list of 6 things or how it relates to anything.

Because if making you trash and giving you an instruction to trash is the same concept, then using Way of the Goat counts as following the played card's instructions.

I'm sorry, I still don't follow you *at* *all*.

You are using English words, not jargon that doesn't exist, right? Way of the Goat "makes you trash" if you use it. It has an instruction on it. But Way of the Goat on Smithy doesn't "count" as following Smithy's instructions. Smithy's instructions are +3 Cards. Way of the Goat instead means that "trash" is attributed to the Smithy, due to my ruling based on rulebook text and how I think players who aren't you will see things. I have endlessly said this, I have not shifted my position here, you don't like it, you have not shifted your position there, it is not so productive for both of us to keep repeating this stuff.

You don't have to keep repeating it, it's clear: Way of the Goat means that Smithy makes you trash. I've been trying to explain how I can't see any difference between a card (in this case Smithy) making you trash and that card giving you an instruction to trash. You still haven't really responded to this (which is understandable if you don't follow).

But yeah, you suggested I could state my main issue tersely and see how it goes, and I did. I think you're right that the conversation can stop here.

99

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 01, 2023, 03:31:50 pm »

I'm not clear what "your choice!" means for Sheep + Chameleon... is this ruling that you can play a card and end up getting just +2 cards for it? Or does "your choice" simply mean that you can play a card for Sheep, or for Chameleon, or for neither?

I'm almost positive it means you can choose which to apply, based on the ruling that the first one you apply will stick, since the next one does nothing when you're no longer following the card's instructions. It's the same for all where he wrote "your choice".

That makes more sense to me for sure, but them I'm not clear why this was listed in you saying it felt contradictory to the other one? (I completely get what you're saying about reckless ruling vs enchantress ruling). Surely there was never a question that if you have 2 Ways in play, the rule is that you could choose which one (or neither) to use when playing a card? What alternative rule could there possibly be?

The latest Reckless+Cham ruling says that Cham means you're following the card's instructions. So Cham is different from the other Ways, while Ench is like the other Ways.
So that should mean: When you apply Cham, Ench and Ways will work.

EDIT: Oh wait, you're saying that you could just choose which Way to actually use? Yes, that's why I wrote about Cham+Sheep that it doesn't matter in practice. What I wrote above is about what happens if you (for some reason) were to actually choose to use both Ways on the same card play. Pretty sure that's what Donald X. was referring to.

So are you saying that based on the latest rulings posted here regarding Chameleon + Reckless, then you should be allowed to get +2 cards by using a combination of Chameleon + Sheep? Or are you just saying that you should get to choose Chameleon, and then when you get to the "would resolve instructions" step (for the second time this card play), you should be able to choose Sheep there and simply get +?

The latter. Like I wrote, If you apply Sheep first, Chameleon does nothing. If you apply Chameleon first, Sheep works (meaning +$2). This would be the same as for Chameleon+Enchantress.

100

Rules Questions / Re: Lantern, Elder, Harbor Village, Moat

« on: February 01, 2023, 11:22:55 am »

I'm not clear what "your choice!" means for Sheep + Chameleon... is this ruling that you can play a card and end up getting just +2 cards for it? Or does "your choice" simply mean that you can play a card for Sheep, or for Chameleon, or for neither?

I'm almost positive it means you can choose which to apply, based on the ruling that the first one you apply will stick, since the next one does nothing when you're no longer following the card's instructions. It's the same for all where he wrote "your choice".

That makes more sense to me for sure, but them I'm not clear why this was listed in you saying it felt contradictory to the other one? (I completely get what you're saying about reckless ruling vs enchantress ruling). Surely there was never a question that if you have 2 Ways in play, the rule is that you could choose which one (or neither) to use when playing a card? What alternative rule could there possibly be?

The latest Reckless+Cham ruling says that Cham means you're following the card's instructions. So Cham is different from the other Ways, while Ench is like the other Ways.
So that should mean: When you apply Cham, Ench and Ways will work.

EDIT: Oh wait, you're saying that you could just choose which Way to actually use? Yes, that's why I wrote about Cham+Sheep that it doesn't matter in practice. What I wrote above is about what happens if you (for some reason) were to actually choose to use both Ways on the same card play. Pretty sure that's what Donald X. was referring to.