Print

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

[Udzu]

I'm a little confused about the following wiki ruling: (encountered with Overlord and Treasure Map but the principle is the same)

If you use Throne Room on Band of Misfits, choosing to play Band of Misfits as a self-trashing card (for example, Embargo), the Band of Misfits will be in the trash after the first play as Embargo, meaning it has left play. Throne Room then plays Band of Misfits again (getting token effects again, if there are any), allowing you to make a new choice as to what Band of Misfits should emulate. However, since Band of Misfits is in the trash, you will only get the on-play effects of the emulated card.

The beginning makes sense: TR plays a BOM, which plays itself as an Embargo, which trashes itself and reverts to being a BOM. TR then plays it again, but can't move it into the play area since it's lost track of it (it was expecting it to already be in the play area). You then get to choose a new card to emulate.

However, the next bit confuses me: since BOM then plays itself again ("You first play Band of Misfits, then you play it again as the card you chose to emulate.") shouldn't it be able to move itself into play? Unlike TR, I can't see why it should have lost track of itself, since it's only just been played (admittedly for the second time this turn) and nothing else has moved it in the interval. Am I missing something about lose track?

[faust]

However, the next bit confuses me: since BOM then plays itself again ("You first play Band of Misfits, then you play it again as the card you chose to emulate.") shouldn't it be able to move itself into play? Unlike TR, I can't see why it should have lost track of itself, since it's only just been played (admittedly for the second time this turn) and nothing else has moved it in the interval. Am I missing something about lose track?

I think playing a card can only move it from your hand into play, but not from somewhere else. Not sure if that is a definite rule, but it fits with how Necromancer works (also if BoM could move itself into play like that, you would also be able to fish it from the trash via Necromancer).

[majiponi]

I think playing a card can only move it from your hand into play, but not from somewhere else. Not sure if that is a definite rule, but it fits with how Necromancer works (also if BoM could move itself into play like that, you would also be able to fish it from the trash via Necromancer).

No. Vassal, Golem and Herald have no special phrase but still move the discarded/revealed Action into your playmat. I am thinking what "playing a card" means to revise Japanese translation.

"Move it into play and follow its instruction" is what I think playing a card means. Most cards say "play FROM somewhere", so the previous location doesn't matter.
Throne lost track of BoM and didn't move it because BoM moved itself.

[Udzu]

The Necromancer example suggests that perhaps a card that fails to go into play actually loses track of itself? Hence a necromanced encampment doesn't return to the supply.

Is it the same for a BOM encampment played from the trash?

[Wuscheli]

shouldn't it be able to move itself into play

it fits with how Necromancer works

But that comes from a different effect: Necromancer explicitly says: Play a face up, non-Duration Action card from the trash, leaving it there and turning it face down for the turn.

No other card (among TR/BOM/Embargo) tells me to leave something in the trash explicitly.

It boils down to what "playing a card" is. My interpretation of "playing a card" is:
1. If it's in my hand, I put it in play. (If it's not in my hand, nothing happens.)
2. I execute the card's instructions.

If this is the definition of "playing a card", then BOM stays in the trash in OP's scenario. TR instructs me to play BOM a second time, BOM in the trash, thus BOM is not in my hand, thus I do not move BOM into play before executing BOM's instructions.

Edit: This can't be the interpretation of "playing a card" because, as majiponi says, Herald and Vassal tell me to play cards from the discard or from revealed-card-land, and the so-played cards move into play, contradicting my (1.). I now assume that majiponi's interpretation is correct.

Interesting though that Necromancer explicitly tells me to leave the played card in the trash. So I'm not sure if my interpretation of "playing a card" is the definition of "playing a card". Would Necromancer move cards into play if we cut his "leaving it there"?

[Ingix]

IMO, the BoM expects itself in play when it copies something, so it does not attempt to move itself. It's the difference between an external effect playing a card (like the game rules allow, or Golem etc.) and an internal effect.

[crj]

My tentative take on this is that playing a card means:

• Move it to the play area
• Follow its on-play instructions

...with two qualifying notes:

• If either half fails, the other half still tries to happen.
• The card is moved to the play area from your hand unless stated otherwise. Effects that identify a card to play somewhere else implicitly play it from that other place.

This explains why things like Herald don't lose track of the card they play, but Throne Room does lose track of a self-trasher before the second play. And why, if it does lose track, you get the on-play effect again without the card returning to in-play.

On the other hand, I don't have much supporting evidence for this rationalisation beyond the fact it seems to work.

[Chris is me]

Cards being played can only move into the play area if they are where they expect themselves to be.

Vassal checks the top of the discard pile. If you reveal Faithful Hound and set it aside, you cannot play it as Vassal lost track.

Herald plays from the top of the deck. I'm having trouble thinking of a real loss-track situation here; I guess if Patron's reaction topdecked a card instead of giving you a Coffers? But then it would lose track.

Throne Room actually doesn't move anything. Once the card is played the first time, it stays where it ended up. You don't pull Reserves off your mat or move Encampment back from set aside land or whatever. So when BoM ends up in the trash it's not going anywhere.

Throne Room doesn't lose track because it was never keeping track. Throne doesn't care where the card is at any point I can immediately think of. BoM doesn't "play itself" - it is played like any other Action card is played, so it doesn't come in with a special redundant "move itself" step that differs from other actions. The text of that wording in the rules just clarifies that Band of Misfits is an action that gets resolved in addition to whatever it is emulating (at least before you decide what it is)

[faust]

BoM doesn't "play itself"

Wrong according to the wiki "other rules clarifications". This is the whole point of this discussion.

[crj]

Vassal checks the top of the discard pile. If you reveal Faithful Hound and set it aside, you cannot play it as Vassal lost track.

Citation needed. My understanding is that Vassal can play a Faithful Hound that has reacted to being revealed. Lose-track only means it will not be put into play when you play it.

[Wuscheli]

BoM expects itself in play when it copies something, so it does not attempt to move itself.

This is the best attack so far, but it's not satisfying still.

The lose-track rule explicitly says that effects track cards. Cards never track cards, only the effects track cards. Usually there is no ambiguity if we say "card X lost track of card Y" instead of "effect E from card X lost track of card Y", but here, we must be careful.

Now we look at this argument: BOM's effect "Play this BOM as if it were..." loses track of BOM.

Why does BOM's effect "play this as if..." expect BOM in play? Sure, usually BOM is in play by the time we're executing BOM's instructions, but it's certainly possible to execute instructions on cards in the trash or anywhere else. Also, there is no earlier instruction on BOM's text that endows "play this as if..." with the assumption that BOM is in play.

[Ingix]

Vassal checks the top of the discard pile. If you reveal Faithful Hound and set it aside, you cannot play it as Vassal lost track.

Citation needed. My understanding is that Vassal can play a Faithful Hound that has reacted to being revealed. Lose-track only means it will not be put into play when you play it.

I actually ran into this on Dominion Online, and the Faitful Hound was set aside, played (I drew 2  cards) and I still got the Hound back next turn. As has been said, only the zone move is prevented by loose track, not other effects.

[Chris is me]

BoM doesn't "play itself"

Wrong according to the wiki "other rules clarifications". This is the whole point of this discussion.

That's not how I read it at all. Band of Misfits doesn't have a separate mechanism to "play itself" that every other Action doesn't have. To me the text is just clarifying that Band of Misfits is played, and then the card it is copying is played. Band of Misfits needs to be played (as a normal action) to start executing the instructions of the card (which instruct the player to play it as another action).

Any ruling about BoM moving itself into play should be no different than eg Woodcutter moving itself into play.

[GendoIkari]

BoM doesn't "play itself"

Wrong according to the wiki "other rules clarifications". This is the whole point of this discussion.

That's not how I read it at all. Band of Misfits doesn't have a separate mechanism to "play itself" that every other Action doesn't have. To me the text is just clarifying that Band of Misfits is played, and then the card it is copying is played. Band of Misfits needs to be played (as a normal action) to start executing the instructions of the card (which instruct the player to play it as another action).

Any ruling about BoM moving itself into play should be no different than eg Woodcutter moving itself into play.

I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly or not; but BoM does in fact have a separate instruction that says to play itself. If you play a BoM, you actually play it twice. The first time like normal, just like you play any other action card. Then, you follow its instructions, which causes you to play it again, although this time you are playing it as if it were another card; so it counts as playing the other card, not playing BoM.

[GendoIkari]

I think the answer here is simple... Band of Misfits "play this as if" instructions expects the Band of Misfits to be in play, because that is the normal place that a card is when you are following its on-play instructions. Band of Misfits is not in play, therefore the "play this as if" instruction can't find it to move it.

Keep in mind that the reason Lose Track exists it that you can literally lose track. If a card has been moved, we can't act like we can know where it is, even if we in reality do know. Maybe it has been shuffled into a hidden pile somewhere and there's literally no way to find that same copy of that card again.

It's the exact same reason that Throne Room on Mining Village won't let you trash it twice to get + twice. The second time you are playing it, when you get to the "you may trash this" instruction, that instruction expects that Mining Village is in play. If Mining Village is not in play, then you can't find the Mining Village in order to trash it. Again, maybe it was shuffled into a deck somewhere. We don't know where it is.

[Udzu]

BoM doesn't "play itself"

Wrong according to the wiki "other rules clarifications". This is the whole point of this discussion.

That's not how I read it at all. Band of Misfits doesn't have a separate mechanism to "play itself" that every other Action doesn't have. To me the text is just clarifying that Band of Misfits is played, and then the card it is copying is played. Band of Misfits needs to be played (as a normal action) to start executing the instructions of the card (which instruct the player to play it as another action).

Any ruling about BoM moving itself into play should be no different than eg Woodcutter moving itself into play.

I'm not sure if I'm reading you correctly or not; but BoM does in fact have a separate instruction that says to play itself. If you play a BoM, you actually play it twice. The first time like normal, just like you play any other action card. Then, you follow its instructions, which causes you to play it again, although this time you are playing it as if it were another card; so it counts as playing the other card, not playing BoM.

Indeed, which is why it counts as 2 actions played as far as Conspirator is concerned.

[Udzu]

I think the answer here is simple... Band of Misfits "play this as if" instructions expects the Band of Misfits to be in play, because that is the normal place that a card is when you are following its on-play instructions. Band of Misfits is not in play, therefore the "play this as if" instruction can't find it to move it.

In which case, should a BOM'd Encampment played from the trash also fail to return itself to the supply (since it similarly expects to find itself in play)?

[GendoIkari]

I think the answer here is simple... Band of Misfits "play this as if" instructions expects the Band of Misfits to be in play, because that is the normal place that a card is when you are following its on-play instructions. Band of Misfits is not in play, therefore the "play this as if" instruction can't find it to move it.

In which case, should a BOM'd Encampment played from the trash also fail to return itself to the supply (since it similarly expects to find itself in play)?

This sounds correct to me. Assuming that the way you played it from the trash is by a Throne Room - Embargo type thing. If it were a card that simply said "Play an action card from the trash", then playing it that way from the trash should move it into play just like playing it normally.

[Ingix]

I think the answer here is simple... Band of Misfits "play this as if" instructions expects the Band of Misfits to be in play, because that is the normal place that a card is when you are following its on-play instructions. Band of Misfits is not in play, therefore the "play this as if" instruction can't find it to move it.

In which case, should a BOM'd Encampment played from the trash also fail to return itself to the supply (since it similarly expects to find itself in play)?

Of course. It fails to set itself aside, so also fails to return to the supply.

[Wuscheli]

Band of Misfits "play this as if" instructions expects the Band of Misfits to be in play, because that is the normal place that a card is when you are following its on-play instructions. Band of Misfits is not in play, therefore the "play this as if" instruction can't find it to move it.

BoM expects itself in play when it copies something, so it does not attempt to move itself.

Why does BOM's effect "play this as if..." expect BOM in play?

I found this ruling by Donald from 2015 that BOM expects itself in play, and thus does not attempt move itself into play. This is already according to the rules where TR-BOM-(trash itself) may choose a new card to copy for the second play of BOM.

Apparently each card (and thus its effects until an effect explicitly moves the card from play) assume the card itself in play.

[Udzu]

Band of Misfits "play this as if" instructions expects the Band of Misfits to be in play, because that is the normal place that a card is when you are following its on-play instructions. Band of Misfits is not in play, therefore the "play this as if" instruction can't find it to move it.

BoM expects itself in play when it copies something, so it does not attempt to move itself.

Why does BOM's effect "play this as if..." expect BOM in play?

I found this ruling by Donald from 2015 that BOM expects itself in play, and thus does not attempt move itself into play. This is already according to the rules where TR-BOM-(trash itself) may choose a new card to copy for the second play of BOM.

Apparently each card (and thus its effects until an effect explicitly moves the card from play) assume the card itself in play.

Awesome, thanks!

[Jeebus]

I haven't read all the thread, but this question goes back to the BGG thread where lose-track was first introduced. TR + Mining Village, Mining Village can't put itself into play because it expects itself to be in play. An on-play ability always expects the card to be in play. Wasn't this brought up just a few weeks ago?

EDIT: Ok, it was more than 2 months ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19394.0

[Udzu]

I haven't read all the thread, but this question goes back to the BGG thread where lose-track was first introduced. TR + Mining Village, Mining Village can't put itself into play because it expects itself to be in play. An on-play ability always expects the card to be in play. Wasn't this brought up just a few weeks ago?

EDIT: Ok, it was more than 2 months ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19394.0

MV doesn't try to put itself in play (its on-play effect doesn't mention the word play). However you're right that the same principle applies: MV can't trash itself because it's exepcting itself to be in play (though it's perhaps not the best example as even if it didn't lose track of itself it still couldn't trash itself because it's already in the trash).

[hhelibebcnofnena]

MV doesn't try to put itself in play (its on-play effect doesn't mention the word play). However you're right that the same principle applies: MV can't trash itself because it's exepcting itself to be in play (though it's perhaps not the best example as even if it didn't lose track of itself it still couldn't trash itself because it's already in the trash).

Okay, only reason I've come across so far for why Renaissance makes the game more complex: staring at "MV" for way longer than should have been necessary while trying to figure out why Mountain Village factors into this discussion, because apparently I'm too tired to take context clues right now.

[Jeebus]

I haven't read all the thread, but this question goes back to the BGG thread where lose-track was first introduced. TR + Mining Village, Mining Village can't put itself into play because it expects itself to be in play. An on-play ability always expects the card to be in play. Wasn't this brought up just a few weeks ago?

EDIT: Ok, it was more than 2 months ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19394.0

MV doesn't try to put itself in play (its on-play effect doesn't mention the word play). However you're right that the same principle applies: MV can't trash itself because it's exepcting itself to be in play (though it's perhaps not the best example as even if it didn't lose track of itself it still couldn't trash itself because it's already in the trash).

Yes, the principle is the same because both BoM and M(ining)V try to move themselves from play as their on-play instruction. The unusual thing about BoM is that even if it's just played normally and doesn't lose track of itself, it still can't move itself into play since it's already there. But whenever you're told to play a card, you put it in play if possible (just like the OP recognizes).

The original BGG thread from 2011 also deals with the following situation: You're Possessed and play TR + MV. Now when you trash MV, it's set aside. TR plays it again (but lost track of it). MV can't trash itself now, even though it's not in trash, since it also lost track of itself.

[Jeebus]

Ok, I read through the thread, and of course GendoIkaro had already answered what I wrote.

Would Necromancer move cards into play if we cut his "leaving it there"?

Yes, just like Vassal, Golem etc.

Throne Room actually doesn't move anything. Once the card is played the first time, it stays where it ended up. You don't pull Reserves off your mat or move Encampment back from set aside land or whatever. So when BoM ends up in the trash it's not going anywhere.

Throne Room doesn't lose track because it was never keeping track. Throne doesn't care where the card is at any point I can immediately think of.

You always try to put a card in play when you play it. TR tries to put the card into play both times. If there was a card Junk Room, "Play an Action card from your hand, trash it, then play it again", it would put the card into play the second time as long as it was able to trash it. (If the card trashed itself, Junk Room would lose track of it before it could trash it.) This is the reason Vassal and Golem put cards into play.

[Ingix]

And the answer to the original question about BoM would be? That BoM expects itself in play when it plays itself as a copy of another card? Or something else?

[GendoIkari]

And the answer to the original question about BoM would be? That BoM expects itself in play when it plays itself as a copy of another card?

Yes, this. While you are executing a card's on-play instructions, those instructions expect that card to be in the in-play area. If it is somewhere else, then it has lost track of where it is, and those instructions can't cause the card to move.

I think a simpler example than BoM shenanigans is Necromancer playing a Madman that's in the trash. You will not return the Madman to its pile, because it is in the trash while being played instead of in play.

[Donald X.]

And the answer to the original question about BoM would be? That BoM expects itself in play when it plays itself as a copy of another card? Or something else?

Band of Misfits expects itself to be in play.

[Wuscheli]

If there was a card Junk Room, "Play an Action card from your hand, trash it, then play it again", it would put the card into play the second time as long as it was able to trash it. (If the card trashed itself, Junk Room would lose track of it before it could trash it.) This is the reason Vassal and Golem put cards into play.

If Junk Room plays Mining Village, then MV trashes itself, then JR's trashing of MV fails.

But can JR then fish MV from the trash for the second play? After all, MV is in the trash, exactly where JR expects it. By the exact wording of lose track item 1, each effect individually checks where stuff is: In rare circumstances an effect may try to move a card that is not where that effect expects the card to be. In those cases the card does not move - the effect has "lost track" of the card.

[GendoIkari]

If there was a card Junk Room, "Play an Action card from your hand, trash it, then play it again", it would put the card into play the second time as long as it was able to trash it. (If the card trashed itself, Junk Room would lose track of it before it could trash it.) This is the reason Vassal and Golem put cards into play.

If Junk Room plays Mining Village, then MV trashes itself, then JR's trashing of MV fails.

But can JR then fish MV from the trash for the second play? After all, MV is in the trash, exactly where JR expects it. By the exact wording of lose track item 1, each effect individually checks where stuff is: In rare circumstances an effect may try to move a card that is not where that effect expects the card to be. In those cases the card does not move - the effect has "lost track" of the card.

No, because the card has moved. The fact that it moved to where Junk Room expected doesn't matter. The Lose Track rule is intentionally broad in this way, as to not have to add specifics to handle different situations. It says Lose Track happens if a card is moved (or covered up).

[Jeebus]

Exactly. If at any point a card is not where an ability expects it to be, the ability loses track of it. This is why I like to use the term ability. It's not each individual effect, it's the whole ability keeping track.

This is why if Prince plays a Reserve card like Duplicate, and you call the Duplicate that turn, Prince still lost track of it (even though it is in play, where Prince would expect it to be).

[GendoIkari]

In rare circumstances an effect may try to move a card that is not where that effect expects the card to be. In those cases the card does not move - the effect has "lost track" of the card.

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one. I think the wording there is just the simplest and most common situation; but the full rule says that a card that is moved or covered up is lost track of; not just a card that isn't where the effect expects it to be.

Also, once you lose track, you can't un-lose track. In the Junk Room / Mining Village examples, the Junk Room loses track of Mining Village as soon as Mining Village trashes itself (even if the rule only dealt with it not being where it expects it to be... at that moment it expects it to be in play, but it is in the trash). So for Junk Room to pull it out of the trash, it would have to un-lose track of it later.

[crj]

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one.

The effect expects the card to be on top of the pile. It's not - there's something else above it.

[GendoIkari]

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one.

The effect expects the card to be on top of the pile. It's not - there's something else above it.

Fair enough. But we do know that a card that is covered and then uncovered is still lost. So being where it expects at the time you try to move it isn't enough; it has to have been in the expected place continually since... hmm, not sure when that duration actually begins. I guess since the card was first referred to by the card doing the effect?

[Chris is me]

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one.

The effect expects the card to be on top of the pile. It's not - there's something else above it.

Fair enough. But we do know that a card that is covered and then uncovered is still lost. So being where it expects at the time you try to move it isn't enough; it has to have been in the expected place continually since... hmm, not sure when that duration actually begins. I guess since the card was first referred to by the card doing the effect?

It's not a duration thing - it's just lost if it was ever covered since it was placed in the place that it's looking for it, right?

[GendoIkari]

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one.

The effect expects the card to be on top of the pile. It's not - there's something else above it.

Fair enough. But we do know that a card that is covered and then uncovered is still lost. So being where it expects at the time you try to move it isn't enough; it has to have been in the expected place continually since... hmm, not sure when that duration actually begins. I guess since the card was first referred to by the card doing the effect?

It's not a duration thing - it's just lost if it was ever covered since it was placed in the place that it's looking for it, right?

"since it was placed in the place that it's looking for it" is the duration then. I mean duration as in a period of time, not as in the card type, in case that was a source of confusion.

But I don't think that's the correct duration, because in the example of Junk Room / Mining Village, the place it it looking for it is in the trash, and the card is in the trash, and has been in the trash since it first went to the trash. But it still has lost track. I think that's because the duration is "since the card looking for it first knew where it was". So in this case, from the moment that Junk Room said to play Mining Village, if Mining Village ever moves somewhere (for a reason other than Junk Room making it move, like when it moves it into play), then Junk Room loses track of it and cannot un-lose track of it.

[Jeebus]

I covered that in my last post: If at any point a card is not where an ability expects it to be, the ability loses track of it.

This includes an on-play ability on a card expecting that card to be in play (like when a card is played from the trash).

But yes, the rest follows from:
1) An ability can never "get track" again.
2) We're talking about an ability of a card, that is all the instructions that the card does when the ability is triggered. The ability keeps tracking the card all the way until it's done being resolved. Again, see the example with a Princed Reserve card.

[GendoIkari]

I covered that in my last post: If at any point a card is not where an ability expects it to be, the ability loses track of it.

This includes an on-play ability on a card expecting that card to be in play (like when a card is played from the trash).

But yes, the rest follows from:
1) An ability can never "get track" again.
2) We're talking about an ability of a card, that is all the instructions that the card does when the ability is triggered. The ability keeps tracking the card all the way until it's done being resolved. Again, see the example with a Princed Reserve card.

Yes, but to use "at any point", you have to have a "starting from when". As in, it doesn't matter if the card was in a different place 3 turns ago. Or the last time your card was played. It matters if has been in an unexpected place since your effect first started caring about where it was.

[crj]

I would say an ability/effect starts tracking a card when it first refers to an individual, specific, identifiable card. This implicitly includes cards identifying themselves and beginning to track themselves when they are played, while working through the above-the-line text.

An effect can, moreover, fail to start tracking a card, if that effect expects the card to be in some specific place when it starts paying attention, and it's not. The most obvious example is a card's on-play effect failing to track the card if it's not in play when played.

[Jeebus]

Hmm, I though that part was obvious? When Summon says "gain a card", that's the first time it refers to it, so obviously that's when it starts tracking it. The only potential clarification that needs to be added is that abilities that say "when you gain/buy/trash/play/etc this" track their own card from the start, and this includes on-play abilities (which have an implicit "when you play this").

[Udzu]

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one. I think the wording there is just the simplest and most common situation; but the full rule says that a card that is moved or covered up is lost track of; not just a card that isn't where the effect expects it to be.

Shuffling also causes lose-track (including, I believe, shuffling a one card pile).

Hmm, I though that part was obvious? When Summon says "gain a card", that's the first time it refers to it, so obviously that's when it starts tracking it. The only potential clarification that needs to be added is that abilities that say "when you gain/buy/trash/play/etc this" track their own card from the start, and this includes on-play abilities (which have an implicit "when you play this").

The answer to this question highlights that on-play abilities only track their own card if it starts in play (the put this in play is an implicit part of the ability).

[Wuscheli]

The Lose Track rule is intentionally broad in this way, as to not have to add specifics to handle different situations. It says Lose Track happens if a card is moved (or covered up).

Exactly. If at any point a card is not where an ability expects it to be, the ability loses track of it.

Thanks, understood. It's very important that abilities track/lose track, not individual effects. (The lose-track rule (link to wiki.ds) is not clearly worded that the ability tracks: Sometimes the rule talks about effects tracking, sometimes it talks about cards tracking.)

I like the term ability for a maximal block of instructions that run at some given time.

on-play abilities (which have an implicit "when you play this").

Yes, with the exception that this's own "when you play this"-ability must be chosen last when we get to order Teacher tokens, reaction-to-attack, ..., that also happen when we play this. :-)

[Jeebus]

Yes, with the exception that this's own "when you play this"-ability must be chosen last when we get to order Teacher tokens, reaction-to-attack, ..., that also happen when we play this. :-)

This is a completely different topic, but yes. Treasures that do something, and also Noble Brigand, actually do say "when you play this". And of course they work like all other cards that you play: "+" tokens and Reactions happen first. With 2nd editions Donald has now started including "first" to signify that Reactions happen before the on-play ability. (Likewise, Citadel, which also triggers when you play a card, says "afterward". Royal Carriage and Coin of the Realm could also be phrased this way to be consistent.)