Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]

Author Topic: 2nd Edition Rules  (Read 27681 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2466
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: September 24, 2016, 07:41:22 pm by Beyond Awesome »
Logged

Tables

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2816
  • Build more Bridges in the King's Court!
  • Respect: +3349
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2016, 07:47:18 pm »
+4

Oh screw you. I was getting ready for bed.
Logged
...spin-offs are still better for all of the previously cited reasons.
But not strictly better, because the spinoff can have a different cost than the expansion.

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3458
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2016, 08:24:34 pm »
0

These cards are all straight bangers. Well done.

And the Base Cards are even better, more clear for new players. Definitely at least getting the full new base set.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

pm me if you wanna do stuff for the blog

they/them

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2466
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2016, 08:26:24 pm »
0

I'm not actually sure what to think of the treasures. New players tend to get confused by my base treasures, but I think the giant numbers covering the art on the ones are distracting. I'm not sure which ones, I'm going to use.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 440
  • Respect: +703
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2016, 08:32:23 pm »
+13

Dominion (second edition)
Removed:
Adventurer
Chancellor
Feast
Spy
Thief
Woodcutter


Added:
Quote
Artisan
Types: Action
Cost: $6
Gain a card to your hand costing up to $5. Put a card from your hand on top of your deck.

Quote
Bandit
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
Gain a Gold. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Treasure other than Copper, and discards the rest.

Quote
Harbinger
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may put a card from it on top of your deck.

Quote
Merchant
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. The first time you play a Silver this turn, +$1.

Quote
Poacher
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +1 Action, +$1. Discard a card per empty Supply pile.

Quote
Sentry
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card, +1 Action. Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Trash and\or discard any number of them. Put the rest back on top in any order.

Quote
Vassal
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+$2. Discard the top card of your deck. If it is an Action, you may play it.

Dominion: Intrigue (second edition):
Removed:
Coppersmith
Great Hall
Saboteur
Scout
Secret Chamber
Tribute


Added:
Quote
Courtier
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Reveal a card from your hand. For each type it has (Action, Attack, etc.), choose one: +1 Action; or +1 Buy; or +$3; or gain a Gold (choices must be different).

Quote
Diplomat
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. If you have 5 or fewer cards in hand, +2 Actions.
---
When another player plays an Attack, you may first reveal this from a hand of 5 or more cards to draw 2 cards then discard 3.

Quote
Lurker
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Choose one: Trash an Action card from the Supply; or gain an Action card from the trash.

Quote
Mill
Types: Action, Victory
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +1 Action. You may discard 2 cards for +$2.
1VP

Quote
Patrol
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the Victory cards and Curses into your hand. Put the rest back in any order.

Quote
Replace
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $2 more than it. If the gained card is an Action or Treasure, put it onto your deck; if it's a Victory card, each other player gains a Curse.

Quote
Secret Passage
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Cards, +1 Action. Put a card from your hand anywhere in your deck.
Logged
Dominion: Avarice 1.1a, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards and Edicts (updated Oct 18, 2021)

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3500
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2016, 08:58:42 pm »
0

A bit sad to see Coppersmith go, but I do have Intrigue, so no biggie. Secret Chamber and Chancellor too, in a way, but not as much.

From Base, Artisan and Vassal look cool. From Intrigue, Courtier, Diplomat, Lurker and Secret Passage seem interesting.

Good to see Thief and Scout "fixed".

Surprised that there's 3 peddler variants in base now!
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2016, 09:18:41 pm »
0

Go scout2!
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2016, 10:54:32 pm »
+1

My big takeaway is that Moat's art looks a lot bluer.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2016, 12:24:25 am »
+8

IRONWORKS DOESN'T BLUE-DOG ANYMORE

IT SAYS "IF THE GAINED CARD"
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

J Reggie

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 844
  • Shuffle iT Username: J Reggie
  • Respect: +1492
    • View Profile
    • Jeff Rosenthal Music
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2016, 12:32:35 am »
+1

IRONWORKS DOESN'T BLUE-DOG ANYMORE

IT SAYS "IF THE GAINED CARD"

OMG this is like worse than the Masquerade thing  :o  I'll miss you little blue doggy  :'(

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2016, 12:38:04 am »
+2

IRONWORKS DOESN'T BLUE-DOG ANYMORE

IT SAYS "IF THE GAINED CARD"

OMG this is like worse than the Masquerade thing  :o  I'll miss you little blue doggy  :'(

Well, I mean, it still functions the exact same way.  It's just a lot clearer in the text now.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1797
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #11 on: September 25, 2016, 12:44:00 am »
+1

I like Lurker! It comboes with Fea...

Never mind.

Sad to see GH go, but I'm happy to see it stay.

Courtier seems the most situational of the bunch, but even without support it should be worth buying at times, a 5 dollar Ruined Market is not to be sneered at. (gold gaining can also occasionally be nice I guess)

I'm sad to see Harem's flavor stay, but no biggie there.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2016, 12:49:15 am by Accatitippi »
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1364
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2016, 01:01:17 am »
0

IRONWORKS DOESN'T BLUE-DOG ANYMORE

IT SAYS "IF THE GAINED CARD"

OMG this is like worse than the Masquerade thing  :o  I'll miss you little blue doggy  :'(

Well, I mean, it still functions the exact same way.  It's just a lot clearer in the text now.

No, wouldn't you, at that point, get the +$1? After revealing trader, silver then becomes the "gained card."
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2016, 01:03:42 am »
+2

IRONWORKS DOESN'T BLUE-DOG ANYMORE

IT SAYS "IF THE GAINED CARD"

OMG this is like worse than the Masquerade thing  :o  I'll miss you little blue doggy  :'(

Well, I mean, it still functions the exact same way.  It's just a lot clearer in the text now.

No, wouldn't you, at that point, get the +$1? After revealing trader, silver then becomes the "gained card."

Ironworks didn't gain that.  Trader did.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
  • Respect: +25699
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2016, 01:18:29 am »
+1

I'm sad to see Harem's flavor stay, but no biggie there.
I offered to rename it. The problem is it's one of a few cards to depict a real person.
Logged

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2466
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2016, 01:23:40 am »
0

My overall impression:

Aesthetics: The cover arts are an improvement, most notably for Dominion. Moat with the blue tint works better for the Reaction frame. And, having more women represented is much appreciated and makes the game feel more diverse. I feel the money and VP could have been improved instead of having the giant symbols blocking the art. These treasures are an improvement over the bland ones we originally had, but don't look as good as the Base Cards ones. With that said, I do use Base Cards, and a lot of new players get confused, so I think these newer treasures will make it easier for players to figure out the values and costs of treasures and VP. In the end, I'll probably end up using these new ones since I tend to introduce a lot of people to Dominion. Also, the larger fonts on cards, and bolding stuff is much appreciated.

As an Introduction to Dominion: I feel a lot of bad cards are gone, and we are getting definite improvements that will make the game better to introduce newer players to. However, I feel that not all problems are solved. I think one more +Buy in Base would help new players set up engines. Also, I feel the recommended first kingdom should have removed moat, since my experience showing new players that card first makes them want to have it in every kingdom with attacks.

I think I will try playing the 2nd edition alone with new players for a little while just to see how it works, and how I feel new players connect with the cards. But, I think overall, this will be better for people learning Dominion. The 2nd Edition does have a distinct disadvantage in that likely millions of copies of 1st edition Dominion have been sold and with all the deck builders out these days, Dominion is not as popular as it used to be. In other words, I feel this should have come out a few years earlier instead of now. But, hey, better late than never.

Also, I feel we still have some weak cards still left such as Bureaucrat and Mine. I guess new players like Treasures, so there's that going as a plus, but both of these cards are pretty weak. So, maybe Donald X. could have been more aggressive in updating the main Dominion game.

Removed Cards:

Chancellor: Almost always useless and rarely bought. You only got this if you had nothing better to buy on $3. Honestly, I'm not going to miss this card.

Thief: This card is weak, weak, weak. Arguably weaker than Scout. It also has the problem of scaring new players. I know most people new Dominion hate this card with a passion, so good riddance. Now, if only Possession could get a replacement.

Woodcutter: Okay, people bought this card, but only for the +Buy, not because they actually wanted it in their deck. As far as +Buy cards goes, Woodcutter is outright boring. I'm not going to miss it. Still, though, for the sake of new players, I feel Base Dominion should have added one more +Buy card.

Feast: Lame card is lame. I do admit, though, to sometimes opening Feast to get a power $5-card. But, honestly, who really likes Feast? I'm glad to see it go.

Adventurer: Potentially the weakest card in the game. Getting rid of this only makes Dominion better.

Spy: Yah, I rarely ever bought this. It just isn't worth it.

Scout: Do I need to say anything?

Coppersmith: I very rarely bought this card. I know some people are sad to see this go, but usually you just trash your coppers in an engine and rarely does this card ever shine. I think I actually buy Chancellor more than this card. Personally, I won't miss this card.

Great Hall: Doesn't really do anything. We're getting Mill. Now, when is the 2nd edition of Seaside coming out? I would be more than happy to see Pearl Diver go. And, yes, I know Donald X. said we aren't getting a 2nd edition of Seaside. Though, I can always dream.

Secret Chamber: This reaction is always a bitch to resolve. I mean, it was a nice card to use with Scrying Pool, but rarely was this card ever good. Out of all the cards, this is probably the most deserving to go just because of all the AP it creates and also how much it slows down the game. Trust me, some people I know can spend forever deciding how to resolve SC.

Tribute: I only ever buy this if I am desperate for a village. The card is wonky, and I'm not really going to miss it.

Saboteur: This card is weak, and to new players it seems like an awful nasty attack in an expansion that is already filled to the brim with nasty attacks. While Donald X. intended Intrigue to be about choices and alt. vp, we all know that's not really the case and Intrigue is really the evil attack expansion. Losing this card is an honest blessing.

Intrigue Base Cards: Saving people $5 is a smart move. If people really want more treasures they can buy the Base treasure cards.

NEW CARDS

Artisan: This replaces the $6 dollar slot that Adventurer took, and I guess it sort of resembles Feast. This is a lot like Altar, but instead you put the card directly into hand and then must put another card on top of your deck. Overall, this seems solid. We all now how good Altar is. While this doesn't trash, putting the card into your hand seems a reasonable trade-off. I think this will be a similar power level to Altar, but as far as cards for new players goes, this miles better than either Feast or Adventurer.

Harbinger: This reminds me a lot of Scheme. You get back a key card and get to use it again before your next shuffle. We know how good Scheme is. I expect this to be of a similar power level. This seems to be the Chancellor replacement. Again, this miles better for introducing new players.

Merchant: Hmm, so it can be a Peddler for $3. I think this is okay, but you either need a high silver-density or be drawing most of your deck. I think this is probably slightly better than Caravan Guard since you get the money right away. Although, like Caravan Guard, it does have a wonkiness to it.

Vassal: Okay, this card is weird. So, essentially, I play this which allows me to play another action and I get $2 extra on top. I don't really like that this is terminal. As for power level, I'm not sure, but this seems weak. I guess this is meant to replace Woodcutter and Chancellor as the terminal $2. Still though, I don't really know how often I will want to buy this card. Ehh, it's got to be better than Woodcutter or Chancellor, so there's that.

Poacher: This is pretty solid. In the beginning, piles likely won't run out soon. If you get 2 or 3 of these, you should be fine. Later on though, they kind of suck, first turning into an Oasis, and then an awful Oasis. Still, though, this card seems pretty decent to me. Not the strongest $4, but not the worst either. Maybe a mid-$4 or so.

Bandit: New players love Gold. I guess having a gold gainer like this is a good idea. This is vastly better than Thief. Still though, the card seems on the weaker side of $5's, but I think players learning Dominion will dig it, so yah. Still though, I think this is overall a weak card.

Sentry: This is strong. Being able to trash two cards is no joke. Sure, you can't trash from your hand which makes JD so strong, but early on Sentry seems very solid. I have a feeling this is an exceptionally good trasher. I do think newer players will get confused with both this and Chapel, but maybe by having another trash card in Base, they will get the idea that copper and estates are bad.

Lurker: This seems nice. I guess Donald X. realized Rogue really wasn't all that great. This allows pile control and can also help you get expensive cards quicker. Though, you have to be careful that your opponent doesn't swipe your stuff.  The fact this is only non-terminal and $2 is really good. Still, though, seeing how the closest cards to this are Graverobber and Rogue, it's really hard to tell just how strong this card is until we actually start playing with it.

Diplomat: Good bye, SC. The Reaction is super good. And, the fact this can be a Lost City is awesome. This reaction seems solid. Though, in games without Attacks, I don't see it getting bought much, though, this seems a great candidate for Draw to X engines especially since this is a village on top.

Mill: This is a more interesting Great Hall. It kind of uses the effect from SC. It doesn't seem super strong, but it's decent, I guess. Actually I have no clue. Well, it's more interesting to have around than Great Hall, let's just say that.

Secret Passage: I understand that this is essentially a cantrip, but this seems really strong, you can potentially set up engines for future turns, and early on, you can tuck estates at the bottom of a shuffle. This seems to be a slightly stronger Fugitive. I mean Fugitive isn't great, but it's not bad either. I think Secret Passage will be slightly above mid-tier as far as $4's are concerned.

Courtier: Yuck, this looks weak. Okay, I agree this is better than Tribute, but usually at best, you are looking at 2 options, 3 if you're lucky to have a Duration-Attack. Regardless, none of the options are that exciting. I guess if you need +Buy, you buy this, but I really foresee this being considered one of the weakest $5's in Dominion. I'm surprised this actually made it to print seeing how this is about improving the expansions.

Patrol: Wow! Scout becomes good. Early on, this will be great terminal draw, especially when no trashing is around. Mid-game it's a $5-Smithy which is actually very weak, but then once you start greening, it picks up again. Oh, and it also draws curses. As far as terminal draw goes, I think this is just below Journeyman and Catacombs. Probably on a similar power level to Rabble. Though, I'm surprised, we are getting this in Intrigue. We already have Nobles and Torturer, like Attacks, Intrigue seems also heavy on draw.

Replace: A remodel variant is always welcome. The attack is weak, but seriously, did we need another attack in this set. Also, this is the third card in Intrigue that can dish out curses. Nonetheless, the whole curse giving thing comes into play later on. Earlier in the game, you are going to be using this to gain engine components. This is nowhere near Butcher territory power level, but this will be a decent card to have in most engines.

Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2016, 01:24:23 am »
0

IRONWORKS DOESN'T BLUE-DOG ANYMORE

IT SAYS "IF THE GAINED CARD"

OMG this is like worse than the Masquerade thing  :o  I'll miss you little blue doggy  :'(

Well, I mean, it still functions the exact same way.  It's just a lot clearer in the text now.

No, wouldn't you, at that point, get the +$1? After revealing trader, silver then becomes the "gained card."

Ironworks didn't gain that.  Trader did.

Exactly. The "it" on Ironworks always meant "the gained card", which itself means "the card that you gained due to the gain a card instruction when you played Ironworks", so there's no rule change here.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #17 on: September 25, 2016, 01:31:01 am »
0

@BeyondAwesome: Bureaucrat and Mine are weak, but they're playable.  This is in contrast to most of the removed cards.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2466
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2016, 01:38:02 am »
+1

@BeyondAwesome: Bureaucrat and Mine are weak, but they're playable.  This is in contrast to most of the removed cards.

Not that playable.
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3296
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4443
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #19 on: September 25, 2016, 01:57:12 am »
0

Ooh, the rule booklets now explain what horizontal lines mean and what Reaction cards are. Nice.
Logged

singletee

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 915
  • Shuffle iT Username: singletee
  • Gold, Silver, Copper, Let's Jam!
  • Respect: +1609
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #20 on: September 25, 2016, 02:23:32 am »
+1

Play Harbinger/Secret Passage and topdeck an Action. Your Vassal is now guaranteed to hit.

Secret Passage is surely weaker than Fugitive, as I recall reading that Fugitive was found to be too strong for $4 and too weak for $5.

I don't think Courtier will be too weak. Should be pretty strong in BM. Early on you can use it to gain Gold; later on get the +$3.

The only removed card I think I will miss is Coppersmith.

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1797
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #21 on: September 25, 2016, 02:26:10 am »
0

How good do you think Patrol-BM will be? As it improves two turns without increasing collision fears, I'm guessing pretty good, but I'd love to see some simulations.
Logged

traces Around

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 328
  • Shuffle iT Username: tracer
  • Respect: +438
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #22 on: September 25, 2016, 02:53:26 am »
+1

How good do you think Patrol-BM will be? As it improves two turns without increasing collision fears, I'm guessing pretty good, but I'd love to see some simulations.

A bit worse than Journeyman or Catacombs and a bit better than Rabble. Sucking up garbage is not overly relevant until towards the end of the game and Patrol is really really good at missing shuffles. All $5 +3 card non-major-atacking BM is basically the same though. Calling this a fixed Scout is being really generous to Ruined Village and really ungenerous to Smithy.

Most of this has already been said in discord, but I will repeat it here:

For all the times you would be willing to pay 10 for a ruined market, Courtier has you covered. It is pretty weak, but will get the job done when you need something that it gives, whether buy, gain, or cash. Conveniently does it non-terminally or does two jobs sometimes.

Great Hall was better than Mill is. The discard option is extremely weak and the few tricks that Great Hall would do are much easier to accomplish at a cost of $3 than $4.

Poacher is my favorite card of the new ones. It has the Lost City effect of the pile naturally splitting somewhat evenly, which is cool.

Diplomat as only village is a pain. Getting thin is rather good. Courtier works well in this scenario.

kieranmillar

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 152
  • Shuffle iT Username: kieranmillar
  • Respect: +355
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #23 on: September 25, 2016, 03:09:13 am »
+1

These cards are all awesome and am happy with which cards were removed. These sets are really cool now.
Logged

Aleimon Thimble

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 698
  • Shuffle iT Username: Aleimon Thimble
  • Respect: +711
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #24 on: September 25, 2016, 05:51:54 am »
0

I don't have time to read everything yet, but I've now officially started mourning the loss of Coppersmith. You will be missed. :(

I'll comment on the new cards when I have the time.
Logged
[...] The God of heaven has given you Dominion [...] (Daniel 2:37)

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #25 on: September 25, 2016, 08:49:17 am »
0

Mill at least does something, unlike Great Hall. It's not boring. And it synergizes with Diplomat.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Orange

  • 2012 WBC Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • Shuffle iT Username: Orange
  • 2012 WBC Champion
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #26 on: September 25, 2016, 10:20:52 am »
0

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #27 on: September 25, 2016, 10:30:36 am »
+1

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?

The new way makes zero sense for digging cards.  The new way also means you can slide Stash on top of your deck before the few cards you would have drawn first, which is also silly.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

stechafle

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
  • Shuffle iT Username: stechafle
  • Respect: +97
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #28 on: September 25, 2016, 10:32:20 am »
0

Bandit can trash Platinum. Ouch!
Logged

Aleimon Thimble

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 698
  • Shuffle iT Username: Aleimon Thimble
  • Respect: +711
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2016, 10:33:42 am »
0

So now that I have time for a more detailed opinion, I'll say the following.

I'm very, very enthusiastic about all of the changes to the Base game. The 6 cards that were removed were not only the 6 cards I predicted, but also the exact same 6 cards I would have killed. They're all very weak, most of them are rather boring and mostly obsolete. Some of the new cards are also really exciting, I'm especially looking forward to playing with Artisan, Bandit and Sentry. Bandit is a very nice fixed Thief variant, Artisan reminds me of Altar but I think it plays different enough that it's definitely worth the slot, and Sentry is the oh-so-badly needed extra trasher. It's kind of a fixed Lookout in a way, because you're not actually forced to trash the cards you reveal. Merchant and Poacher look kinda weak, but the set certainly needs a couple of extra cheapish cantrips like that, especially now that Vassal exists. Overall, love it, and I am definitely going to buy the updated Base set if it ever comes out here.

As enthusiastic as I am about the Base game, I'm somewhat disappointed in the new Intrigue and I think I actually liked the old one better overall. Although I was a bit fearful of it already, it really sucks that Coppersmith is gone. Sure, it was a bit narrow, but still one of the coolest cards in Intrigue, and it certainly didn't deserve to get the axe imo. I understand that Saboteur needed to go, even though I kinda liked it, but I had hoped for another trashing attack in its place instead of another junker. We have very few trashing attacks already when compared to junking attacks. Other than that, I'm still sad that the Masquerade pin got destroyed.

I also don't really like most of the new cards at first glance. Courtier looks horribly overpowered, like a slightly weaker Governor without the downside. Diplomat looks confusing and not very useful as a Reaction card. Lurker is weird, it seems out of place in Intrigue and looks like a Dark Ages takeout. I also don't think the set needed Replace, it already has Upgrade. The remaining cards are nice, I guess; Secret Passage is a clever idea, Patrol is an interesting take on a Scout-ish card, and Mill is a pretty cool mashup of Great Hall and Secret Chamber. Still, overall I'll probably need a lot of time to get used to the new Intrigue, I'm not sure if I'll ever buy it, and I'll definitely refuse to ever remove Coppersmith from my own set.
Logged
[...] The God of heaven has given you Dominion [...] (Daniel 2:37)

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #30 on: September 25, 2016, 10:40:24 am »
0

Bandit can trash Platinum. Ouch!

And Fool's Gold.  And Bank.  And Spoils.  And...

Diplomat looks confusing and not very useful as a Reaction card.

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

It also lets you find your other Reactions.  And combos with Tunnel.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

JW

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
  • Shuffle iT Username: JW
  • Respect: +1792
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #31 on: September 25, 2016, 10:41:30 am »
+2

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

You need 5 or more cards in hand to use Diplomat's reaction. But it's still very useful against Militia because after you discard down to 3 you're guaranteed to trigger Diplomat's +Actions.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2016, 10:43:01 am by JW »
Logged

J Reggie

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 844
  • Shuffle iT Username: J Reggie
  • Respect: +1492
    • View Profile
    • Jeff Rosenthal Music
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #32 on: September 25, 2016, 10:42:58 am »
0

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

It also lets you find your other Reactions.  And combos with Tunnel.

Well You only get to do the thing once unless you had more than 5 cards in hand.

Edit:  ninja'd

Aleimon Thimble

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 698
  • Shuffle iT Username: Aleimon Thimble
  • Respect: +711
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2016, 10:44:05 am »
+1

I guess this proves my point that it is confusing? :P
Logged
[...] The God of heaven has given you Dominion [...] (Daniel 2:37)

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3458
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2016, 10:45:16 am »
+9

I completely do not understand why anyone thinks the Masquerade pin made Dominion a better game.

As much as you might have enjoyed pulling it off, just in terms of game design, mutually enjoyable play experience for all, etc. it's obvious why the game was much worse off for having it than for not having it. Playing against it could ruin Dominion for players, easily. It was just an awful game mechanic that you guys just enjoyed exploiting, not some treasured part of the Dominion experience that made for quality gameplay. I'm glad it's gone. I'm glad the Bureaucrat pin is gone. Dominion is better off for it.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2016, 04:19:44 pm by Chris is me »
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

pm me if you wanna do stuff for the blog

they/them

ignorentmen

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 101
  • Respect: +51
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2016, 10:47:52 am »
+6

Love that the new card art has more females represented!

All of this, this whole process, getting rid of cards players don't like, changing confusing rules, adding new cards, adding females to the card art, using input from members of this forum. It all just shows a great level of dedication and quality from Donald and Rio Grande Games. Being listen to the buying audience shouldn't be a rarity in today's world, but it is. A company that can listen deserves to be praised. Plainly put, it is just awesome! So thanks!
Logged

Aleimon Thimble

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 698
  • Shuffle iT Username: Aleimon Thimble
  • Respect: +711
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #36 on: September 25, 2016, 11:42:16 am »
0

Love that the new card art has more females represented!

All of this, this whole process, getting rid of cards players don't like, changing confusing rules, adding new cards, adding females to the card art, using input from members of this forum. It all just shows a great level of dedication and quality from Donald and Rio Grande Games. Being listen to the buying audience shouldn't be a rarity in today's world, but it is. A company that can listen deserves to be praised. Plainly put, it is just awesome! So thanks!

That's certainly true. My critique towards the new Intrigue is not meant as a critique towards Donald or the overhauling process itself; I think it's a good idea in general, especially considering potential future players. And since the Base set is still the, well, base set, it's way more important to get right than Intrigue; you can just skip Intrigue if you don't like it, especially now that it's no longer a standalone.
Logged
[...] The God of heaven has given you Dominion [...] (Daniel 2:37)

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #37 on: September 25, 2016, 12:56:48 pm »
0

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?

The new way makes zero sense for digging cards.  The new way also means you can slide Stash on top of your deck before the few cards you would have drawn first, which is also silly.

Yeah this is weird. First off, if I play a Watchtower as the last card in my hand, do I really have to count my deck to see if I have less than 6 cards in it before I can just start drawing? I'm curious if this is really meant to be a rule change, or if it was just the easiest way to state that you draw what you can from your old deck and the rest from your discard pile after shuffling it.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #38 on: September 25, 2016, 01:07:32 pm »
0

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

You need 5 or more cards in hand to use Diplomat's reaction. But it's still very useful against Militia because after you discard down to 3 you're guaranteed to trigger Diplomat's +Actions.

So if my opponent plays Council Room, Council Room, Militia:
  • I'm being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 7 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
  • I'm still being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 6 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
  • I'm still being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 5 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
So I've drawn 6 cards total, and discarded 9?  Does that work?
Logged

Mic Qsenoch

  • 2015 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1709
  • Respect: +4329
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #39 on: September 25, 2016, 01:20:34 pm »
+3

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

You need 5 or more cards in hand to use Diplomat's reaction. But it's still very useful against Militia because after you discard down to 3 you're guaranteed to trigger Diplomat's +Actions.

So if my opponent plays Council Room, Council Room, Militia:
  • I'm being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 7 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
  • I'm still being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 6 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
  • I'm still being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 5 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
So I've drawn 6 cards total, and discarded 9?  Does that work?

Yes
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #40 on: September 25, 2016, 02:31:47 pm »
0

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

You need 5 or more cards in hand to use Diplomat's reaction. But it's still very useful against Militia because after you discard down to 3 you're guaranteed to trigger Diplomat's +Actions.

Right, right.  Well, it lets you "play Warehouse" instead of being affected by Minion, Pillage or Taxman.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2466
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #41 on: September 25, 2016, 03:00:15 pm »
0

I just realized that with Bandit and Courtier now every Dominion set has at least one gold-gainer. I guess some people just love gold.
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1325
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1384
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #42 on: September 25, 2016, 03:16:20 pm »
+2

I just realized that with Bandit and Courtier now every Dominion set has at least one gold-gainer. I guess some people just love gold.
Gold is fine, man, what do people have against gold. They can't all be the best $6 card ever.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
  • Respect: +25699
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #43 on: September 25, 2016, 03:45:56 pm »
0

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?
You say "for instance," but the only thing it could possibly change is Stash.

The old way worked fine when the only verb was "draw." It was confusing when there were more verbs. Consider Lookout with only one card left.

And over the years I have seen lots of people do it the new way, even though it wasn't in the rules.
Logged

J Reggie

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 844
  • Shuffle iT Username: J Reggie
  • Respect: +1492
    • View Profile
    • Jeff Rosenthal Music
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #44 on: September 25, 2016, 03:51:03 pm »
+1

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?
You say "for instance," but the only thing it could possibly change is Stash.

The old way worked fine when the only verb was "draw." It was confusing when there were more verbs. Consider Lookout with only one card left.

And over the years I have seen lots of people do it the new way, even though it wasn't in the rules.

Yeah, it's a lot easier this way. And enough people do it IRL that I'm kind of sick of saying "wellllll... technically you're not supposed to do that, but it doesn't really matter do whatever". So this is another "thank you Donald" moment rather than "WTF Donald".

Orange

  • 2012 WBC Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 277
  • Shuffle iT Username: Orange
  • 2012 WBC Champion
  • Respect: +278
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #45 on: September 25, 2016, 03:53:25 pm »
0

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?
You say "for instance," but the only thing it could possibly change is Stash.

The old way worked fine when the only verb was "draw." It was confusing when there were more verbs. Consider Lookout with only one card left.

And over the years I have seen lots of people do it the new way, even though it wasn't in the rules.

I said "for instance" because I really wasn't sure if there were other things that could be impacted.  I didn't have much of an opinion on if it was significant, thus the question.  Thanks for the response.
Logged

JW

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 979
  • Shuffle iT Username: JW
  • Respect: +1792
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #46 on: September 25, 2016, 04:13:58 pm »
0

I'm glad the Bureaucrat pin is gone. Dominion is better off for it.

I'm not sure what you are referring to with Bureaucrat. A Bureaucrat-Masquerade pin is still possible, but has always effectively required a hand-size attack for a near-total lock. See Stef's remarkable game here, for example: https://www.twitch.tv/stef_42/v/44303501
Logged

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3458
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #47 on: September 25, 2016, 04:19:16 pm »
0

I'm glad the Bureaucrat pin is gone. Dominion is better off for it.

I'm not sure what you are referring to with Bureaucrat. A Bureaucrat-Masquerade pin is still possible, but has always effectively required a hand-size attack for a near-total lock. See Stef's remarkable game here, for example: https://www.twitch.tv/stef_42/v/44303501

Sorry, I misspoke and forgot Bureaucrat was left in the game lol. Yeah it's still there.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

pm me if you wanna do stuff for the blog

they/them

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #48 on: September 25, 2016, 04:40:49 pm »
0

I completely do not understand why anyone thinks the Masquerade pin made Dominion a better game.

As much as you might have enjoyed pulling it off, just in terms of game design, mutually enjoyable play experience for all, etc. it's obvious why the game was much worse off for having it than for not having it. Playing against it could ruin Dominion for players, easily. It was just an awful game mechanic that you guys just enjoyed exploiting, not some treasured part of the Dominion experience that made for quality gameplay. I'm glad it's gone.
I don't mind it being removed but it was an interesting thing that would show up once in a thousand games (because of being a 3-card combo). Not common enough to create degenerate games on a regular basis, but just barely common enough that long-time players will see it a few times, making it fun for analysis and stories.

That said, I've barely played with Adventures and later, so if Royal Carriage makes it a 2-card combo, then a fix was needed for sure.
Logged

Aleimon Thimble

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 698
  • Shuffle iT Username: Aleimon Thimble
  • Respect: +711
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #49 on: September 25, 2016, 05:03:37 pm »
+1

I completely do not understand why anyone thinks the Masquerade pin made Dominion a better game.

As much as you might have enjoyed pulling it off, just in terms of game design, mutually enjoyable play experience for all, etc. it's obvious why the game was much worse off for having it than for not having it. Playing against it could ruin Dominion for players, easily. It was just an awful game mechanic that you guys just enjoyed exploiting, not some treasured part of the Dominion experience that made for quality gameplay. I'm glad it's gone.
I don't mind it being removed but it was an interesting thing that would show up once in a thousand games (because of being a 3-card combo). Not common enough to create degenerate games on a regular basis, but just barely common enough that long-time players will see it a few times, making it fun for analysis and stories.

That said, I've barely played with Adventures and later, so if Royal Carriage makes it a 2-card combo, then a fix was needed for sure.

The Masquerade pin was never a three-card combo. Any discard attack with KC and Masquerade worked just fine for the full pin, but even without a discard attack it was a highly painful combo. A Kinged Masquerade with an empty hand is enough to get your opponent down to 2 cards in hand, and the other 3 cards in his hand will be trashed, so it's still a brutal combined discard-and-trashing attack. Royal Carriage could perform a full pin on its own, that's true.

Most people also think you have to trash down to a deck of only KC-KC-Goons-Masquerade. That's not at all necessary, you can play any engine as long as you trash all your Coppers and Estates, and you make sure that the last card you play is a Kinged Masquerade. The pin was way more flexible and had more finesse than people say.
Logged
[...] The God of heaven has given you Dominion [...] (Daniel 2:37)

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8172
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9630
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #50 on: September 25, 2016, 05:41:25 pm »
0

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?
You say "for instance," but the only thing it could possibly change is Stash.

The old way worked fine when the only verb was "draw." It was confusing when there were more verbs. Consider Lookout with only one card left.

And over the years I have seen lots of people do it the new way, even though it wasn't in the rules.

But the new way makes cards like Venture and Golem less clear. Do you just shuffle your discard pile immediately upon playing Golem, just in case?
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
  • Respect: +25699
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #51 on: September 25, 2016, 05:42:57 pm »
+1

But the new way makes cards like Venture and Golem less clear. Do you just shuffle your discard pile immediately upon playing Golem, just in case?
No, Golem and Venture reveal cards one at a time.
Logged

blueblimp

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2849
  • Respect: +1559
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #52 on: September 25, 2016, 07:23:47 pm »
0

I completely do not understand why anyone thinks the Masquerade pin made Dominion a better game.

As much as you might have enjoyed pulling it off, just in terms of game design, mutually enjoyable play experience for all, etc. it's obvious why the game was much worse off for having it than for not having it. Playing against it could ruin Dominion for players, easily. It was just an awful game mechanic that you guys just enjoyed exploiting, not some treasured part of the Dominion experience that made for quality gameplay. I'm glad it's gone.
I don't mind it being removed but it was an interesting thing that would show up once in a thousand games (because of being a 3-card combo). Not common enough to create degenerate games on a regular basis, but just barely common enough that long-time players will see it a few times, making it fun for analysis and stories.

That said, I've barely played with Adventures and later, so if Royal Carriage makes it a 2-card combo, then a fix was needed for sure.

The Masquerade pin was never a three-card combo. Any discard attack with KC and Masquerade worked just fine for the full pin, but even without a discard attack it was a highly painful combo. A Kinged Masquerade with an empty hand is enough to get your opponent down to 2 cards in hand, and the other 3 cards in his hand will be trashed, so it's still a brutal combined discard-and-trashing attack. Royal Carriage could perform a full pin on its own, that's true.

Most people also think you have to trash down to a deck of only KC-KC-Goons-Masquerade. That's not at all necessary, you can play any engine as long as you trash all your Coppers and Estates, and you make sure that the last card you play is a Kinged Masquerade. The pin was way more flexible and had more finesse than people say.
Any pin short of a full pin was bad because 1. your opponent gets to keep their best cards on each turn, 2. your opponent can often disrupt it by playing a single Masquerade, and 3. the kingdom has KC and Masquerade in it, and as such the strongest alternative strategy is probably very fast and hard to outrace.

It's true that there were several different 3-card combos that could do the pin, but they're still 3-card combos. It wasn't very common. Suppose there are 10 cards that complete the pin with KC and Masquerade. Then the chance of having pin in kingdom was very roughly 10^3 * (1/200)^2 * (10/200) = ~0.1%, so my 1-in-1000 guess was the right order of magnitude. :P

Edit: To be fair, I could be totally wrong on this, because the last time I was any good as a player was pre-Goko. But isotropic had KC+Masq appear together at higher frequency than today, so the 3-card combos should probably be _less_ common today if anything.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2016, 07:30:48 pm by blueblimp »
Logged

NolanA

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +53
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #53 on: September 26, 2016, 08:38:54 pm »
+2

How good do you think Patrol-BM will be? As it improves two turns without increasing collision fears, I'm guessing pretty good, but I'd love to see some simulations.

I ran simulations of some of the new cards.  My sims of Patrol were basic and did not include changing order of cards.  Patrol-BM was much better than Smithy, Council, or  Militia - Big Money.  It also held its own against Courtyard, Wharf, and Ghost Ship - Big Money, getting a 40+% win rate, so only losing by a small margin.  Bandit-BM and Patrol-BM were roughly tied overall.  However, the results against Bandit were quite different on different starts.  With a 4/3 start, Patrol easily won.  With a 5/2 start, Bandit easily won.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2016, 10:40:40 pm by NolanA »
Logged

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2528
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1642
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #54 on: September 29, 2016, 02:32:25 pm »
+1

I think the "Shuffling" section in the new Dominion rules is new.  It used to be that if I was drawing 3 and had 1 left in my deck, I drew the 1, could look at it, then shuffled and drew the other 2.  That has changed.  So now, for instance, I won't know what I drew on the first card (sans having deck contents memorized) before choosing where to put my Stashes.  Significant change?
You say "for instance," but the only thing it could possibly change is Stash.

The old way worked fine when the only verb was "draw." It was confusing when there were more verbs. Consider Lookout with only one card left.

And over the years I have seen lots of people do it the new way, even though it wasn't in the rules.

Yeah, it's a lot easier this way. And enough people do it IRL that I'm kind of sick of saying "wellllll... technically you're not supposed to do that, but it doesn't really matter do whatever". So this is another "thank you Donald" moment rather than "WTF Donald".

Won't there be a lot more of saying that now?
They: "I discard these 8 cards with Cellar, and then draw... 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6... oh, I have to shuffle."
You: "wellllll... technically you're not supposed to do that, but it doesn't really matter do whatever".

Deadlock39

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1722
  • Respect: +1758
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #55 on: September 29, 2016, 10:33:38 pm »
0

When I draw (more than 1), I almost always deal cards face down as I count, then pick them up. I'd recommend this if you want to conform to the rules exactly. I recommend not making any comments about the exact rule when playing because it generally just doesn't matter. Explaining the rule once is probably fine.

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #56 on: September 30, 2016, 09:18:11 am »
+5

I don't much like replacing "if you do" with "to" or "for".  But I've noticed I especially don't like it on Mill:

Quote
You may discard 2 cards, for +$2.

In ye olde days, we'd have known that this meant 1 card gets you nothing, 2 cards get you $2.  But in the newfangled style, it really sounds like 1 card gets you $2, 2 cards get you $4.
Logged

navical

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 196
  • Respect: +268
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #57 on: September 30, 2016, 09:57:49 am »
+1

I don't much like replacing "if you do" with "to" or "for".  But I've noticed I especially don't like it on Mill:

Quote
You may discard 2 cards, for +$2.

In ye olde days, we'd have known that this meant 1 card gets you nothing, 2 cards get you $2.  But in the newfangled style, it really sounds like 1 card gets you $2, 2 cards get you $4.

I assumed when I read Mill that not using "if you do" was deliberate and discarding 1 or 0 cards (if that was all you had left in your hand) still got you $2. Apparently that was wrong :/
Logged

ObtusePunubiris

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 124
  • Respect: +187
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #58 on: September 30, 2016, 10:57:59 am »
+3

I don't much like replacing "if you do" with "to" or "for".  But I've noticed I especially don't like it on Mill:

Quote
You may discard 2 cards, for +$2.

In ye olde days, we'd have known that this meant 1 card gets you nothing, 2 cards get you $2.  But in the newfangled style, it really sounds like 1 card gets you $2, 2 cards get you $4.

I assumed when I read Mill that not using "if you do" was deliberate and discarding 1 or 0 cards (if that was all you had left in your hand) still got you $2. Apparently that was wrong :/

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #59 on: September 30, 2016, 11:26:01 am »
+1

I don't much like replacing "if you do" with "to" or "for".  But I've noticed I especially don't like it on Mill:

Quote
You may discard 2 cards, for +$2.

In ye olde days, we'd have known that this meant 1 card gets you nothing, 2 cards get you $2.  But in the newfangled style, it really sounds like 1 card gets you $2, 2 cards get you $4.

I assumed when I read Mill that not using "if you do" was deliberate and discarding 1 or 0 cards (if that was all you had left in your hand) still got you $2. Apparently that was wrong :/

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

You are comparing to other cards because you know the other cards. Obscurity issues are relevant for new people, not experienced people, I think.
Logged

Chris is me

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2745
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chris is me
  • What do you want me to say?
  • Respect: +3458
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #60 on: September 30, 2016, 11:26:06 am »
0

I don't much like replacing "if you do" with "to" or "for".  But I've noticed I especially don't like it on Mill:

Quote
You may discard 2 cards, for +$2.

In ye olde days, we'd have known that this meant 1 card gets you nothing, 2 cards get you $2.  But in the newfangled style, it really sounds like 1 card gets you $2, 2 cards get you $4.

I assumed when I read Mill that not using "if you do" was deliberate and discarding 1 or 0 cards (if that was all you had left in your hand) still got you $2. Apparently that was wrong :/

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

That wording is even more different.

You may discard up to two cards, for $2

is different than

You may discard two cards, for +$2

because it offers a choice the other one doesn't. You can activate the ability with 2+ cards in hand and choose 0 or 1 cards from the hypothetical wording - the actual wording does not allow you to choose to discard less than 2 cards if you activate it.
Logged
Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/chrisisme2791

bug me on discord

pm me if you wanna do stuff for the blog

they/them

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #61 on: September 30, 2016, 11:26:31 am »
+1

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

...and if the intent was that you get +$2 only if you discard both cards, it would have read something like "You may discard exactly 2 cards, for +$2."

Any of those three would be unambiguous.  But the wording we got could refer to any of the three.

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #62 on: September 30, 2016, 11:31:11 am »
0

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

...and if the intent was that you get +$2 only if you discard both cards, it would have read something like "You may discard exactly 2 cards, for +$2."

Any of those three would be unambiguous.  But the wording we got could refer to any of the three.

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1681
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1812
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #63 on: September 30, 2016, 11:37:23 am »
0

I don't much like replacing "if you do" with "to" or "for".  But I've noticed I especially don't like it on Mill:

Quote
You may discard 2 cards, for +$2.

In ye olde days, we'd have known that this meant 1 card gets you nothing, 2 cards get you $2.  But in the newfangled style, it really sounds like 1 card gets you $2, 2 cards get you $4.

I assumed when I read Mill that not using "if you do" was deliberate and discarding 1 or 0 cards (if that was all you had left in your hand) still got you $2. Apparently that was wrong :/

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

You are comparing to other cards because you know the other cards. Obscurity issues are relevant for new people, not experienced people, I think.
This. Every time I teach somebody new Dominion it's amazing how they pick up things like Crown even though so many people complain how confusing these things can be.
Logged
My magnum opus collection of dominion fan cards is available here!

mameluke

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
  • Respect: +442
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #64 on: September 30, 2016, 11:39:29 am »
0

The new wording is fine. I'm pretty sure if the discarding part was irrelevant to the +$2, they'd be on separate lines. Consider Horse Traders.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #65 on: September 30, 2016, 11:41:32 am »
0

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

...and if the intent was that you get +$2 only if you discard both cards, it would have read something like "You may discard exactly 2 cards, for +$2."

Any of those three would be unambiguous.  But the wording we got could refer to any of the three.

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

With new terminology/rules, if you play this and you have only 1 other card in hand, you are allowed to discard that 1 card for no benefit, right?
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #66 on: September 30, 2016, 11:58:09 am »
+1

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

...and if the intent was that you get +$2 only if you discard both cards, it would have read something like "You may discard exactly 2 cards, for +$2."

Any of those three would be unambiguous.  But the wording we got could refer to any of the three.

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

With new terminology/rules, if you play this and you have only 1 other card in hand, you are allowed to discard that 1 card for no benefit, right?

Yes, although the number of situations where it's advantageous to do that is vanishingly small. Which is why Mill has "for", whereas Trading Post has "If you did".
Logged

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2528
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1642
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #67 on: September 30, 2016, 12:00:22 pm »
+2

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

I think you know what he meant. That concept used to be phrased differently. It's even changed on the 2nd edition versions of old cards.

"If you do", "for" and "to" are not defined in Dominion terminology. Nowhere in any rulebook are those defined. Sure, you can read the card FAQs to find what the words mean on that particular card, but that doesn't mean that you know what similar words mean on all other cards. And it doesn't mean the card text shouldn't be as clear as it possibly can be (given space restrictions). So "do x to get y" should be clear (at least as clear as "do x; if you do, y") in a vacuum and without reference to any "new Dominion terminology".
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 12:23:05 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #68 on: September 30, 2016, 12:25:17 pm »
0

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

I think you know what he meant. That concept used to be phrased differently. It's even changed on the 2nd edition versions of old cards.

"If you do", "for" and "to" are not defined in Dominion terminology. Nowhere in any rulebook are those defined. Sure, you can read the card FAQs to find what the words mean on that particular card, but that doesn't mean that you know what similar words mean on all other cards. And it doesn't mean the card text shouldn't be as clear as it possibly can be (given space requirements). So "do x to get y" should be clear (at least as clear as "do x; if you do, y") in a vacuum and without reference to any "new Dominion terminology".

This a thousand times over.

Also, what's with the comma in Mill? That's just wrong.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #69 on: September 30, 2016, 12:35:20 pm »
0

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

I think you know what he meant. That concept used to be phrased differently. It's even changed on the 2nd edition versions of old cards.

"If you do", "for" and "to" are not defined in Dominion terminology. Nowhere in any rulebook are those defined. Sure, you can read the card FAQs to find what the words mean on that particular card, but that doesn't mean that you know what similar words mean on all other cards. And it doesn't mean the card text shouldn't be as clear as it possibly can be (given space requirements). So "do x to get y" should be clear (at least as clear as "do x; if you do, y") in a vacuum and without reference to any "new Dominion terminology".

This a thousand times over.

Also, what's with the comma in Mill? That's just wrong.

It matches reserves. That was discussed a bunch when reserves came out.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #70 on: September 30, 2016, 12:38:06 pm »
0

I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

...and if the intent was that you get +$2 only if you discard both cards, it would have read something like "You may discard exactly 2 cards, for +$2."

Any of those three would be unambiguous.  But the wording we got could refer to any of the three.

The thing I find most frustrating is that if I were explaining it to a new player, what I'd say would be "You may discard two cards, and if you do discard two cards, then you get two monies" which is exactly how the cards used to be phrased.

It's a new card. This is the only way it's ever been phrased.

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

With new terminology/rules, if you play this and you have only 1 other card in hand, you are allowed to discard that 1 card for no benefit, right?

Yes, although the number of situations where it's advantageous to do that is vanishingly small. Which is why Mill has "for", whereas Trading Post has "If you did".

Pretty much the only one I can think of is if you have a Tunnel in hand.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

spiralstaircase

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Respect: +453
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #71 on: September 30, 2016, 12:47:18 pm »
+3

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

Yes, sure.  My complaint isn't that new Dominion terminology is unclear when understood as Dominion terminology, it's that it's unclear when read as ordinary English; and given that old Dominion terminology didn't require that distinction, the old terminology was better in terms of clarity.  New dominion terminology is better in terms of brevity.

If you prefer brevity to clarity, hey, that's fine by me.  Just don't expect me to give you a favourable code review.
Logged

ObtusePunubiris

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 124
  • Respect: +187
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #72 on: September 30, 2016, 01:12:49 pm »
0


I like the new wording and think it's very clear.  If the intent was that you get +$2 no matter how many cards you discard, it would have read something like "You may discard up to 2 cards, for +$2." If the intent was for each discarded card to give you +$2, it would have read something like "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2 each."

You are comparing to other cards because you know the other cards. Obscurity issues are relevant for new people, not experienced people, I think.

Great point.  I did exactly that.

EDIT: Removed a poor analogy
« Last Edit: September 30, 2016, 01:19:38 pm by ObtusePunubiris »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #73 on: September 30, 2016, 01:56:22 pm »
+4

If you prefer brevity to clarity, hey, that's fine by me.  Just don't expect me to give you a favourable code review.

I decline every pull request that uses variable names longer than 1 letter due to lack of brevity.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9707
  • Respect: +10765
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #74 on: September 30, 2016, 01:59:10 pm »
0

"I play Militia."
"Oh, thanks, let me just play Warehouse twice, and, yeah, I'm already down to 3 cards.  Thanks!"

You need 5 or more cards in hand to use Diplomat's reaction. But it's still very useful against Militia because after you discard down to 3 you're guaranteed to trigger Diplomat's +Actions.

So if my opponent plays Council Room, Council Room, Militia:
  • I'm being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 7 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
  • I'm still being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 6 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
  • I'm still being attacked, so I reveal my Diplomat from a hand of 5 cards.  I draw 2 and discard 3.
So I've drawn 6 cards total, and discarded 9?  Does that work?

Oh man, long Governor chains followed by a Militia are going to be super-annoying/slow to resolve if your opponent has a Diplomat in hand.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #75 on: September 30, 2016, 02:56:48 pm »
+3

In new Dominion terminology, "for" and "to" mean that you must have actually successfully done the thing to get the bonus. Pretty simple.

Yes, sure.  My complaint isn't that new Dominion terminology is unclear when understood as Dominion terminology, it's that it's unclear when read as ordinary English; and given that old Dominion terminology didn't require that distinction, the old terminology was better in terms of clarity.  New dominion terminology is better in terms of brevity.

If you prefer brevity to clarity, hey, that's fine by me.  Just don't expect me to give you a favourable code review.

I think it's fine when read as ordinary English, and the playtesters as a whole must have agreed. If enough people have a problem understanding a wording, it generally gets changed.

I concede that "if you do/did" may have been better on Mill. Maybe part of that is on me; the font size I was using when mocking up these cards—larger than the first edition font size—allowed "You may discard 2 cards, for +$2" to fit on a single line. But when Matthias actually settled on a new font size for Empires and second editions, it was even larger. So, being that the new Mill uses two lines for that text anyway, sure maybe "if you did" was the better call there.

I'm still not convinced it's actually confusing to new players that aren't trying to be pedantic.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6363
  • Respect: +25699
    • View Profile
Re: 2nd Edition Rules
« Reply #76 on: September 30, 2016, 05:23:33 pm »
+10

I think the general case, e.g. Moneylender's "You may trash a Copper from your hand for +$3," is just not confusing anyone.

Since Mill involves 2 cards, it might have been clearer with "if you did." Something to think through again in 8 years.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
 

Page created in 0.104 seconds with 20 queries.