Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp  (Read 1278 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

crj

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 934
  • Respect: +1036
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #25 on: June 26, 2018, 06:13:34 pm »
0

In order to get the card out of your discard pile, you have to allow for searching through your discard pile, which is not allowed.
Again, though, I wonder out loud: why not allow people to inspect their discard piles?
Logged

dz

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 64
  • Shuffle iT Username: DZ
  • Respect: +57
    • View Profile
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2908
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3679
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #27 on: June 26, 2018, 07:00:28 pm »
+1

I'm trying to think what would break if the lose-track rule didn't include covering a card in your discard pile, but only moving it from the discard pile. Does that actually cause any issues? I think it's the cover-up part of lose-track that causes the most counter-intuitive rulings.

In order to get the card out of your discard pile, you have to allow for searching through your discard pile, which is not allowed.

Welllll, if you discard a Faithful Hound and four Coppers, technically you then have to search through your discard pile to retrieve the Hound and set it aside. So it's not like there's nothing in the game that implicitly makes you do that anyway.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7160
  • Respect: +7981
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #28 on: June 26, 2018, 07:02:50 pm »
+1

I'm trying to think what would break if the lose-track rule didn't include covering a card in your discard pile, but only moving it from the discard pile. Does that actually cause any issues? I think it's the cover-up part of lose-track that causes the most counter-intuitive rulings.

In order to get the card out of your discard pile, you have to allow for searching through your discard pile, which is not allowed.

Welllll, if you discard a Faithful Hound and four Coppers, technically you then have to search through your discard pile to retrieve the Hound and set it aside. So it's not like there's nothing in the game that implicitly makes you do that anyway.

Yeah, Tunnel and Faithful Hound are messed up. I think it was said back in Tunnel discussions that “when you discard this” really ends up needing to be played as “as you are discarding this.”
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

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5007
  • Respect: +20644
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #29 on: June 26, 2018, 07:15:17 pm »
+2

But, aha: "At the start of your next turn, +1 Action and gain to your hand an Action card costing up to $4."
Bit of a shame to lose the opportunity for cost-reduction shenanigans. /-8
Not so much! Generally dodging rules confusion is worth a lot more than any specific combo. And someone will point out that it still works with Bridge Troll and Ferry.
Logged

crj

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 934
  • Respect: +1036
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #30 on: June 26, 2018, 07:39:25 pm »
0

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=94.0
Hohum. Slow players are quite capable of spending ages trying to remember what's in their discard pile. And of playing so slowly that I forget what's in my own discard pile, which can be pretty annoying.

I sometimes wish I could ban slow players from looking at their hands...
Logged

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7073
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9314
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #31 on: June 26, 2018, 08:06:48 pm »
0

Obviously the best idea instead of the lose-track rule would have been to create a second discard pile that contains only cards you gained this turn, which you're allowed to look through, but have to put into your regular discard pile if you shuffle.

There's no way that could become confusing, right?
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1298
  • Respect: +1526
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #32 on: June 26, 2018, 09:35:03 pm »
+1

I'm trying to think what would break if the lose-track rule didn't include covering a card in your discard pile, but only moving it from the discard pile. Does that actually cause any issues? I think it's the cover-up part of lose-track that causes the most counter-intuitive rulings.

In order to get the card out of your discard pile, you have to allow for searching through your discard pile, which is not allowed.

Welllll, if you discard a Faithful Hound and four Coppers, technically you then have to search through your discard pile to retrieve the Hound and set it aside. So it's not like there's nothing in the game that implicitly makes you do that anyway.

Yeah, Tunnel and Faithful Hound are messed up. I think it was said back in Tunnel discussions that “when you discard this” really ends up needing to be played as “as you are discarding this.”
"When you would discard this"?

Also, presumably if you don't wind up gaining any Ruins, the Summoned Death Cart will get successfully set aside (Case 1: Ruins pile is empty; Case 2: Trader while Silver pile is empty).
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8058
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +9368
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #33 on: June 27, 2018, 11:09:37 am »
0

But, aha: "At the start of your next turn, +1 Action and gain to your hand an Action card costing up to $4."
Bit of a shame to lose the opportunity for cost-reduction shenanigans. /-8
Not so much! Generally dodging rules confusion is worth a lot more than any specific combo. And someone will point out that it still works with Bridge Troll and Ferry.

And Princed Bridges.

Is Cobbler then your idea of a "fixed" Summon?
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/

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6996
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9664
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #34 on: June 27, 2018, 12:10:15 pm »
+1

But, aha: "At the start of your next turn, +1 Action and gain to your hand an Action card costing up to $4."
Bit of a shame to lose the opportunity for cost-reduction shenanigans. /-8
Not so much! Generally dodging rules confusion is worth a lot more than any specific combo. And someone will point out that it still works with Bridge Troll and Ferry.

And Princed Bridges.

Is Cobbler then your idea of a "fixed" Summon?

As you can read in the Secret History, Cobbler evolved into that shape over time. It was never the idea to make it like Summon. The penultimate version of Cobbler was actually more like Summon, since you gained the card when you played Cobbler and set it aside for next turn. I think of the final version as being much closer to Transmogrify. It's the workshop to Transmogrify's remodel.
Logged

Jeebus

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1183
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +886
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #35 on: June 28, 2018, 11:13:03 am »
+2

I suppose you just have to keep track of which cards/events have lost-track of which other cards...

I'm pretty sure all abilities lose track of a card when it moves except the ability that actually moved it. When a card is covered, all abilities lose track of it. (You can say that the second rule follows from the first because the card moved when it was covered, in the sense that it no longer has the position it had on the top of the pile. No ability moved it though, so that's why no ability still has track of it.)

Welllll, if you discard a Faithful Hound and four Coppers, technically you then have to search through your discard pile to retrieve the Hound and set it aside. So it's not like there's nothing in the game that implicitly makes you do that anyway.

Yeah, Tunnel and Faithful Hound are messed up. I think it was said back in Tunnel discussions that “when you discard this” really ends up needing to be played as “as you are discarding this.”

The reason Tunnel works, is that you're not moving the Tunnels, you're revealing them. So in this case you're allowed to fish them out of your discard pile, which is what you're technically doing if you discarded several cards and then revealing one or several Tunnels (even though IRL you're revealing them as you're discarding).

Of course this means that the rules about fishing out cards from the discard pile are confusing. You're allowed to do it when you're revealing Tunnels, but not when Summoning a Death Cart. It also tells us that the basis for this rule is not the fact that you can't look through your discard pile, as people have suggested. If you know where a card is and an ability allows you to look at or reveal it, you're allowed to do so, even in your discard pile.

People are talking about how it would be if we didn't have that part of the lose-track rule. But note that it doesn't just apply to your discard pile, it also applies to your deck. You can Develop two cards to the top of your deck, and the lower one would be lost track of.

But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2018, 12:38:44 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5007
  • Respect: +20644
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #36 on: June 28, 2018, 04:25:59 pm »
+1

But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?
A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.

I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.
Logged

Jeebus

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1183
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +886
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #37 on: June 28, 2018, 04:37:34 pm »
0

But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?
A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.

I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.

Then it has another timing than Tunnel, since Tunnel can't be "as you discard this", unless you change the ruling that you can't Watchtower a Tunnel-gained Gold when you discard your whole hand.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7160
  • Respect: +7981
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #38 on: June 28, 2018, 04:47:10 pm »
+1

But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?
A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.

I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.

Then it has another timing than Tunnel, since Tunnel can't be "as you discard this", unless you change the ruling that you can't Watchtower a Tunnel-gained Gold when you discard your whole hand.

Not sure why that follows. Even if Tunnel were" as you discard this", you wouldn't be into that timing until all cards, including Watchtower, are being discarded.
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

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5007
  • Respect: +20644
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #39 on: June 28, 2018, 05:01:30 pm »
+1

I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.

Then it has another timing than Tunnel, since Tunnel can't be "as you discard this", unless you change the ruling that you can't Watchtower a Tunnel-gained Gold when you discard your whole hand.
I am looking at Tunnel and well. The wording is simple, people get it, what a success story. It does not want to be something convoluted in order to better handle exotic cases. Maybe it's okay if they are technically different, provided that that difference is completely invisible to almost all players ever. It looks like "as you discard this" works fine for both though.

No-one is going to think you can't set aside two Faithful Hounds; it is sure better if you can. So I'm going with, you can, you can do it, just like people are doing. However the precise ruling goes, you can set aside both Hounds, that's established.

Fishing Tunnel out of your discard pile to reveal it is bad; it may no longer be there for example, or it may no longer be clear if that's the same Tunnel. At the same time Tunnel wants you to get the Gold after discarding - not with cards in a new limbo. Well maybe I can have that too.

When you discard some cards, you can reveal Tunnels and set aside Faithful Hounds. Did I say "when"? It's part of the discarding process, these abilities. Then, if you revealed Tunnel as you were discarding it, you gain a Gold; the cards are all in the discard pile. It is maybe slightly simpler if none of the cards are in your discard pile - but then they're in being-discarded limbo and who needs that.
Logged

Jeebus

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1183
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +886
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2018, 05:42:59 pm »
0

But this makes me wonder how Faithful Hound doesn't break lose-track? Since you're allowed to order the cards when you discard several, you could always put the Hound on top, and then no problem. But if you discard several Hounds, I don't see how you can set aside more than one. Donald?
A card can make itself an exception of course, though that's a bad rule to do that with.

I'm going to again go with, it's "as you discard this." Technically this means you could briefly see an extra top-of-discard card with Cellars.

Then it has another timing than Tunnel, since Tunnel can't be "as you discard this", unless you change the ruling that you can't Watchtower a Tunnel-gained Gold when you discard your whole hand.

Not sure why that follows. Even if Tunnel were" as you discard this", you wouldn't be into that timing until all cards, including Watchtower, are being discarded.

Hmm, maybe you're right. In this old thread Donald is saying that it doesn't work to reveal Tunnel before you finish discarding, based on the Watchtower case. That was after I mentioned it. But maybe I only thought about revealing Tunnel either in your hand before discarding, or after putting it in your discard pile before discarding the other cards. I didn't think about revealing it when it's in being-discarded limbo. I guess if you reveal it in limbo, when all your being-discarded cards are in limbo, there is no Watchtower problem.*

I see that Donald has replied while I was writing this. It sounds like being-discarded limbo is when you reveal Tunnels and Hounds, then when all the cards are in the discard pile, you gain Golds. But I guess the Hounds are not set aside then, because then you have the situation of having to fish out Hounds, which also breaks lose-track. So the Hounds get set aside when you reveal them in limbo, I guess.

* Is there a lose-track problem? What is a bunch of cards in limbo anyway? It's not unordered, because the rules say you can order them before discarding. If you order them in your hand and then discard them all, then only one card is on top and the others are covered even in limbo, so it seems lose-track applies. Or maybe it's a fanned out set of cards where no card is on top even if it's ordered. That makes sense. So you separate all to-be-discarded cards from your hand, reveal whichever you want, then put them in discard. You have to reveal all cards at once though, otherwise we get the old "is it the same card?" problem.

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5007
  • Respect: +20644
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #41 on: June 28, 2018, 06:33:51 pm »
+2

I see that Donald has replied while I was writing this. It sounds like being-discarded limbo is when you reveal Tunnels and Hounds, then when all the cards are in the discard pile, you gain Golds. But I guess the Hounds are not set aside then, because then you have the situation of having to fish out Hounds, which also breaks lose-track. So the Hounds get set aside when you reveal them in limbo, I guess.
You have to discard some cards. You take those cards in your hand, and then, hey set aside these Faithful Hounds and flash these Tunnels. Which is what people actually do - no-one fishes Tunnels out of their discard pile.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4691
  • Respect: +5044
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #42 on: June 29, 2018, 02:44:57 am »
0

Would a wording like "Gain a card costing up to 4, setting it aside as you do" work? Now both things happen at the same time, so you can pick the order, right? Or is that already a confusing/wordy solution or does it break other things?

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5007
  • Respect: +20644
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #43 on: June 29, 2018, 04:11:00 am »
+1

Would a wording like "Gain a card costing up to 4, setting it aside as you do" work? Now both things happen at the same time, so you can pick the order, right? Or is that already a confusing/wordy solution or does it break other things?
Having to know the correct order isn't great (yes this comes up with real cards sometimes due to lose track and triggered gains). Really that approach wants to end up the hypothetical good phrasing of "gain a card to set-aside land." But if I were changing the card now I prefer the Villa/Cobbler approach anyway and so wouldn't put in the work on that wording.
Logged

Screwyioux

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 179
  • Shuffle iT Username: Screwyioux
  • Respect: +197
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #44 on: June 29, 2018, 09:51:52 am »
0

Would a wording like "Gain a card costing up to 4, setting it aside as you do" work? Now both things happen at the same time, so you can pick the order, right? Or is that already a confusing/wordy solution or does it break other things?
Having to know the correct order isn't great (yes this comes up with real cards sometimes due to lose track and triggered gains). Really that approach wants to end up the hypothetical good phrasing of "gain a card to set-aside land." But if I were changing the card now I prefer the Villa/Cobbler approach anyway and so wouldn't put in the work on that wording.

Question for Donald (or anyone interested in game design):

How much emphasis do you place on getting the wording of a card technically correct/precise on first print? Obviously, you do it if you can, but how much time/energy do you generally feel inclined to spend on it versus other priorities like coming up with more cards or getting them out earlier?

Like with the Tunnel thing, there's the common sense approach of "most people know you don't fish them out of your discard pile or look at the rest of that pile." How important do you think it is to keep the game competitively "unbreakable," versus just expecting the players to to play the card as intended?

(let me know if that question isn't making sense)
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 09:53:27 am by Screwyioux »
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3684
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2238
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #45 on: June 29, 2018, 12:47:17 pm »
+1

This is probably a silly question, but if you gain Nomad Camp with Summon, then reveal Watchtower to try topdecking the Nomad Camp, does Summon still succeed in setting it aside?
Logged

Jeebus

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1183
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +886
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #46 on: June 29, 2018, 01:10:54 pm »
+2

I wonder if lose-track could never have existed in the first place.

First of all, you have the cases where a card is covered. The problem is that you have stuff like Warrior finding a Tunnel and not being able to trash it because it gets covered by a Gold. I'm pretty sure almost 100% of people who play IRL plays that wrong, because nobody thinks about that rule applying then. Arguably that also goes for all cases with triggered gains on when-gain (or triggered gains on when-trash resulting from when-gain). Almost everybody not intimately familiar with lose-track (or having played a lot online very observantly), wouldn't think that you can't move the card.

Secondly, lose-track is the reason cards played from trash don't jump out*, which was relevant from day 1. But in most cases people don't need to know the rule, because that's the way they play it intuitively - the opposite of Warrior/Tunnel. Of course you need a rule, but it could just be that cards played from trash stay there.

The third type is when the card is actually lost track of for the players. I can think of Inn shuffling in a card. In this case it's obvious that it's lost track of; you hardly need a rule, but it could be a rule about shuffling a card.

The fourth type is cases where a card moved. For instance, abilities moving a card twice: Counterfeit and Procession don't trash a card that moved in the meantime; Vassal doesn't put a Faithful Hound in play after it was set aside; Summon or Replace don't move a gained card that was moved by Watchtower/Royal Seal/Tracker/Travelleing Fair. Or multiple abilities triggered by a card moving: Alchemist, Scheme, Hermit, Prince and Faithful Hound all trigger on discard, so then just one of them can move the card; and we also have Fortress + Possession.

My question is whether lose-track is needed to regulate this type of interaction. Why not just allow that everything happens? All abilities move the card. Well, one weirdness with Watchtower is that it would let you move a card from trash without even gaining it. We could revise the rule about playing from trash to cover both cases: "A card can't move from trash unless an ability lets you can gain it from there." Another weirdness would be that Hound would be put in your hand at end of turn but still be played by Prince the next turn, but I guess that would be okay. (It would be an optional and dumb move.) (Edit: Not a real case, since a Princed Hound can't use its ability.) I can't think of other problems right now.

The fifth type is cards specifically designed to exploit lose-track, like Madman, Prince, Wish. These can't be successfully Throned because of lose-track. A rule about moving cards from trash doesn't help, because these cards move from somewhere else. This type might be a bigger problem. The problem is purely with TR variants. A fix could be to make all TR variants like Royal Carriage: "You may play a card from your hand, then if it's still in play, replay it". (It would mean that Madman and Wish doesn't even give +Actions on second play, but that doesn't really matter.**)

Conclusion: Lose-track is complicated, so I probably haven't covered all cases, but if I designed Dominion from scratch, I might try to do it this way:

Rule 1: A card can't move from trash unless an ability lets you can gain it from there.
Rule 2: A card that is shuffled in a face-down deck can't be moved.
Change Throne Room variants to: "You may play a card from your hand, then if it's still in play, replay it".

The point of these two rules is that they are intuitive. Someone might wonder about moving cards from trash, but most people wouldn't assume that you can without checking the rules at least.

*except when an ability tells you to play a card from the trash: only Necromancer, which specifically prohibits the card from moving.
**Late edit: It would of course, as Donald has pointed out, also mean that things like TR+Feast doesn't work.


« Last Edit: June 30, 2018, 10:24:35 am by Jeebus »
Logged

Jeebus

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1183
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +886
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #47 on: June 29, 2018, 01:13:51 pm »
0

A separate, more doable, idea is scrapping covered-card-is-lost-track-of (the first type in my previous post). That would solve a lot of problems and make the game more intuitive. Unfortunately it's stated in the Dark Ages rulebook.

EDIT: It seems that lose-track is not even mentioned in any other rulebook. So unless you have Dark Ages, you only know about it through the examples given for certain card interactions. But the Hinterlands rulebook, for instance, doesn't mention anything about lose-track weirdness with Border Village. I don't think any rulebook has any examples of a card being lost track of because it's covered.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 01:18:55 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

dz

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 64
  • Shuffle iT Username: DZ
  • Respect: +57
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #48 on: June 29, 2018, 05:01:39 pm »
0

This is probably a silly question, but if you gain Nomad Camp with Summon, then reveal Watchtower to try topdecking the Nomad Camp, does Summon still succeed in setting it aside?

Yes. A card can't get lost if it doesn't actually go to a new location. Nomad Camp goes onto your deck, and Watchtower moves Nomad Camp from the top of your deck...to the top of your deck. So Summon can still find that Nomad Camp.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5007
  • Respect: +20644
    • View Profile
Re: summon + death cart vs. summon + nomad camp
« Reply #49 on: June 29, 2018, 06:13:43 pm »
+1

How much emphasis do you place on getting the wording of a card technically correct/precise on first print? Obviously, you do it if you can, but how much time/energy do you generally feel inclined to spend on it versus other priorities like coming up with more cards or getting them out earlier?
The exact wording matters, it comes up, so I try to have a good wording to start with. However in the rare case that it isn't clear what the wording should be (in a major way, not, do we need to remind people here that "each player" includes them or whatever such thing), I don't put the work in there until it seems like the card is good and will stick around.

This goes back to a card called Harvest in Cornucopia. It said something like, "gain Silvers to hand until you have 5 cards in hand." We had a 12-page thread arguing about the best wording for that. Then it died. A lesson in not doing that.

Like with the Tunnel thing, there's the common sense approach of "most people know you don't fish them out of your discard pile or look at the rest of that pile." How important do you think it is to keep the game competitively "unbreakable," versus just expecting the players to to play the card as intended?
Well the rules have to work, I am stuck there.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All
 

Page created in 0.152 seconds with 22 queries.