Print

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

[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.)