Print

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

[blueblimp]

On Goko, if a card set aside with Prince is named for Scheme's effect, it will go on top of your deck and not continue to be set aside. (There is no choice.) The log prettifier is currently not working for me but the log would be here: http://www.gokosalvager.com/static/logprettifier.html?/20140829/log.5066a4d70cf20e086dc89e71.1409368935383.txt.

Here's what I think the rules specify.

Scheme reads: "At the start of Clean-up this turn, you may choose an Action card you have in play. If you discard it from play this turn, put it on your deck." The Scheme-Hermit ruling implies that Scheme triggers from the card being discarded.

Prince reads: "...set aside an Action card from your hand costing up to $4. At the start of each of your turns, play that Action, setting it aside again when you discard it from play. (Stop playing it if you fail to set it aside on a turn you play it.)"

Since the two when-discard effects occur simultaneously, I should be able to choose which happens first. If I choose Prince to happen first, then the card should be set aside, causing Scheme to lose track of it so that the card doesn't go on the top of my deck. If I choose Scheme to happen first, then the card should go on top of my deck, causing Prince to lose track of it, so that the card doesn't get set aside. That means there are two legal outcomes (setting aside the card, and putting on top of the deck), but Goko only resolves to one, which happens to be the less favourable outcome for the player in most situations.

[enfynet]

Here's the question: in what case would you Scheme your Princed card then decide you want Prince to happen first? Scheme specifically says "you may" so I can't see a situation when you'd even bother selecting a card if you really want it to remain Princed anyways.

[blueblimp]

Here's the question: in what case would you Scheme your Princed card then decide you want Prince to happen first? Scheme specifically says "you may" so I can't see a situation when you'd even bother selecting a card if you really want it to remain Princed anyways.

When you screw up? That was the case with me. (The UI doesn't make it easy to tell which cards were played by Prince vs played during your turn, and I forgot that I had two Princes playing Schemes per turn, not just one.)

[Davio]

I think you should be able to choose between the two which one you want to resolve first as they both trigger when you (try to) discard that card from play.
After you resolved either Prince or Scheme, the card is no longer in play, so the other one loses track.

I guess the only time you would purposely remove a card from Prince (other than by accident) is with a forced trasher like Trade Route or something.

[soulnet]

It is not unreasonable for the UI to assume Scheme always happens before Prince, because there is no reason to Scheme a card, other than screw-up prevention. I think it is a reasonable design choice to automate things, even at the cost of not double-checking.

[Awaclus]

I think it would be good if the Princed cards were a bit separate from the other Action cards you've played this turn. Then you could treat the bug as a feature. Actually this could be done for Durations from previous turns as well, it would make it easier for those people who don't have the Salvager extension to keep track of what they have played this turn.

[Davio]

That's actually a pretty good idea. A simple colored border may suffice.

[werothegreat]

Your Princed card is literally always the first card you play every turn.  Just make sure not to click the leftmost card in your pile at the end of your turn when you use Scheme.

[yed]

Your Princed card is literally always the first card you play every turn.  Just make sure not to click the leftmost card in your pile at the end of your turn when you use Scheme.

It is not when you have other duration in play and choose to play it before the princed card.

[soulnet]

Your Princed card is literally always the first card you play every turn.  Just make sure not to click the leftmost card in your pile at the end of your turn when you use Scheme.

It is not when you have other duration in play and choose to play it before the princed card.

The first non-orange card. If you princed a Duration, you deserve the hassle.

[Davio]

If you Prince a Throne Room and use it on a duration card, does the TR stick to the duration or does it return to Prince?

I suspect it sticks to the duration, but rulings on this have changed in the past.

[amalloy]

If you Prince a Throne Room and use it on a duration card, does the TR stick to the duration or does it return to Prince?

I suspect it sticks to the duration, but rulings on this have changed in the past.

It sticks to the duration. Prince attempts to set it aside at the end of the turn, but fails to because the TR is not being discarded from play.

[Awaclus]

So now TR's lack of "may" might have actual relevance some day.

[Drab Emordnilap]

So now TR's lack of "may" might have actual relevance some day.

You've never had a game where you played Throne Throne Smithy and then been forced to play an action you'd rather not play (or play twice maybe)?

[Awaclus]

So now TR's lack of "may" might have actual relevance some day.

You've never had a game where you played Throne Throne Smithy and then been forced to play an action you'd rather not play (or play twice maybe)?

I can't say for sure that I haven't, but I don't remember ever playing a game like that either.

[Davio]

So now TR's lack of "may" might have actual relevance some day.

You've never had a game where you played Throne Throne Smithy and then been forced to play an action you'd rather not play (or play twice maybe)?

I think I had it happen a handful of times with Golem.

The reason I brought up the TR was because Donald first ruled that all TRs and KCs in a chain stay out, but later changed it to only the TR that was directly before the played duration card.

But there doesn't seem to be a rules contradiction here. The TR stays out with the duration, Prince fails to set it aside and so the TR goes away. And if you TR another TR which is played on a duration, the first TR goes back to Prince as the duration-TR rule implies.

[Asper]

I still don't understand why Prince should not work on Durations, setting them aside again when they are discarded. Wonder why Donald didn't want that.

[Awaclus]

I still don't understand why Prince should not work on Durations, setting them aside again when they are discarded.

Because of the text in parentheses.

[Asper]

I still don't understand why Prince should not work on Durations, setting them aside again when they are discarded.

Because of the text in parentheses.

I'll just claim you genuinely misunderstood me, so, yes, i know that. I wonder why that text had to limit it to "The turn you play it". It's not like it was necessary for Scheme (where lose track is the reason Prince may fail) or one-shots (which will not be discarded afterwards - unless you gain them back from the trash, where Prince loses track again). So was it just because Donald didn't want cards being played every second turn?

[Donald X.]

I still don't understand why Prince should not work on Durations, setting them aside again when they are discarded. Wonder why Donald didn't want that.

It's too confusing. Let's say you've got Fishing Village. Every other turn you get +$1 +2 Actions, every other turn you get +$1 +1 Action. Some turns it doesn't matter which one it is, you aren't using the last Action; then, you lose track of what you're supposed to be getting.

And then, by not letting you use it with durations, I deprive you of a use that wasn't going to be what you wanted much anyway, because you're in some sense getting half as much as with some other card.

[LastFootnote]

Seems to me that you'd still play the card every tun. So the turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+1 Action; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

[pingpongsam]

Seems to me that you'd still play the card every tun. So the turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+1 Action; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

Seems to me the duration card would get detached from Prince since it gets left in play after the first turn and then would be discarded as normal after the second turn thus widowing Prince.

[LastFootnote]

Seems to me that you'd still play the card every tun. So the turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+1 Action; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

Seems to me the duration card would get detached from Prince since it gets left in play after the first turn and then would be discarded as normal after the second turn thus widowing Prince.

Man, read the thread. We are talking about a hypothetical Prince that works on Duration cards.

[Asper]

Seems to me that you'd still play the card every tun. So the turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+1 Action; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

Seems to me the duration card would get detached from Prince since it gets left in play after the first turn and then would be discarded as normal after the second turn thus widowing Prince.

Man, read the thread. We are talking about a hypothetical Prince that works on Duration cards.

I was coming from the german version of the card (which lacks a bit in clarity anyhow), but i'll try an english version that works as i meant:

"You may set this aside. If you do, set aside an Action card from your hand costing up to 4. At the start of each of your turns, if that Action is set aside, play it, setting it aside again when you discard it from play."

I got my answer though. Thanks, Donald.

Edit: And yes, you are of course right that the current Prince only with that one line removed would play them every turn, LastFootnote. Thinking of it now, i can clearly see how my attempt at a solution only gives you half of what you pay for, while the other way (that you meant) is super confusing.

[Donald X.]

Seems to me that you'd still play the card every tun. So the turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+1 Action; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

Well it would depend on the exact phrasing of this hypothetical card. Having it play the card every turn is not great for me either though.

When we playtested Prince, I had several versions with different wordings, and some of them worked on duration cards and one-shots. Those things were tried and did not work out.

[GendoIkari]

If you Prince a Throne Room and use it on a duration card, does the TR stick to the duration or does it return to Prince?

I suspect it sticks to the duration, but rulings on this have changed in the past.

It sticks to the duration. Prince attempts to set it aside at the end of the turn, but fails to because the TR is not being discarded from play.

Slight correction, Prince never attempts to set it aside at the end of the turn. Prince only does something when the card is discarded, it doesn't automatically do something at end of turn.

[Asper]

After having my first games with Prince recently, i thought about it setting aside a Possessed players Tactician. Boy, i was happy when i remembered that doesn't work. I mean, if it played Durations only every second turn it wouldn't be that awful (every second turn is awesome, every first doesn't exist), but still. I assume there are some nasty Prince-Possession moves, anyhow, like Rats or Trading Post (provided the possessed one bought them in the first place).

[Awaclus]

After having my first games with Prince recently, i thought about it setting aside a Possessed players Tactician. Boy, i was happy when i remembered that doesn't work. I mean, if it played Durations only every second turn it wouldn't be that awful (every second turn is awesome, every first doesn't exist), but still. I assume there are some nasty Prince-Possession moves, anyhow, like Rats or Trading Post (provided the possessed one bought them in the first place).

Remake is also pretty nice, especially if you have a Militia or something.

[Jeebus]

I'll just claim you genuinely misunderstood me, so, yes, i know that. I wonder why that text had to limit it to "The turn you play it". It's not like it was necessary for Scheme (where lose track is the reason Prince may fail) or one-shots (which will not be discarded afterwards - unless you gain them back from the trash, where Prince loses track again). So was it just because Donald didn't want cards being played every second turn?

What you're saying is in essence to remove the whole parenthesis. Keeping just "Stop playing it if you fail to set it aside" doesn't make much sense. Removing the last part ("on a turn you play it") seems to only make the conditions (for Prince stopping to play it) happen more often, since there is now less restrictions on when. But actually it just makes everything less clear.

So what you actually mean is to remove the whole sentence. What you're saying is that Prince should not ever stop playing the card on purpose, but rather that losing track will take care of it. But actually losing track will not prevent a card from being played. Without a proper way of knowing when Prince should stop playing a card, it will be played no matter where it is. A Feast will keep giving you a $5 card every turn for the rest of the game, for the same reason as Throning a Feast gives you two cards. With a Fishing Village, like LastFootnote said (with a slight correction): The turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+2 Actions; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

[Asper]

I'll just claim you genuinely misunderstood me, so, yes, i know that. I wonder why that text had to limit it to "The turn you play it". It's not like it was necessary for Scheme (where lose track is the reason Prince may fail) or one-shots (which will not be discarded afterwards - unless you gain them back from the trash, where Prince loses track again). So was it just because Donald didn't want cards being played every second turn?

What you're saying is in essence to remove the whole parenthesis. Keeping just "Stop playing it if you fail to set it aside" doesn't make much sense. Removing the last part ("on a turn you play it") seems to only make the conditions (for Prince stopping to play it) happen more often, since there is now less restrictions on when. But actually it just makes everything less clear.

So what you actually mean is to remove the whole sentence. What you're saying is that Prince should not ever stop playing the card on purpose, but rather that losing track will take care of it. But actually losing track will not prevent a card from being played. Without a proper way of knowing when Prince should stop playing a card, it will be played no matter where it is. A Feast will keep giving you a $5 card every turn for the rest of the game, for the same reason as Throning a Feast gives you two cards. With a Fishing Village, like LastFootnote said (with a slight correction): The turn after you set aside Fishing Village, you get [+2 Actions; +$1]. Every turn after that, you'd get [+3 Actions; +$2].

I indeed made some mistakes about the lose-track rule in the last weeks. By now i too have come to understand it just keeps you from moving cards. So yes, you are of course right that the lose-track doesn't work to keep Prince from playing a card if leaving out the part in parantheses is all the change you do. You would have to tie the play to the set-aside:

Prince, 8$
You may set this aside. If you do, set aside another action card from your hand costing up to 4$. At the start of each of your turns, if that action is set aside, play it. Set it aside again when you discard it from play.

[silverspawn]

while we're at it, why not move the "you may" 6 words to the right?

Set this aside. If you do, you may set aside an Action card from your hand costing up to 4$ ...

that way you a) don't have the pointless decision anymore to play or not play the prince and b) no more tracking problems. any big problem I'm missing?

The "problem" with the new set-aside wording is, now duration cards are played every second turn, which is hard to remember.

[Joseph2302]

while we're at it, why not move the "you may" 6 words to the right?

Set this aside. If you do, you may set aside an Action card from your hand costing up to 4$. At the start of each of your turns, if that action is set aside, play it. Set it aside again when you discard it from play.

that way you a) don't have the pointless decision anymore to play or not play the prince and b) no more tracking problems. any big problem I'm missing?

Yes, you're forced to set with aside with Herald/Golem, even if you don't have an action to set it aside with. So this small edit makes it weaker on some boards. At the moment, if you play it with Herald/Golem, you can just not set it aside if you want.

[silverspawn]

Yes, you're forced to set with aside with Herald/Golem, even if you don't have an action to set it aside with. So this small edit makes it weaker on some boards. At the moment, if you play it with Herald/Golem, you can just not set it aside if you want.

Well I'm obviously aware of that, but it seems like a non-issue, and other cards sure don't care about it. forager can force you to trash a province, stuff like that has happened before.

edit: though we probably should not discuss this here, because even wording changes are variants, so it's not the right place.

[Asper]

The "problem" with the new set-aside wording is, now duration cards are played every second turn, which is hard to remember.

It's hard to remember because knowing when to clean up and when not to clean up a Duration is hard to remember. It's not Prince who does that.

Anyhow, Donald's feedback on this approach was that you get "only half of what you paid for". I can definitely see the point of this, but on the other hand many durations are pretty good anyhow. Outpost, one of the worst, would be played after each of your regular turns, even. It's not like it breaks the game - not being able to Scheme a Feast didn't cause a riot either.

Also, what i just noticed: If you actually could play Durations, you could also Prince Tactician. Contrary to what i said before (in another thread, i think), that wouldn't mean you start every turn with no cards in hand. Instead, if you play durations every turn, you could resolve the Princed one first and then the effect from last turn, starting every turn with 5 cards, 2 actions and 2 buys. Or if you played it every second turn, you would pass one turn, then play a double turn next time. Then pass, and so on.

Also, when answering to Jeebus before, i forgot to mention i allready pointed out the need to tie the play and set-aside together:

I was coming from the german version of the card (which lacks a bit in clarity anyhow), but i'll try an english version that works as i meant:

"You may set this aside. If you do, set aside an Action card from your hand costing up to 4. At the start of each of your turns, if that Action is set aside, play it, setting it aside again when you discard it from play."

I got my answer though. Thanks, Donald.