Of course you sometimes draw your entire deck but the rule ignoramus made an unconditional claim about Disciple working every turn which is plain nonsense. The mere presence of Peasant does in no way guarantee that you always draw your entire deck. It does, as always, depend on the Kingdom.
So here is to you: design a kingdom (no Empires or 2nd edition) containing Peasant and Hireling and we'll play it a few times and see if Discipling Hireling works out for you.Sure. Once you read the Dominion rules in the meantime and learn that turn and shuffle are not equivalent.
Seriously, I am interested in discussing the intricacies of playing with Travellers. But not with folks who gotta blatantly lie (claiming that Disciple thrones and gains a card each turn) in order to make their point.
Have you ever played an engine that draws your whole deck before? If not that might explain a lot...
Is there a certain card associated with the Peasant line that is specifically very good at enabling that kind of deck to exist? Maybe there are even two of those cards in the line. Maybe you only get to those two cards when you're more or less at the point in the game of drawing your entire deck every turn.
If you put aside the snark for like ten seconds and think about it, you can see what he's saying.
Of course he explicitly made that rule-ignoring claim in order to pretend that Disciple works every turn like Hireling whereas it does in fact only work once per shuffle.
This is the underlying reason behind this ridiculous debate: unconditional, utterly preposterous claims. Like that you always draw your entire deck or that you always prefer a higher Action card density over higher draw power. If Dominion were that simple we would not play it.
They made an "unconditional claim" that they later corrected by saying
I was perfectly aware what I was typing. Shuffle and turn should be roughly equivalent, whether the deck is thin or thick.
This is also the way i read the original "unconditional claim" because really it is not unconditional but in the context that we are playing a peasent game and in those games you tend to get to draw your deck at some point in time. That point might not be reached yet at the time you have disciple and your hireling in Hand, so you might not be able to play your disciple every turn right afterwards if you decide to keep it instead of using it on your hireling. But on most boards with peasent the point of drawing your deck should be reached at some and then maybe you got to that point a little faster by discipling your hireling but now you cant explode as much as you could if you had kept your disciple around to throne and at the same time gain another one of your payload cards.
So this looks at the relative benefits of keeping vs giving up your disciple even without thinking about maybe you want to get teacher really fast, which you often want, and already we have an Argumentation that says "on most boards you would want to keep your disciple".
Im not saying theres no edge cases where it wouldnt be good to disciple your hireling, I (and most of the posts here) just claim those are edge cases. That's why traces proposed you specifically design such an edge case since if its not an edge case, that task shouldnt be too hard.
Anyway, I feel like im replicating most of what has been said already. I guess the point i wanted to make is, if you want to have a serious and constructive discussion from which you can gain insight from, you should give people some credit and not assume every inaccurately formulated thing in a Post is to be interpreted in the worst way possible, like saying "lol turn and shuffle aren't equivalent go read the rulebook noob". Of course that goes to everyone, so i dont put that all on you since the reply to your original post was something like "aren't you the guy that gets everything wrong all the time?" which is in no way better and also doesnt set a good base for a constructive discussion about your original claim.
By the way, on last thing that just got to my mind is your original reply to doctorsteelhammer was also like one of those "ridiculous unconditional Statements"
you give up your disciple for another hireling?For a throned Hireling and another Hireling? Of course.
If i wanted i could read that as "i will always use disciple on hireling given the Chance, no matter the circumstances" and I think we all agree it would be wrong to do that on every board in every Situation. But at the time i read that, I read it as a statement about an edge case even thought you didnt explicitly formulate it that way, because i already know it doesnt make sense to read it as a generalised statement and so i give you the Best possible Interpretation i can think of what it should mean so we can have a discussion, and dont Interpret it in the worst possible way just to pseudp attack the point youre not actually even trying to make