Print

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

[hvb]

Cant wait to play a poker game with some duplicates on a duke board. Who will commit first?

[Donald X.]

I feel the comma makes these cards 0% clearer.

The comma is a delimiter. In the case of Guide for example, there would be people asking, so can I draw 5 cards every turn? The power level would make it clear that they must not be able to, but they would ask anyway.

Interestingly Jay, who ruthlessly prunes my commas, did not even mention those.

[Witherweaver]

Are all the reserve cards going to have that incorrect comma? That's annoying.

It turns out I value clear communication above language prescriptivism. In fact I don't value language prescriptivism at all.

Just out of curiosity, why not use "If you do, ...".  To save space?

", for " is less space than ".  If you do, "

" for " is even less space!

[LastFootnote]

I feel the comma makes these cards 0% clearer.

The comma is a delimiter. In the case of Guide for example, there would be people asking, so can I draw 5 cards every turn? The power level would make it clear that they must not be able to, but they would ask anyway.

The word "to" is the delimiter, though. You do A to do B. If you didn't do A, you can't just do B. I'm not trying to restart this discussion, though. Really it's unimportant as long as the card is clear. And the final form is clear.

Interestingly Jay, who ruthlessly prunes my commas, did not even mention those.

Yes, that surprised me.

[Donald X.]

" for " is even less space!

Dude.

Turn start -> Call: -all Cards, +5 Cards.

[Witherweaver]

" for " is even less space!

Dude.

Turn start -> Call: -all Cards, +5 Cards.

Sorry, I'm honestly not seeing what you're saying.

Edit: Oh, I mean in terms of the possible ambiguity without the comma.

[LastFootnote]

Turn start -> Call: -all Cards, +5 Cards.

Aaaaargh! You killed Dominion!

Sorry, I'm honestly not seeing what you're saying.

I think he's saying that if space were the only issue, Dominion cards could be a lot more terse. I'm really glad they're not, though.

[market squire]

"Start of your turn"
How does Guide interact with Durations and Prince?
Do I resolve Guide before or after Tactician draw for example? (After would be a poor choice - swapping 10 for 5, but cleaning up the first five and then drawing another five for Tactician would be nice.)

You choose!

Can you use Guide's mulligan ability in the exact turn you played via Prince?
(Okay, if you want something more realistic: via a Princed Throne Room/ Herald)

[werothegreat]

" for " is even less space!

Dude.

Turn start -> Call: -all Cards, +5 Cards.

Sorry, I'm honestly not seeing what you're saying.

DO YOU EVEN CODE, BRUH

[popsofctown]

I assumed the sentences were grammatically correct, to follow the law of charitable judgments, which means I interpreted the commas to be parenthetical commas.  So the fact that you actually get a benefit for calling the cards is just a parenthetical expression, not the focus of the sentence.  Gaining a card costing up to 6$ is pretty minor and unimportant, what's awesome man, is you may call the card, call it anytime you like, after a gain and before anything else happens, but other than that anytime you want man.

[werothegreat]

"Start of your turn"
How does Guide interact with Durations and Prince?
Do I resolve Guide before or after Tactician draw for example? (After would be a poor choice - swapping 10 for 5, but cleaning up the first five and then drawing another five for Tactician would be nice.)

You choose!

Can you use Guide's mulligan ability in the exact turn you played via Prince?
(Okay, if you want something more realistic: via a Princed Throne Room/ Herald/ Golem)

Uhhhh, no?  You can use it on an Outpost turn, though?  Which would be freaking awesome, by the way.

Princing a Guide would be pretty stupid, honestly.

[Donald X.]

The word "to" is the delimiter, though. You do A to do B. If you didn't do A, you can't just do B. I'm not trying to restart this discussion, though. Really it's unimportant as long as the card is clear. And the final form is clear.

Vampire Weekend - Oxford Comma

[Witherweaver]

[Witherweaver]

Turn start -> Call: -all Cards, +5 Cards.

Aaaaargh! You killed Dominion!

Sorry, I'm honestly not seeing what you're saying.

I think he's saying that if space were the only issue, Dominion cards could be a lot more terse. I'm really glad they're not, though.

I fixed my post.  I'm not seeing where the ambiguity is between ", for " and " for" or ", to " and " to ".

[werothegreat]

Strange 80's woman

I'm just glad this wasn't Call Me, Maybe.

[Witherweaver]

Amazing 80's woman

I'm just glad this wasn't Call Me, Maybe.

Fixed that for you.

[crlundy]

I'd been wondering what the new card color would be! Man, the gradient on that Treasure-Reserve is subtle. I'm also surprised it's called a Tavern Mat and not a Reserve Mat. I feel like Dominion usually chooses straightforwardness over flavorfulness. (It's a VP mat not a Landowner's Mat or something.) I wonder what the Tavern Mat art will look like. It also seems counterintuitive that calling cards doesn't put them in play, but I'm guessing this was to balance Peddler, Horn of Plenty, etc.

Wero pointed out that it DOES put them into play. But I think it's kind of funny that you find the opposite to be counter-intuitive... my impression when playing with these was that it was confusing that they were put into play, given that they weren't being played. I would have thought that they should just go to your discard. I'm guessing that they don't because Donald didn't want the possibility of re-playing the card the same turn that you called it.

Whoops, misread something earlier, sorry. And I only think it's more intuitive because any time non-Reactions do something they end up in play. But we're all good, works like expected.

[Donald X.]

I fixed my post.  I'm not seeing where the ambiguity is between ", for " and " for" or ", to " and " to ".

"When X, you may A to B and C" can be parsed as "When X happens, first I can A to B, and then, regardless of that, I can C." Such is Human Perversity.

[chris3145]

I assumed the sentences were grammatically correct, to follow the law of charitable judgments, which means I interpreted the commas to be parenthetical commas.  So the fact that you actually get a benefit for calling the cards is just a parenthetical expression, not the focus of the sentence.  Gaining a card costing up to 6$ is pretty minor and unimportant, what's awesome man, is you may call the card, call it anytime you like, after a gain and before anything else happens, but other than that anytime you want man.

They can't be parenthetical commas because the rest of the sentence is grammatically incorrect if you remove the commas and the clause between them.

[LastFootnote]

I don't foresee this comma discussion going anywhere. So hey, how about these great new cards?

I underbuy Duplicate and am generally in the camp that thinks it looks weak. You can call it on the turn you play it, but it hurts your buying power by being a dead terminal that turn. And it can miss a shuffle while you're waiting for it to really pay off. But the potential benefit from Duplicate is great, even without cost reducers. I particularly like calling multiple Duplicates on the same gain.

[allanfieldhouse]

I think it would be clearer with no comma, but hey, it's not my game. I understand what the cards are saying, and I'll get used to it.

[Witherweaver]

I fixed my post.  I'm not seeing where the ambiguity is between ", for " and " for" or ", to " and " to ".

"When X, you may A to B and C" can be parsed as "When X happens, first I can A to B, and then, regardless of that, I can C." Such is Human Perversity.

Ahhhhhhh, I get it now. 

[Witherweaver]

I don't foresee this comma discussion going anywhere. So hey, how about these great new cards?

I underbuy Duplicate and am generally in the camp that thinks it looks weak. You can call it on the turn you play it, but it hurts your buying power by being a dead terminal that turn. And it can miss a shuffle while you're waiting for it to really pay off. But the potential benefit from Duplicate is great, even without cost reducers. I particularly like calling multiple Duplicates on the same gain.

Also, I would think more control over game ending conditions.

[LastFootnote]

I fixed my post.  I'm not seeing where the ambiguity is between ", for " and " for" or ", to " and " to ".

"When X, you may A to B and C" can be parsed as "When X happens, first I can A to B, and then, regardless of that, I can C." Such is Human Perversity.

Ahhhhhhh, I get it now.

Yeah, that convinced me as well.

[werothegreat]

I don't foresee this comma discussion going anywhere. So hey, how about these great new cards?

I underbuy Duplicate and am generally in the camp that thinks it looks weak. You can call it on the turn you play it, but it hurts your buying power by being a dead terminal that turn. And it can miss a shuffle while you're waiting for it to really pay off. But the potential benefit from Duplicate is great, even without cost reducers. I particularly like calling multiple Duplicates on the same gain.

Also, I would think more control over game ending conditions.

"I Stonemason a Hunting Grounds, gaining 3 Duchies, calling 5 Duplicates to gain the rest of the Duchies."