Print

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

[silverspawn]

I just played a game with Innovation and Skulk. When you buy Skulk while having Innovation, it lets you choose the order of effects (gain gold and set aside -> play skulk). This happened several times; the times where I chose to play Skulk first, everything went fine. But the one time I chose to get the gold first, Skulk didn't play. It said Innovation lost track of Skulk.

But why? I understand that if I resolve the gold thing first, then the first card I gain that turn is Gold not Skulk. But Gold is not an action card, so Skulk is still the first action card I gained this turn. Why does gaining a gold cause Innovation to lose track of Slulk? Or is it a bug?

Don't have the ID, unfortunately, and can't reproduce it (I don't own cards).

[Awaclus]

The Gold covers up the Skulk in your discard pile if you gain it first, and then Innovation doesn't find Skulk where it expects it to be (at the top of your discard pile) and can't move it into play.

[dane-m]

The Gold covers up the Skulk in your discard pile if you gain it first, and then Innovation doesn't find Skulk where it expects it to be (at the top of your discard pile) and can't move it into play.

Or rather it can't set it aside and therefore the condition to play it isn't fulfilled.

[silverspawn]

The Gold covers up the Skulk in your discard pile if you gain it first, and then Innovation doesn't find Skulk where it expects it to be (at the top of your discard pile) and can't move it into play.

Is this always a thing? Card A looses track of card B because another card goes on top, even if card B doesn't move?

[Rabid]

http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Lose_Track_rule

[Awaclus]

The Gold covers up the Skulk in your discard pile if you gain it first, and then Innovation doesn't find Skulk where it expects it to be (at the top of your discard pile) and can't move it into play.

Or rather it can't set it aside and therefore the condition to play it isn't fulfilled.

Right.

[Jeebus]

Is this always a thing? Card A looses track of card B because another card goes on top, even if card B doesn't move?

You could say that card B did move, because it doesn't have the same location anymore, on top of the pile.

[GendoIkari]

Is this always a thing? Card A looses track of card B because another card goes on top, even if card B doesn't move?

You could say that card B did move, because it doesn't have the same location anymore, on top of the pile.

Ah, theory of relativity messing up Dominion rules as usual.

But no, lose track has always applied to being covered up as much as to literal movement.

[Jeebus]

Ah, theory of relativity messing up Dominion rules as usual.

But no, lose track has always applied to being covered up as much as to literal movement.

I know that the rule specifies that it also applies to covering up cards. What I meant was that you could perfectly well view this as merely a clarification. "The bottom of the pile", "the top of the pile", "position x from the top/bottom of the pile" are defined locations in Dominion. Covering up a card changes this defined position. Actually I always took this as the reason why it's lost track of. If it's considered to have the same position only with a card on top of it, I don't see why the rule couldn't just be that it's not lost track of.

[singletee]

For some reason this does not apply to hands. You can gain a card with Transmogrify (or Mine if you like), physically shuffle your hand around, then react with a Watchtower to trash the gained card.

What I posit is that "top of discard pile" and "rest of discard pile" are different locations WRT lose-track.

[Chris is me]

For some reason this does not apply to hands. You can gain a card with Transmogrify (or Mine if you like), physically shuffle your hand around, then react with a Watchtower to trash the gained card.

What I posit is that "top of discard pile" and "rest of discard pile" are different locations WRT lose-track.

They should be! You can't look through your discard pile, so by the letter of the rules you can't verify if any particular card is in the discard pile, or where it is, without being granted the ability to look through it.

I don't know if this actually matters regarding lose track, but intuitively it seems to be part of the justification to me.

[Jeebus]

Well, your hand, just like the trash pile, is an unordered pile of visible cards - unlike your discard pile and deck.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

For some reason this does not apply to hands. You can gain a card with Transmogrify (or Mine if you like), physically shuffle your hand around, then react with a Watchtower to trash the gained card.

What I posit is that "top of discard pile" and "rest of discard pile" are different locations WRT lose-track.

Hasn't Watchtower already lost track of it in the first place because you gained it to your hand rather than your discard as usual?

[Jeebus]

For some reason this does not apply to hands. You can gain a card with Transmogrify (or Mine if you like), physically shuffle your hand around, then react with a Watchtower to trash the gained card.

What I posit is that "top of discard pile" and "rest of discard pile" are different locations WRT lose-track.

Hasn't Watchtower already lost track of it in the first place because you gained it to your hand rather than your discard as usual?

No, gaining to hand or to top of deck does not cause lose-track. (This has been known since Seaside with Sea Hag/Watchtower.) Only movement after gaining causes lose-track.