Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Possession+Ball  (Read 322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7718
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +8560
    • View Profile
Possession+Ball
« on: September 03, 2017, 11:26:59 pm »
+1

Okay, just to check I have this right (starting a new topic because the old one is locked):

-If I Possess someone and make them take their - token (usually by making them buy Ball), I get the token instead.  Say if they're green and I'm yellow, I take their green token.  This much I understand.
-Following on that, if I buy Ball the turn I play Possession, that should mean that after Possessing the green player and making them buy Ball, I should have two - tokens - my yellow one, and their green one.  This seems pretty obvious.
-Then when green takes their unPossessed turn, they can buy Ball without taking a - token because I currently have theirs, and they couldn't take mine (or anyone else's) even if it were available.
-However, here we come to a tricky bit: let's say I (yellow) play a single Copper on my next turn, producing , triggering the - tokens.  Do they activate one at a time?  Do I choose which one?  My guess would be they both trigger, and you end up losing , but there is no stipulation on the token saying you can't go below , so does that leave you with - to spend?  What would that even mean?
-Let's say I've managed to lose the green token.  Now green player buys their own Ball.  Do they take that green - token again?  Or have my Possession shenanigans prevented them from ever having to take it again this game?
« Last Edit: September 03, 2017, 11:28:30 pm by werothegreat »
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.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4293
  • Respect: +16817
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2017, 11:49:05 pm »
0

-Then when green takes their unPossessed turn, they can buy Ball without taking a - token because I currently have theirs, and they couldn't take mine (or anyone else's) even if it were available.
If Green buys Ball, they take their token from Yellow.

-However, here we come to a tricky bit: let's say I (yellow) play a single Copper on my next turn, producing , triggering the - tokens.  Do they activate one at a time?  Do I choose which one?  My guess would be they both trigger, and you end up losing , but there is no stipulation on the token saying you can't go below , so does that leave you with - to spend?  What would that even mean?
If Yellow plays a Copper or Silver, Yellow goes down to $0 and returns both tokens. If Yellow plays a Gold, Yellow goes down to $1 and returns both tokens, etc.

It should be no surprise that if a rule for "what if you go below $0" were ever needed, the answer would be, you stop at $0.

-Let's say I've managed to lose the green token.  Now green player buys their own Ball.  Do they take that green - token again?  Or have my Possession shenanigans prevented them from ever having to take it again this game?
Green can still take their token.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6318
  • Respect: +6804
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2017, 12:40:05 am »
0

-Then when green takes their unPossessed turn, they can buy Ball without taking a - token because I currently have theirs, and they couldn't take mine (or anyone else's) even if it were available.

Wait, is this part correct? I'm not seeing why. Ball says "Take your - token". What rules prevent you from taking your token in the case that someone else currently has your token?

*Edit* If I read it right, Donald says in the other thread that you can indeed take a token from someone else who already has it.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2017, 12:58:05 am by GendoIkari »
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
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7718
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +8560
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2017, 09:24:30 am »
0

Okay. Will update the wiki accordingly.
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/

dereeder

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2017, 11:52:29 pm »
0

Tokens don't lose track?
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7718
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +8560
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2017, 07:07:24 am »
0

Tokens don't lose track?

Nope.  For one thing, your - token is unique, and never gets covered up by anything.  You always know exactly where it is.
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/

Jeebus

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 873
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +596
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2017, 02:45:46 pm »
0

All this is already in my rules document, based on the last thread in which this was discussed and ruled on, two years ago. (And if anybody needs to look up something, I would appreciate it if you look it up there and let me know if something is worded in a less than clear way.)

If Yellow plays a Copper or Silver, Yellow goes down to $0 and returns both tokens. If Yellow plays a Gold, Yellow goes down to $1 and returns both tokens, etc.

Do I understand you correctly that if you have two tokens and play a Copper, you lose both tokens? In the other thread you ruled differently, namely that you only lose one token. With this changed ruling, the order you play Treasures matter: Imagine that you first play a Copper, losing both tokens, and then a Silver. You would end up with $2. If you instead played the Silver first, you would end up with $1.

It should be no surprise that if a rule for "what if you go below $0" were ever needed, the answer would be, you stop at $0.

Actually in the other thread you said that each ability deducting $, like Poor House, has to state that you stop at $0. Otherwise you would go below $0. And that's why the -$1 token actually works like: When you would get $, instead get $1 less and lose this. (Actually you said that the token would have had that text in any case, if only there had been room.)

Personally I think the whole thing of taking other players' colored tokens is very counter-intuituve and confusing, and leads to these weird rules situations. But that's what you ruled and that's what I included in my document.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2017, 04:29:00 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6318
  • Respect: +6804
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2017, 03:28:43 pm »
0

All this is already in my rules document, based on the last thread in which this was discussed and ruled on, two years ago. (And if anybody needs to look up something, I would appreciate it if you look it up there and let me know if something is worded in a less than clear way.)

If Yellow plays a Copper or Silver, Yellow goes down to $0 and returns both tokens. If Yellow plays a Gold, Yellow goes down to $1 and returns both tokens, etc.

Do I understand you correctly that if you have two tokens and play a Copper, you lose both tokens? In the other thread you ruled differently, namely that you only lose one token. With this changed ruling, the order you play Treasures matter: Imagine that you first play a Copper, losing both tokens, and then a Silver. You would end up with $2. If you instead played the Silver first, you would end up with $1.)


Yes, and he did say in the other thread that only losing one token if you played Copper was a tentative ruling.
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

Jeebus

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 873
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +596
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2017, 03:47:29 pm »
+1

Yes, and he did say in the other thread that only losing one token if you played Copper was a tentative ruling.

True, but it seems he said that before he considered it more carefully. Because afterwards he posted this:

Quote
The token is a token; it didn't have space for precise rules text and doesn't have it. It doesn't say "would" but that's how it works; it's not "you get $ and then lose $1," it's "when you would get $, you get less." They apply one at a time and the second one can't apply because you are no longer getting $.

That seems pretty definite. I actually even thought back then that he introduced that modification so that this interaction would work the way he preferred. But according to Donald, that was not the case, the precise function of the token includes "would" and it's not there due to lack of space.

Also, the ruling that coin amounts can go below $0 was not stated as being tentative. But I guess that ruling is reversed now in any case.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2017, 03:53:05 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4293
  • Respect: +16817
    • View Profile
Re: Possession+Ball
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2017, 04:45:55 pm »
+3

Quote
The token is a token; it didn't have space for precise rules text and doesn't have it. It doesn't say "would" but that's how it works; it's not "you get $ and then lose $1," it's "when you would get $, you get less." They apply one at a time and the second one can't apply because you are no longer getting $.

That seems pretty definite. I actually even thought back then that he introduced that modification so that this interaction would work the way he preferred. But according to Donald, that was not the case, the precise function of the token includes "would" and it's not there due to lack of space.

Also, the ruling that coin amounts can go below $0 was not stated as being tentative. But I guess that ruling is reversed now in any case.
Thanks, I do prefer that previous ruling, given my previous logic.

If you play a Copper you only lose one token. Pick which one to lose.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.098 seconds with 20 queries.