Print

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

[Donald X.]

1. Way of the Chameleon: scroll down!
2. Way of the Rat: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg825937#msg825937
3. Village Green: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826022#msg826022
4. Alliance: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826128#msg826128
5. Gamble: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826331#msg826331
6. Camel Train: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826449#msg826449
7. Way of the Horse: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826562#msg826562
8. Way of the Pig / Way of the Sheep: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826668#msg826668
9. Stampede: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826734#msg826734
10. Cardinal: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826816#msg826816
11. Desperation: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20150.msg826945#msg826945

* * *

Bonus Preview 1: Way of the Chameleon

People asked for various things, but the big one was Ways, everyone wants to see more. Someone wanted the "vice-versa" card and someone wanted the most rule-bending things, so here's all three of those, and the most exotic thing in the set.



Durations are tricky. It only applies to this turn; if you play Merchant Ship using Way of the Chameleon, you get +2 Cards this turn and +$2 next turn. Also some things get you cards but aren't "+Cards"; Way of the Chameleon doesn't apply to them. There will be a rulebook eventually!

[Sparafucile]

 Very interesting card!   If I chameleon a second time in a turn - does it undo the first one - putting all the cards back to normal? 

[kieranmillar]

Very interesting card!   If I chameleon a second time in a turn - does it undo the first one - putting all the cards back to normal?

You choose to apply Ways on a card by card basis, so its either active or not for an individual card play, you can't apply it twice.

[Sparafucile]

It says each time ... this turn.

Also. - ways are instead of the card text.... so....

[kieranmillar]

The key word is "that", meaning it only applies to the one card you applied the Way to. The "this turn" clause is there I imagine to prevent tracking issues with durations.

[Donald X.]

The key word is "that", meaning it only applies to the one card you applied the Way to. The "this turn" clause is there I imagine to prevent tracking issues with durations.

Correct.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 1:

People asked for various things, but the big one was Ways, everyone wants to see more. Someone wanted the "vice-versa" card and someone wanted the most rule-bending things, so here's all three of those, and the most exotic thing in the set.



Durations are tricky. It only applies to this turn; if you play Merchant Ship using Way of the Chameleon, you get +2 Cards this turn and +$2 next turn. Also some things get you cards but aren't "+Cards"; Way of the Chameleon doesn't apply to them. There will be a rulebook eventually!

So, a Smithy could be turned into a terminal Gold and a Goon turns into +2 Cards +1 Buy

How does it interact with Capitalism?  Does Capitalism only look at the "original" text, so that you still wouldn't be able to play a Smithy during Buy phase (even though you could use it for +$3 during your Action phase), but you could play, say, a Livery for +3 Cards instead of +$3?

[Violet CLM]

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

[mxdata]

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

But only if you have no Treasure cards in your hand.  It's now "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -1 Card per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below 0 cards)"  No, wait, it specifically says "+Cards" and "+coins" on the Way, so I guess it wouldn't matter how many Treasure cards you had.  It would basically become "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -$1 per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below $0)" making that clause meaningless ... except that you'd still have to reveal your hand, but who cares?  Dang, that does make Poor House awesome!

[J Reggie]

I can't wait to use this on cards like Peddler! I always wondered if there would be a way to directly switch +bonuses, and here it is.

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

But only if you have no Treasure cards in your hand.  It's now "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -1 Card per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below 0 cards)"

Would it be -1 card? I'd think the only thing that changes would be the plusses, not the minuses.

[mxdata]

I can't wait to use this on cards like Peddler! I always wondered if there would be a way to directly switch +bonuses, and here it is.

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

But only if you have no Treasure cards in your hand.  It's now "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -1 Card per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below 0 cards)"

Would it be -1 card? I'd think the only thing that changes would be the plusses, not the minuses.

Yeah, I corrected that.  You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!  I'd predict that in a game with Poor House and Chameleon, the Poor House would get bought up very quickly

[Donald X.]

How does it interact with Capitalism?  Does Capitalism only look at the "original" text, so that you still wouldn't be able to play a Smithy during Buy phase (even though you could use it for +$3 during your Action phase), but you could play, say, a Livery for +3 Cards instead of +$3?

Livery has +$3 so Capitalism makes it a Treasure. In my buy phase I play it, which I can do because it's a Treasure. It's still an Action so I can use Way of the Chameleon on it, which I do. This causes me to get +3 Cards and the other thing Livery does.

[mxdata]

What's the reason for making it so it can't be used for the Duration effect?

[Donald X.]

What's the reason for making it so it can't be used for the Duration effect?

Tracking! Nothing tracks that you did that, so you wouldn't remember (irl).

[mxdata]

What's the reason for making it so it can't be used for the Duration effect?

Tracking! Nothing tracks that you did that, so you wouldn't remember (irl).

Ah, of course!  It would be too easy to forget what choice you'd made, and you can't apply the Way to only part of the card.  Makes perfect sense now

[mxdata]

I can't wait to play that Chameleon + Poor House combo!

[mxdata]

Minion would be interesting with Chameleon.  You'd have the option of using it as a Lab or of discarding your hand for $4 if you applied Chameleon to it.  So, Minion now has a total of four ways to play it, and Count now has twelve total ways to play it (since the +$3 option becomes +3 cards if you use Chameleon, so 3*4)

[mxdata]

Minion would be interesting with Chameleon.  You'd have the option of using it as a Lab or of discarding your hand for $4 if you applied Chameleon to it.  So, Minion now has a total of four ways to play it, and Count now has twelve total ways to play it (since the +$3 option becomes +3 cards if you use Chameleon, so 3*4)

And it becomes a lot easier to get the +2 Actions on Diplomat if you use Chameleon.  Unless you played it from a hand of 7 or more cards, it would effectively be +$2 +2 Actions

[mxdata]

At first I thought Chameleon would have no effect on cards like Peddler or Merchant, but then I realized that Chameleon would allow it to override Enchantress, as mentioned in the first post about Ways "Enchantress is a lot like a Way. The main thing is that you can beat Enchantress by doing the Way instead."  So, normally there'd be no effect, since there's no practical difference between +1 Card +1 Action +$1 and +$1 +1 Action +1 Card, but if it's your first card with an Enchantress attack in play, it overrides Enchantress!

[silverspawn]

Squire strictly stronger than village confirmed. City Quarter will also be fun.

I imagine the most consequential change will just be to up the powerlevel of various cards. +1$ is definitely weaker than +1 card in general, so we will have lots of cards that are blatantly overpowered for their price point. Think of Diplomat. Or Festival.

[mxdata]

Squire strictly stronger than village confirmed. City Quarter will also be fun.

I imagine the most consequential change will just be to up the powerlevel of various cards. +1$ is definitely weaker than +1 card in general, so we will have lots of cards that are blatantly overpowered for their price point. Think of Diplomat. Or Festival.

Some trash-for-benefit cards have an interesting effect.  Forager becomes a non-terminal draw, with a variable number of cards drawn for example.  Death Cart lets you draw *five cards*!  And Poor House is basically Hunting Grounds without the on-trash effect

[silverspawn]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

[pubby]

Scholar is funny with this. +$7.

[J Reggie]

I can't wait to use this on cards like Peddler! I always wondered if there would be a way to directly switch +bonuses, and here it is.

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

But only if you have no Treasure cards in your hand.  It's now "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -1 Card per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below 0 cards)"

Would it be -1 card? I'd think the only thing that changes would be the plusses, not the minuses.

Yeah, I corrected that.  You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!  I'd predict that in a game with Poor House and Chameleon, the Poor House would get bought up very quickly

Yeah, I guess PPE doesn't apply to edits.

[crj]

Scholar is funny with this. +$7.

Woah! Epic if throned with some spare +Buy.

[crj]

Hmm. Suddenly it makes a difference whether you're playing with first-edition or second-edition Cellar. /-8

(Edit: and which language your set is.)

[LastFootnote]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

[J Reggie]

Ooo, my favorite card Miser likes this.

[michaeljb]

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

But only if you have no Treasure cards in your hand.  It's now "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -1 Card per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below 0 cards)"  No, wait, it specifically says "+Cards" and "+coins" on the Way, so I guess it wouldn't matter how many Treasure cards you had.  It would basically become "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -$1 per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below $0)" making that clause meaningless ... except that you'd still have to reveal your hand, but who cares?  Dang, that does make Poor House awesome!

(emphasis mine)

You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!

(emphasis mine)

I can't wait to play that Chameleon + Poor House combo!

And Poor House is basically Hunting Grounds without the on-trash effect

Poor House's "formula" is not +(max(, - number of Treasure cards in your hand)); it is +, then - per Treasure card in your hand, with your total count bottoming out at . For example, if you play a Market, then a Laboratory, then a Poor House and reveal 5 Coppers, you now have a grand total of and 1 Buy; the Poor House is actively harmful* in that case.

So a Chameleoned Poor House draws 4 cards and then can still remove you've accumulated earlier this turn. Play a Market for its normal effects (Chameleoned or not), then play a Chameleoned Poor House to draw 4 cards, then if you reveal any Treasures at all, you lose the provided by the Market.

* blah blah edge case blah blah Peddler

[Jeebus]

Very interesting card!   If I chameleon a second time in a turn - does it undo the first one - putting all the cards back to normal?

If you could use a Way several times when you play a card, it wouldn't make a difference. The Way tells you what to do instead of following the card's instructions. If you apply the Way again, you are already not following the card's instructions, so it wouldn't do anything. This is in line with Enchantress; playing severeal Enchantresses doesn't give your opponents "+1 Card, +1 Action" more than once.

[GendoIkari]

So Poor House is +4 Cards and costs $1? I'll take it.

But only if you have no Treasure cards in your hand.  It's now "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -1 Card per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below 0 cards)"  No, wait, it specifically says "+Cards" and "+coins" on the Way, so I guess it wouldn't matter how many Treasure cards you had.  It would basically become "+4 Cards.  Reveal your hand, -$1 per Treasure card in your hand (you can't go below $0)" making that clause meaningless ... except that you'd still have to reveal your hand, but who cares?  Dang, that does make Poor House awesome!

You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!

I can't wait to play that Chameleon + Poor House combo!

And Poor House is basically Hunting Grounds without the on-trash effect

Poor House's "formula" is not +(max(, - number of Treasure cards in your hand)); it is +, then - per Treasure card in your hand, with your total count bottoming out at . For example, if you play a Market, then a Laboratory, then a Poor House and reveal 5 Coppers, you now have a grand total of and 1 Buy; the Poor House is actively harmful* in that case.

So a Chameleoned Poor House draws 4 cards and then can still remove you've accumulated earlier this turn. Play a Market for its normal effects (Chameleoned or not), then play a Chameleoned Poor House to draw 4 cards, then if you reveal any Treasures at all, you lose the provided by the Market.

* blah blah edge case blah blah Peddler

I don’t think anyone was misunderstanding this. Yes Poor House would still remove other money you had earned from Peddler, etc... but often you won’t have any yet. Poor House by itself is now +4 cards, the possible drawback is avoided by not using it in a Peddler-type deck.

[Jeebus]

People asked for various things, but the big one was Ways, everyone wants to see more. Someone wanted the "vice-versa" card and someone wanted the most rule-bending things, so here's all three of those, and the most exotic thing in the set.

Do you mean "most exotic" in the zoological sense?

[Jeebus]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

Oh man, that's awful. Why differentiate between draw cards and +cards? Now some cards were functionally changed with 2nd editions, retroactively.

[michaeljb]

I don’t think anyone was misunderstanding this. Yes Poor House would still remove other money you had earned from Peddler, etc... but often you won’t have any yet. Poor House by itself is now +4 cards, the possible drawback is avoided by not using it in a Peddler-type deck.

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I dunno, "not using it in a Peddler-type deck" sounds like a condition to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!

(emphasis mine)

[michaeljb]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

Oh man, that's awful. Why differenciate between draw cards and +cards? Now some cards were functionally changed with 2nd editions, retroactively.

If I've learned anything from reading of Donald's posts over the years, I would guess his answer is something like this: at the time, "drawing cards" seemed like better wording than "+Cards" and Way of the Chameleon's mechanism was unforeseen. While making Menagerie, the mechanism seemed neat enough to be worth the drawback of retroactively changing some first edition cards. While the mechanism could be worded to treat "drawing cards" and "+Cards" as the same, that was probably too wordy.

[silverspawn]

Hmm. Suddenly it makes a difference whether you're playing with first-edition or second-edition Cellar. /-8

(Edit: and which language your set is.)

I think that matters anyway. If you take the german version literally, you have all sorts of nonsensical effects and bugs. For example, watchtower triggerd on buy or gain last time I checked, which doesn't make any sense (though admittedly it also doesn't change anything).

[Jeebus]

If I've learned anything from reading of Donald's posts over the years, I would guess his answer is something like this: at the time, "drawing cards" seemed like better wording than "+Cards" and Way of the Chameleon's mechanism was unforeseen. While making Menagerie, the mechanism seemed neat enough to be worth the drawback of retroactively changing some first edition cards. While the mechanism could be worded to treat "drawing cards" and "+Cards" as the same, that was probably too wordy.

I definitely don't think the card text on Way of the Chameleon should be changed. But there is no way to know from that text alone whether it applies to "draw cards"; you have to check the rulebook. And it would be perfectly reasonable to say that "give you +Cards" also refers to cards that say "draw cards".

Actually, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same, as with the -1 Card token for instance. So the intuitive interpretation is that cards that "give you +Cards" include any card that lets you draw cards.

[mxdata]

So a Chameleoned Poor House draws 4 cards and then can still remove you've accumulated earlier this turn. Play a Market for its normal effects (Chameleoned or not), then play a Chameleoned Poor House to draw 4 cards, then if you reveal any Treasures at all, you lose the provided by the Market.

* blah blah edge case blah blah Peddler

Wait, Poor House can remove coins that came from other cards?  I thought the -coins only applied to its own bonus?

[Violet CLM]

What I'm curious about is how far the effects reach. If I apply Chameleon to Crown in my Buy phase, leading me to play a treasure card twice, does Chameleon automatically extend to any +$ that treasure card gives me? It was following Crown's instructions that directly caused me to play the treasure card.

[michaeljb]

So a Chameleoned Poor House draws 4 cards and then can still remove you've accumulated earlier this turn. Play a Market for its normal effects (Chameleoned or not), then play a Chameleoned Poor House to draw 4 cards, then if you reveal any Treasures at all, you lose the provided by the Market.

* blah blah edge case blah blah Peddler

Wait, Poor House can remove coins that came from other cards?  I thought the -coins only applied to its own bonus?

Indeed it can. I don't know if the 2E rulebook changed the wording of the FAQ and the wiki seems to be having trouble right now, so here's what the 1E rulebook says:

Poor House: First you get +. Then you reveal your hand, and lose per Treasure card in it. You can lose more than this way, but the amount of coins you have available to spend can never go below . Cards with two types, one of which is Treasure (such as Harem from Intrigue) are Treasure cards.

[michaeljb]

What I'm curious about is how far the effects reach. If I apply Chameleon to Crown in my Buy phase, leading me to play a treasure card twice, does Chameleon automatically extend to any +$ that treasure card gives me?

No.

It was following Crown's instructions that directly caused me to play the treasure card.

True, but when you're playing a Treasure that Crown let you play twice, you're onto a different card's instructions. In this scenario, Chameleon's "that" refers only to Crown's instructions.

[mxdata]

Scholar is funny with this. +$7.

Dang, almost a guaranteed Province, as long as you play at least one card with a +$1 bonus before it!  But also, I love how this card and Minion cause you to have no hand after you play them with Chameleon

Storehouse acts almost like a throned Cellar when you use this Way, except with +1 Buy and no +Actions

[michaeljb]

Storehouse acts almost like a throned Cellar when you use this Way, except with +1 Buy and no +Actions

Oof, Storeroom is another instance of the Storyteller quirk--1E uses "+Cards" and 2E uses "draw" so only the 1E version works with Chameleon 2E version works the way you describe.

[mxdata]

Wait, Poor House can remove coins that came from other cards?  I thought the -coins only applied to its own bonus?

Indeed it can. I don't know if the 2E rulebook changed the wording of the FAQ and the wiki seems to be having trouble right now, so here's what the 1E rulebook says:

Poor House: First you get +. Then you reveal your hand, and lose per Treasure card in it. You can lose more than this way, but the amount of coins you have available to spend can never go below . Cards with two types, one of which is Treasure (such as Harem from Intrigue) are Treasure cards.

Hunh, interesting.  I guess it never came up for me because there was never any point to playing it with more than 3 Treasure cards in hand.  So, clearly then, you'd want to make sure you played this before any cards that give +coins.  Although, a draw of 4 cards would probably still be worth it, even if ended up losing a couple coins, similar to playing Storyteller

[michaeljb]

People asked for various things, but the big one was Ways, everyone wants to see more. Someone wanted the "vice-versa" card and someone wanted the most rule-bending things, so here's all three of those, and the most exotic thing in the set.

Do you mean "most exotic" in the zoological sense?

If not, I'd like to request the most zoologically exotic thing in the set for a bonus preview. 

[mxdata]

Scholar is funny with this. +$7.

Woah! Epic if throned with some spare +Buy.

Or King's Court/Mastermind!  +$21!  Automatically at least two provinces or a province and a colony if you have an extra buy (in the case of Mastermind, maybe from another Duration card with +Buy or a Turtled card with +Buy or the Fair project), and you'd only need one more coin for two Colonies.  A Duration card like Wharf would even allow you to continue playing after the +$21 if you resolve Mastermind first, though granted with a very small hand

EDIT: Wait, you can choose to use the Way or not on each play.  So, another option is to use Chameleon on the first two plays for $14, then on the third play you use the normal function, giving you +7 cards.  Now you have a 7-card hand with $14 already accumulated

[scolapasta]

Plus you don't have to use the Way the third time. Play a Mastermind and on our next turn, Chameleon a Scholar for just the first two plays: start your turn with and a 7 card hand and +$14.

[GendoIkari]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

The last sentence seems strange to me. While I suppose every group will play it differently, I would expect that anyone who knows about the errata/change would generally choose to play with that errata. I only have first edition, but if I play with Throne Room, I’m making sure everyone knows that it actually says “may” even though it isn’t printed on the card. It seems silly to play with different rules based on whether or not your printed copy has old text.

Same goes for any game. I have first edition Carcassone, but when scoring I’m going to use the current farm scoring rules.

[Donald X.]

Do you mean "most exotic" in the zoological sense?

I meant exotic in terms of the effect; the animals though, as I have mentioned somewhere, are mostly ones medieval people interacted with.

[GendoIkari]

I don’t think anyone was misunderstanding this. Yes Poor House would still remove other money you had earned from Peddler, etc... but often you won’t have any yet. Poor House by itself is now +4 cards, the possible drawback is avoided by not using it in a Peddler-type deck.

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I dunno, "not using it in a Peddler-type deck" sounds like a condition to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!

(emphasis mine)

I read “unconditional” as “always draws 4.” Compared to Scout, which can draw 4 but probably won’t. There’s a potential drawback, but not a condition. Either way it still sounds like a strong combo, and I think the people that were discussing it were aware of the drawback.

[Donald X.]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

Oh man, that's awful. Why differenciate between draw cards and +cards? Now some cards were functionally changed with 2nd editions, retroactively.

If I've learned anything from reading of Donald's posts over the years, I would guess his answer is something like this: at the time, "drawing cards" seemed like better wording than "+Cards" and Way of the Chameleon's mechanism was unforeseen. While making Menagerie, the mechanism seemed neat enough to be worth the drawback of retroactively changing some first edition cards. While the mechanism could be worded to treat "drawing cards" and "+Cards" as the same, that was probably too wordy.

Not working with non-draw draw seems fine in general; it's clear, Farming Village isn't +1 Card. Having Cellar / Storeroom / Storyteller depend on which version you have is a bummer; it didn't kill Way of the Chameleon though.

For the second editions, I felt like I had a better wording on Cellar etc., and didn't know this thing was coming. The idea of switching around +'s predates the game being published, but surely that was never happening.

[Donald X.]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

The last sentence seems strange to me. While I suppose every group will play it differently, I would expect that anyone who knows about the errata/change would generally choose to play with that errata. I only have first edition, but if I play with Throne Room, I’m making sure everyone knows that it actually says “may” even though it isn’t printed on the card. It seems silly to play with different rules based on whether or not your printed copy has old text.

Same goes for any game. I have first edition Carcassone, but when scoring I’m going to use the current farm scoring rules.

It's up to the players; for sure some people are going to play by the card in front of them, and not think about this, and that will be fine.

[mxdata]

I don’t think anyone was misunderstanding this. Yes Poor House would still remove other money you had earned from Peddler, etc... but often you won’t have any yet. Poor House by itself is now +4 cards, the possible drawback is avoided by not using it in a Peddler-type deck.

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I dunno, "not using it in a Peddler-type deck" sounds like a condition to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You're right, as written it doesn't change the minuses, so it's a card costing $1 that draws an unconditional 4 cards!

(emphasis mine)

I read “unconditional” as “always draws 4.” Compared to Scout, which can draw 4 but probably won’t. There’s a potential drawback, but not a condition. Either way it still sounds like a strong combo, and I think the people that were discussing it were aware of the drawback.

Yeah, that was what I meant by unconditional.  You draw 4 cards no matter what.  Depending on what you have in your hand,  and what you've already played, there might be a -coin cost, but nothing's blocking you from drawing four cards

[Donald X.]

Not working with non-draw draw seems fine in general; it's clear, Farming Village isn't +1 Card. Having Cellar / Storeroom / Storyteller depend on which version you have is a bummer; it didn't kill Way of the Chameleon though.

I left out Oracle. The plan is to change Oracle back though, meaning only some years worth of copies of Hinterlands will have the non-draw ones. It changed because of the centered +2 Cards confusing people; but the text could still say +2 Cards, why doesn't it.

[Jeebus]

My objection was not that you should have killed Way of the Chameleon, nor changed the card text. I just think that "give you +Cards" should have included all cards that let you draw cards. After all, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same.

EDIT: Of course not including Farming Village. The exact same set of cards that the -1 Card token interacts with.

[Donald X.]

My objection was not that you should have killed Way of the Chameleon, nor changed the card text. I just think that "give you +Cards" should have included all cards that let you draw cards. After all, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same.

EDIT: Of course not including Farming Village. The exact same set of cards that the -1 Card token interacts with.

Library interacts with the -1 Card token.

If I'd had a better wording I would have used it. It wasn't a case of not caring.

[GendoIkari]

My objection was not that you should have killed Way of the Chameleon, nor changed the card text. I just think that "give you +Cards" should have included all cards that let you draw cards. After all, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same.

EDIT: Of course not including Farming Village. The exact same set of cards that the -1 Card token interacts with.

Library interacts with the -1 Card token.

Come to think of it, if Chameleon did work with the word “draw”, then cards like Library would give you infinite money... you keep getting +$1 until you have 7 cards in hand, and you never reach 7 cards in hand.

[mxdata]

My objection was not that you should have killed Way of the Chameleon, nor changed the card text. I just think that "give you +Cards" should have included all cards that let you draw cards. After all, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same.

EDIT: Of course not including Farming Village. The exact same set of cards that the -1 Card token interacts with.

Library interacts with the -1 Card token.

Come to think of it, if Chameleon did work with the word “draw”, then cards like Library would give you infinite money... you keep getting +$1 until you have 7 cards in hand, and you never reach 7 cards in hand.

A simple solution there would just be to say that it only works if a specific number is given.  "Draw 2 cards" is equivalent to +2 Cards, but "draw until you have seven cards" is not equivalent to any +X Cards because X is conditional (and digging cards like Farming Village *definitely* don't count).  And, in fact, with Library is actually undefined until it's finished resolving - since you have the option of discarding Actions, there's no way of knowing how many cards you would've actually drawn, only what your final handsize would be

[Jeebus]

My objection was not that you should have killed Way of the Chameleon, nor changed the card text. I just think that "give you +Cards" should have included all cards that let you draw cards. After all, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same.

EDIT: Of course not including Farming Village. The exact same set of cards that the -1 Card token interacts with.

Library interacts with the -1 Card token.

If I'd had a better wording I would have used it. It wasn't a case of not caring.

Good point about Library. If Chameleon includes all card drawers, it includes Library.
So I guess the wording struggles were actually about making it more clear that it was only about "+Cards".

[Jeebus]

A simple solution there would just be to say that it only works if a specific number is given.  "Draw 2 cards" is equivalent to +2 Cards, but "draw until you have seven cards" is not equivalent to any +X Cards because X is conditional (and digging cards like Farming Village *definitely* don't count).  And, in fact, with Library is actually undefined until it's finished resolving - since you have the option of discarding Actions, there's no way of knowing how many cards you would've actually drawn, only what your final handsize would be

I think you make good point. Players would definitely not just assume that Library = infinite $. They would check the rulebook and find that it doesn't (along with Watchtower, Jack, etc).

[Donald X.]

My objection was not that you should have killed Way of the Chameleon, nor changed the card text. I just think that "give you +Cards" should have included all cards that let you draw cards. After all, the rules make it clear that "draw cards" and "+Cards" are the same.

EDIT: Of course not including Farming Village. The exact same set of cards that the -1 Card token interacts with.

Library interacts with the -1 Card token.

Come to think of it, if Chameleon did work with the word “draw”, then cards like Library would give you infinite money... you keep getting +$1 until you have 7 cards in hand, and you never reach 7 cards in hand.

A simple solution there would just be to say that it only works if a specific number is given.  "Draw 2 cards" is equivalent to +2 Cards, but "draw until you have seven cards" is not equivalent to any +X Cards because X is conditional (and digging cards like Farming Village *definitely* don't count).  And, in fact, with Library is actually undefined until it's finished resolving - since you have the option of discarding Actions, there's no way of knowing how many cards you would've actually drawn, only what your final handsize would be

Trying to make that distinction does not look better / clearer to me. Library etc. draw one card at a time.

It's very clear if a card says "+Cards" or doesn't. It does or it doesn't! It's not clear what the current wording of a card is, compared to the printing you bought, but you don't need to account for that, and I bet most people won't think to.

[mxdata]

If you're still taking requests about the next preview, I'd like to see what the "an unused action" from the teaser refers to.  I've been pondering it and I can't come up with a reasonable card or landscape that that phrase would make sense in.  It can't refer to an action card, because "unused" would be weirdly redundant there.  An "unused" card would be one that's still in your hand, or that you discarded/trashed/Exiled, so I'm guessing it means an Action that you haven't used.  But the "an" is what's confusing me, why would it be an unused Action and not something like "any unused Actions" or "each unused Action" in a clause like "if you have any unused Actions ..." or "per unused Action".  So I'm extremely curious to find out what that is!

[Donald X.]

If you're still taking requests about the next preview, I'd like to see what the "an unused action" from the teaser refers to.  I've been pondering it and I can't come up with a reasonable card or landscape that that phrase would make sense in.  It can't refer to an action card, because "unused" would be weirdly redundant there.  An "unused" card would be one that's still in your hand, or that you discarded/trashed/Exiled, so I'm guessing it means an Action that you haven't used.  But the "an" is what's confusing me, why would it be an unused Action and not something like "any unused Actions" or "each unused Action" in a clause like "if you have any unused Actions ..." or "per unused Action".  So I'm extremely curious to find out what that is!

I've made a list of requests, and they've piled up, even though a bunch are just "more Ways." So I probably won't get to further requests, though I can add them to the list.

[mxdata]

Chameleon + Governor would be funny.  One of the options becomes +$3 for yourself and +$1 for all other players - except that, of course, they wouldn't be able to use that coin on your turn!

[Gubump]

Chameleon + Governor would be funny.  One of the options becomes +$3 for yourself and +$1 for all other players - except that, of course, they wouldn't be able to use that coin on your turn!

Except that it's phrased "each time that would give you +Cards this turn, you get + instead, and vice-versa." Governor would still give everybody else +1 Card.

[mxdata]

Chameleon + Governor would be funny.  One of the options becomes +$3 for yourself and +$1 for all other players - except that, of course, they wouldn't be able to use that coin on your turn!

Except that it's phrased "each time that would give you +Cards this turn, you get + instead, and vice-versa." Governor would still give everybody else +1 Card.

Oh, right!  I missed that part, good point

[hhelibebcnofnena]

I was going to bring storyteller up as a joke, but actually it now allows you to play treasures during your turn for +$, which is legitimately useful. Unless the effect doesn't trigger because it says "draw cards" instead of "+X Cards" ...?

Correct, 2nd Edition Storyteller doesn't has "draw" instead of "+1 Card", so it's unaffected by Way of the Chameleon (other than the vanilla +1 Card). If you're playing IRL with 1st Edition Storyteller, then the +Cards will be converted to +$.

The last sentence seems strange to me. While I suppose every group will play it differently, I would expect that anyone who knows about the errata/change would generally choose to play with that errata. I only have first edition, but if I play with Throne Room, I’m making sure everyone knows that it actually says “may” even though it isn’t printed on the card. It seems silly to play with different rules based on whether or not your printed copy has old text.

Same goes for any game. I have first edition Carcassone, but when scoring I’m going to use the current farm scoring rules.

I'd like to play with the errata and 2E versions, but I'm never going to be keeping a mental list of cards which changed +cards to draw cards, because it has no functional change except with Way of the Chameleon. Throne Room I remember because even though the functional change doesn't usually matter, it's always there. I also don't feel like looking up a list of those cards every time I play.

The key difference here is that knowing the errata isn't what causes you to choose it. It's remembering the errata.

[Jeebus]

I'd like to play with the errata and 2E versions, but I'm never going to be keeping a mental list of cards which changed +cards to draw cards, because it has no functional change except with Way of the Chameleon. Throne Room I remember because even though the functional change doesn't usually matter, it's always there. I also don't feel like looking up a list of those cards every time I play.

The key difference here is that knowing the errata isn't what causes you to choose it. It's remembering the errata.

In my view the problem is that people could play a game with Chameleon and Storyteller where it was a great combo, then play another game with another physical set or play online, and it's completely different. If you're not attentive to that, it has consequences for you, and why would you ever be attentive to that? It could be that the players in the game have different prior experiences; some expect it to work one way, some another way.

[michaeljb]

I read “unconditional” as “always draws 4.” Compared to Scout, which can draw 4 but probably won’t. There’s a potential drawback, but not a condition. Either way it still sounds like a strong combo, and I think the people that were discussing it were aware of the drawback.

I agree that it looks strong, and I was wrong in my interpretation of "unconditional". But I still think the person I quoted wasn't aware of the drawback at the time, after all they later posted this:

Wait, Poor House can remove coins that came from other cards?  I thought the -coins only applied to its own bonus?

Hopefully this can conclude this silly side-conversation about whether my Princess Bride meme post was justified :p

[GendoIkari]

I read “unconditional” as “always draws 4.” Compared to Scout, which can draw 4 but probably won’t. There’s a potential drawback, but not a condition. Either way it still sounds like a strong combo, and I think the people that were discussing it were aware of the drawback.

I agree that it looks strong, and I was wrong in my interpretation of "unconditional". But I still think the person I quoted wasn't aware of the drawback at the time, after all they later posted this:

Wait, Poor House can remove coins that came from other cards?  I thought the -coins only applied to its own bonus?

Hopefully this can conclude this silly side-conversation about whether my Princess Bride meme post was justified :p

Fair, I didn’t notice that was one of the same people. And yeah, I remember a few people misunderstanding Poor House in that way in the past.

*Edit* lol I just now saw the hidden text thanks to the quote in this post.

[Wolphmaniac]

Can't wait to Chameleon a Market so I can say that I chameleoned ironically.

[mxdata]

Can't wait to Chameleon a Market so I can say that I chameleoned ironically.

There is actually a context where that would make sense.  As clarified in the original Ways post, Enchantress can be cancelled out by a Way.  So, even though a Chameleoned market is just a normal Market, it would block Enchantress' effect and let you actually use it as a Market

[FemurLemur]

I'd like to play with the errata and 2E versions, but I'm never going to be keeping a mental list of cards which changed +cards to draw cards, because it has no functional change except with Way of the Chameleon. Throne Room I remember because even though the functional change doesn't usually matter, it's always there. I also don't feel like looking up a list of those cards every time I play.

The key difference here is that knowing the errata isn't what causes you to choose it. It's remembering the errata.

In my view the problem is that people could play a game with Chameleon and Storyteller where it was a great combo, then play another game with another physical set or play online, and it's completely different. If you're not attentive to that, it has consequences for you, and why would you ever be attentive to that? It could be that the players in the game have different prior experiences; some expect it to work one way, some another way.

Sounds like Chameleon may be a definite pick for your online banlist

It seems like more generally you take issue with the existence of the 2E, as the problem you're describing already theoretically happens with various card combos between editions. Different players will have different expectations for how Possession, Masquerade, Trade Route- among others- combo with various cards based on the version they're used to.

Ultimately, I don't think this Chameleon issue is gonna be a very big deal. Those of us who are here are likely to care more than most, and we'll consequently probably learn the list of Chameleon exceptions pretty quickly.

Either way, I'd rather have it than not, because it's a pretty dang neat landscape

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 2: Way of the Rat

Here's another Way, for you people hungry for Ways. Despite Way of the Chameleon, they are mostly very simple, whether vanilla like Way of the Ox, or just, you know, simple, like Way of the Rat.



In games with Way of the Rat, everything can gain copies of itself. There you have it.

[silverspawn]

Rats will be shocked to find out that the way of the rats is different from the way of the rat.

I expect this will be useful late rather than early. Foregoing an early action card to gain a copy of it will rarely be worth it. On the other hand, if you have your entire deck in hand and some spare actions, it can be very strong.

[Awaclus]

Way of Lord Rattington.

[Reefersleep]

Way of The Rat looks great to me; I'm always looking for more ways to gain Grand Markets, and now I can do it via copper!

[segura]

Kinda nice if you dud with Prince.

[Wizard_Amul]

Way of Lord Rattington.

I can totally see Lord Rattington use this every turn and never actually play any of his actions for their usual on-play effect. It would be funny to see him empty the Chapel pile.

[J Reggie]

I really like how well-balanced these Ways seem, a lot of thought must have gone into them. Like, you're usually not going to use them most of the time you're playing an action, but they still add something interesting to a game.

[chipperMDW]

Rats will be shocked to find out that the way of the rats is different from the way of the rat.

Yeah, it's way different.

[GendoIkari]

I really like how well-balanced these Ways seem, a lot of thought must have gone into them. Like, you're usually not going to use them most of the time you're playing an action, but they still add something interesting to a game.

Turtle, Chameleon, and Rat are extra cool here. With all Ways; there’s an interesting balance problem to solve... the Way can be used with an action that cost $2, or with an action that cost $5. So it can’t give a $5 strength effect; otherwise it’s way too good when used with a $2 cost action. But those three (so far) give you a better effect when you use a better card with it. Whereas the other 2 revealed Ways give you the same effect no matter what; making them much better if used with a worse/cheaper action.

[crj]

I think Way of the Rat will make sense any time you want to collect many copies of a spammable card, and playing a copy of the spammable card gives you a lesser effect than buying another. As mentioned, Grand Market is the most obvious example of this.

The other significant category is cards with below-the-line effects. Using it on Highway or Haggler could easily make sense.

As a minor special case, if you throne a throne, you could throne some stuff, then use Way of the Rat on your final invocation of the throned throne to get yourself another throne.

[mxdata]

I think Way of the Rat will make sense any time you want to collect many copies of a spammable card, and playing a copy of the spammable card gives you a lesser effect than buying another. As mentioned, Grand Market is the most obvious example of this.

The other significant category is cards with below-the-line effects. Using it on Highway or Haggler could easily make sense.

As a minor special case, if you throne a throne, you could throne some stuff, then use Way of the Rat on your final invocation of the throned throne to get yourself another throne.

Way of the Rat + a cheap card would also be a way to get Wayfarer for  cheap.  Especially if the cheap card is a cantrip, like, say, Pearl Diver

[mxdata]

I think Way of the Rat will make sense any time you want to collect many copies of a spammable card, and playing a copy of the spammable card gives you a lesser effect than buying another. As mentioned, Grand Market is the most obvious example of this.

The other significant category is cards with below-the-line effects. Using it on Highway or Haggler could easily make sense.

As a minor special case, if you throne a throne, you could throne some stuff, then use Way of the Rat on your final invocation of the throned throne to get yourself another throne.

Way of the Rat + a cheap card would also be a way to get Wayfarer for  cheap.  Especially if the cheap card is a cantrip, like, say, Pearl Diver

Also, Procession would have an interesting effect with Way of the Rat.  If you use Way of the Rat on the second play of your action, you get a copy of it to replace the one Procession trashes, plus a more expensive action

[scolapasta]

I like that Way of the Rat helps you get Actions, but needs Treasures to activate.

Additionally, great artwork on this one! Love it.

[dpm]

I really like how well-balanced these Ways seem, a lot of thought must have gone into them. Like, you're usually not going to use them most of the time you're playing an action, but they still add something interesting to a game.

Turtle, Chameleon, and Rat are extra cool here. With all Ways; there’s an interesting balance problem to solve... the Way can be used with an action that cost $2, or with an action that cost $5. So it can’t give a $5 strength effect; otherwise it’s way too good when used with a $2 cost action. But those three (so far) give you a better effect when you use a better card with it. Whereas the other 2 revealed Ways give you the same effect no matter what; making them much better if used with a worse/cheaper action.

I kind of feel it would be even more interesting if you could only use a Way once per turn.  You couldn't Turtle your Chapel away as an effective Exile forever, unless you wanted to forgo using it on another action card.  (It would also save on some really annoying clicking, "No, I don't want to reconsider whether I want to use the Way on this card".)

[MrSir712]

I'm going to use Way of the Rat on my Workshop, please and thank you.

Also, could we see a Duration or Reaction?

[pst]

I think Way of the Rat will make sense any time you want to collect many copies of a spammable card, and playing a copy of the spammable card gives you a lesser effect than buying another. As mentioned, Grand Market is the most obvious example of this.

Also Cities, before they have become good.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 3: Village Green

The party's over! If not now, then soon, the previews will go down from dominion.games, and you will have to wait for the release to see them again - still estimated at March 18. Yet I soldier on. Today, another Reaction card.



Village Green is the Barge village, and also the Tunnel village. If you discard it when it's not your turn, take the "next" option, that's my advice; +Actions do not do much good when it's not your turn. As with Tunnel it doesn't have to be in your hand, it can be flipped over by a Fortune Teller or whatever. It even works when discarded from the Exile mat.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 3: Village Green

The party's over! If not now, then soon, the previews will go down from dominion.games, and you will have to wait for the release to see them again - still estimated at March 18. Yet I soldier on. Today, another Reaction card.



Village Green is the Barge village, and also the Tunnel village. If you discard it when it's not your turn, take the "next" option, that's my advice; +Actions do not do much good when it's not your turn. As with Tunnel it doesn't have to be in your hand, it can be flipped over by a Fortune Teller or whatever. It even works when discarded from the Exile mat.

A village reaction!  This would be handy against discard attacks, especially attacks like Urchin that only make you discard one card - start your next turn with 5 cards and 3 Actions!  Or a Knight attack if there was another card in the 3-6 range.  But also things like Inn, you'd only end up with one card ending up in your discard pile (or maybe no cards if you happened to have two Village Greens in your hand!)

The fact that it works when discarded from the Exile mat makes me think there might be a combo there with Bounty Hunter or any other Exiling cards that haven't been revealed yet.  Exile a few Village Greens, then, once you've got a few of them on your Exile mat, buy one, discard them all, and trigger their reactions and start your next turn with a large hand and a bunch of Actions (hmm ... could also be handy if you happened to have Outpost in play too when you do that, since then you'd get the reaction effects right away)

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 3: Village Green

The party's over! If not now, then soon, the previews will go down from dominion.games, and you will have to wait for the release to see them again - still estimated at March 18. Yet I soldier on. Today, another Reaction card.



Village Green is the Barge village, and also the Tunnel village. If you discard it when it's not your turn, take the "next" option, that's my advice; +Actions do not do much good when it's not your turn. As with Tunnel it doesn't have to be in your hand, it can be flipped over by a Fortune Teller or whatever. It even works when discarded from the Exile mat.

It's interesting that all the Reactions revealed so far in Menagerie are played rather than revealed, discarded, or set-aside.  So, now I'm wondering if the two we haven't seen yet will also be played

So, of the reactions revealed so far, we have three different triggers: when you gain a card, when someone else gains a victory card, and now when you discard.  I wonder if all five reactions will have different triggers

[Gherald]

Why are my Courtiers frolicking around in the new Village Green

[faust]

Why are my Courtiers frolicking around in the new Village Green

More importantly - why is the Village Green orange and blue?

[silverspawn]

It's so strong. Imagine it with Oracle, Vault, Cartographer, storeroom, Scholar – there are lots of combos and they all sound worth doing. And that's on a card that would be worth buying without the reaction.

[crj]

Hmm. Discarding multiple cards is simultaneous, yes? So if I attack you with Militia and you discard two Village Greens, you can play them both and draw back up to 5 cards?

That makes intuitive sense, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it codified anywhere in the rules.

[MrSir712]

Bonus Preview 3: Village Green

The party's over! If not now, then soon, the previews will go down from dominion.games, and you will have to wait for the release to see them again - still estimated at March 18. Yet I soldier on. Today, another Reaction card.



Village Green is the Barge village, and also the Tunnel village. If you discard it when it's not your turn, take the "next" option, that's my advice; +Actions do not do much good when it's not your turn. As with Tunnel it doesn't have to be in your hand, it can be flipped over by a Fortune Teller or whatever. It even works when discarded from the Exile mat.

It's interesting that all the Reactions revealed so far in Menagerie are played rather than revealed, discarded, or set-aside.  So, now I'm wondering if the two we haven't seen yet will also be played

So, of the reactions revealed so far, we have three different triggers: when you gain a card, when someone else gains a victory card, and now when you discard.  I wonder if all five reactions will have different triggers

I believe he said on day 5 that four out of the five Reactions play themselves.

[GendoIkari]

Hmm. Discarding multiple cards is simultaneous, yes? So if I attack you with Militia and you discard two Village Greens, you can play them both and draw back up to 5 cards?

That makes intuitive sense, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it codified anywhere in the rules.

You can, thanks to the recent errata!

Cards in discard piles can be moved even if covered up by other cards

Of course, you wouldn't want to draw back up to 5 immediately, you would choose the "next turn" option generally, and draw back up to 5 at the start of your turn.

[J Reggie]

Now I'm trying to think of cases where you would want to draw when it's not your turn. Maybe finding a Province for Tournament, or trying to draw a different reaction.

[scolapasta]

Now I'm trying to think of cases where you would want to draw when it's not your turn. Maybe finding a Province for Tournament, or trying to draw a different reaction.

Edge case: you have two Village Greens in your hand, you might play one now, so that only one is in play next turn (while still getting +1 Card from the 2nd one) to help activate a Magic Lamp. (which cares about unique cards in play)

[mxdata]

It's interesting that all the Reactions revealed so far in Menagerie are played rather than revealed, discarded, or set-aside.  So, now I'm wondering if the two we haven't seen yet will also be played

So, of the reactions revealed so far, we have three different triggers: when you gain a card, when someone else gains a victory card, and now when you discard.  I wonder if all five reactions will have different triggers

I believe he said on day 5 that four out of the five Reactions play themselves.

Ah, I must've missed that.  Cool!

I'm wondering if the reaction-by-playing is because of Ways?  Like, Village Green would've had to have worked this way for the same reason as Caravan Guard, but Black Cat and Sheepdog could just have easily worked by "set this aside", as far as the reaction itself goes.  However, by playing instead of setting aside, it allows the option of using a Way instead

[GendoIkari]

With Village Green and the newest Errata dealing with the discard pile, are you allowed to look through your entire discard pile any time you discard a Village Green (or Tunnel) except during Clean-up? Or only if you discarded multiple cards such that the Village Green (or Tunnel) is not on top?

[scolapasta]

BTW, great idea on the bonus previews! One a day is very fun, as it gives us something to all deliberate on, and maintains anticipation for tomorrow. I hope you're enjoying providing them as much as we are enjoying seeing them.

[Jeebus]

Hmm. Discarding multiple cards is simultaneous, yes? So if I attack you with Militia and you discard two Village Greens, you can play them both and draw back up to 5 cards?

That makes intuitive sense, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it codified anywhere in the rules.

I don't think it's in the published rules, but yes, Donald has rules that when-discard abilities trigger after you discard all the cards.

With Village Green and the newest Errata dealing with the discard pile, are you allowed to look through your entire discard pile any time you discard a Village Green (or Tunnel) except during Clean-up? Or only if you discarded multiple cards such that the Village Green (or Tunnel) is not on top?

Only when the card you're taking isn't on top.

[GendoIkari]

Hmm. Discarding multiple cards is simultaneous, yes? So if I attack you with Militia and you discard two Village Greens, you can play them both and draw back up to 5 cards?

That makes intuitive sense, but I'm not sure I've ever seen it codified anywhere in the rules.

I don't think it's in the published rules, but yes, Donald has rules that when-discard abilities trigger after you discard all the cards.

I don't think the post you linked to works as an answer... under the original lose-track rule, it wouldn't matter that both Village Greens trigger; you wouldn't be able to move the one that was not on top... actually you would still be able to play it, but it would stay in your discard pile, so it would get played without moving. But the errata allows it to move to in-play.

[chipperMDW]

I don't think it's in the published rules, but yes, Donald has rules that when-discard abilities trigger after you discard all the cards.

That ruling is about Minion, which does discard the cards simultaneously. But unless I've missed a recent ruling (I admittedly haven't been paying that much attention to the latest changes) Militia and other "discard down to" were ruled to be one-at-a-time (but you don't have to reveal them all somehow).

Here's a recent-sh (2017) place it was discussed. Donald said:

Yes, sorry; Inn is "discard 2 cards at once" while Militia is "repeatedly discard 1 card until at 3."

EDIT: The impact being that you were allowed to, after being hit by Militia with a five-card hand, discard a Tunnel, react with it, react with a Watchtower to topdeck the Gold, then discard that Watchtower.

[GendoIkari]

I don't think it's in the published rules, but yes, Donald has rules that when-discard abilities trigger after you discard all the cards.

That ruling is about Minion, which does discard the cards simultaneously. But unless I've missed a recent ruling (I admittedly haven't been paying that much attention to the latest changes) Militia and other "discard down to" were ruled to be one-at-a-time (but you don't have to reveal them all somehow).

Here's a recent-sh (2017) place it was discussed. Donald said:

Yes, sorry; Inn is "discard 2 cards at once" while Militia is "repeatedly discard 1 card until at 3."

Ooh, this means that with Militia and Village Green, you can discard a Village Green, play it, draw a card, discard another Village Green, play it, draw a card, repeat up to 10 times; and still be at a 5 card hand; having to discard 2 more.

[chipperMDW]

Ooh, this means that with Militia and Village Green, you can discard a Village Green, play it, draw a card, discard another Village Green, play it, draw a card, repeat up to 10 times; and still be at a 5 card hand; having to discard 2 more.

Or, I think, put the +1 Card token on Village Green and get hit by Militia to play all the Village Greens that get into your hand in next-turn mode for free.

[Ingix]

In another place Donald said today, roughly "Without looking it up, Militia is one discard for multiple cards".

That makes sense to me, as there is as of yet no "-1 discard token".

[Jeebus]

I don't think the post you linked to works as an answer... under the original lose-track rule, it wouldn't matter that both Village Greens trigger; you wouldn't be able to move the one that was not on top... actually you would still be able to play it, but it would stay in your discard pile, so it would get played without moving. But the errata allows it to move to in-play.

You are right, it would not have been possible before the recent lose-track rule change. And now the lose-track doesn't prevent you from doing it. But that was actually not Crj's question. The question was if you could play both Village Greens after discarding to Militia, or if you needed to react with the first Village Green right after discarding it.

That's what I was replying to, wrongly as it turns out. ChipperMDW is of course right, Militia is one card at a time, so you would only be able to draw up to 4 cards right then. (As you said, you should choose "next" anyway, and then you would draw up to 5 on your turn.)

[Jeebus]

Wait, how does it work? I'm being attacked with Militia. I have 5 cards. I discard a Copper, I have 4 cards. I discard a Village Green, I have 3 cards. Is Militia done now? Can I react with Village Green now, and draw back up to 4? Or would that mean I have to discard down to 3 again, because Militia wasn't done yet?

[Jeebus]

In another place Donald said today, roughly "Without looking it up, Militia is one discard for multiple cards".

That makes sense to me, as there is as of yet no "-1 discard token".

He has ruled that Militia is one-at-a-time several times, because that's what "discard down to" means according to him.

Maybe the latest: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=17897.msg735984#msg735984

[LastFootnote]

In another place Donald said today, roughly "Without looking it up, Militia is one discard for multiple cards".

That makes sense to me, as there is as of yet no "-1 discard token".

He has ruled that Militia is one-at-a-time several times, because that's what "discard down to" means according to him.

I'm hoping that changes, if it hasn't already. It eliminates a lot of rules questions if Militia discards all at once, and it's what people mostly do in practice anyway.

[grrgrrgrr]

Let's wrap it up with a conjecture based list of synergies and antisynergies.

Way of the Chameleon
S: Any virtual Money (esp. Poor House)
S: Lab variants (and Horse givers)
S: Cantrips, when there is too much draw already
S: Any source of + Cards actually, to avoid reshuffles
S: Opposing Enchantresses
A: Steward (as in: more stiff competition)
A: Drawers that don't use "+ Cards"

Way of the Rat
S: Cards that scream "get the most of this ASAP", especially Grand Market
S: Cards with a "while in play" effect, especially Highway
S: Villages, to grant the terminal space
S: Throne Room variants
S: Donate
A: Most cards really prefer to be played 99% of the time.
A: Treasureless decks

Village Green
S: Tactician
S: Sifters, especially Embassy and Dungeon
S: Cards like Loan and Rebuild that search for non-Action cards
S: Opposing discard attacks
S: Gainers, to increase the density of this card 
A: Lack of above makes its extra effect mostly irrelevant (though not entirely)
A: Strategies that don't care about Villages (like, god forbid, Smithy BM)

[Jeebus]

In another place Donald said today, roughly "Without looking it up, Militia is one discard for multiple cards".

That makes sense to me, as there is as of yet no "-1 discard token".

He has ruled that Militia is one-at-a-time several times, because that's what "discard down to" means according to him.

I'm hoping that changes, if it hasn't already. It eliminate a lot of rules questions if Militia discards all at once, and it's what people mostly do in practice anyway.

I also thought it was better if Militia discards all at once, back when he ruled the other way many years ago. But I think Dominion's rules should be stable as much as possible. I just don't see how it's good for the game with rules changes unless it's absolutely necessary to fix a problem.

[GendoIkari]

In another place Donald said today, roughly "Without looking it up, Militia is one discard for multiple cards".

That makes sense to me, as there is as of yet no "-1 discard token".

He has ruled that Militia is one-at-a-time several times, because that's what "discard down to" means according to him.

I'm hoping that changes, if it hasn't already. It eliminate a lot of rules questions if Militia discards all at once, and it's what people mostly do in practice anyway.

I also thought it was better if Militia discards all at once, back when he ruled the other way many years ago. But I think Dominion's rules should be stable as much as possible. I just don't see how it's good for the game with rules changes unless it's absolutely necessary to fix a problem.

Other than the question of whether or not opponents are allowed to see both of the discarded cards; has it every mattered before Village Green whether it was one at a time or not?

[Jeebus]

Other than the question of whether or not opponents are allowed to see both of the discarded cards; has it every mattered before Village Green whether it was one at a time or not?

Yes, ChipperMDW explained it in his edit above.

[Donald X.]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

[Jeebus]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

[LastFootnote]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

[Jeebus]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

What do you mean? That the rule suggests that Militia makes you discard all at once? Why do you think that? Nobody would read that rule and conclude that Militia is all at once, nor that it's one at a time. That all comes from Militia's card text.

[GendoIkari]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

What do you mean? That the rule suggests that Militia makes you discard all at once? Why do you think that? Nobody would read that rule and conclude that Militia is all at once, nor that it's one at a time. That all comes from Militia's card text.

I could see someone reading that rule and just assuming that it applies to Militia, simply because both the rule and Militia deal with discarding multiple cards. A casual, non-precise reading, could cause some people to think of the rules as instructions on how to discard multiple cards; not realizing that there is a potential different between discarding multiple cards “at once” vs “one at a time”.

[segura]

But I think Dominion's rules should be stable as much as possible.

Game design isn't like the Ten Commandments coming down from heaven, things are always in flux. The fact that DXV changes and updates the rules is great and should be appreciated as not every designer does this.

[Jeebus]

In my view the problem is that people could play a game with Chameleon and Storyteller where it was a great combo, then play another game with another physical set or play online, and it's completely different. If you're not attentive to that, it has consequences for you, and why would you ever be attentive to that? It could be that the players in the game have different prior experiences; some expect it to work one way, some another way.

Sounds like Chameleon may be a definite pick for your online banlist

It seems like more generally you take issue with the existence of the 2E, as the problem you're describing already theoretically happens with various card combos between editions. Different players will have different expectations for how Possession, Masquerade, Trade Route- among others- combo with various cards based on the version they're used to.

I simply share the opinion that Donald used to have. None of the 2E cards combo differently with other cards because of the changes they received, or if they do, it's extremely marginal. (Masq is the obvious exception, although still pretty marginal, but it was errataed to avoid that very combo.) That is not the case with 1E and 2E Cellar on a board with Way of the Chameleon.

[LastFootnote]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

What do you mean? That the rule suggests that Militia makes you discard all at once? Why do you think that? Nobody would read that rule and conclude that Militia is all at once, nor that it's one at a time. That all comes from Militia's card text.

Nobody would read that rule at all. When possible, rules should match what’s intuitive.

[Jeebus]

Game design isn't like the Ten Commandments coming down from heaven, things are always in flux. The fact that DXV changes and updates the rules is great and should be appreciated as not every designer does this.

I kind of feel like you're misrepresenting what I said. Of course it's great when a new rule improves the game. For instance, the initial rule that TR+TR+Duration+Duration keeps both TR's in play was very confusing, and ultimately a simpler and much better rule was made. But... I think Dominion's rules should be stable as much as possible - meaning a rule change should have a good reason. Nobody was complaining about the Militia rule, and nobody expressed confusion about it. Sure, many people were probably playing it wrong, but I guarantee you that many people are playing lots of these rules wrong, especially lose-track stuff, so I don't see that as a good reason to change the rules. Whoever wonders about a rule, can ask about it online, or probably more likely will search for it online, and will then find contradicting statements whenever there has been a rule change.

[Jeebus]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

What do you mean? That the rule suggests that Militia makes you discard all at once? Why do you think that? Nobody would read that rule and conclude that Militia is all at once, nor that it's one at a time. That all comes from Militia's card text.

Nobody would read that rule at all. When possible, rules should match what’s intuitive.

Are you saying nobody would read the rulebook?

[Jeebus]

I could see someone reading that rule and just assuming that it applies to Militia, simply because both the rule and Militia deal with discarding multiple cards. A casual, non-precise reading, could cause some people to think of the rules as instructions on how to discard multiple cards; not realizing that there is a potential different between discarding multiple cards “at once” vs “one at a time”.

Maybe so, but I still think that this idea would be 90% because of Militia's actual card text, and 10% because of that rule. I see good reason, and have always seen good reason, for saying that Militia discards all at once, because yes that's the intuitive reading based on Militia's text. I just don't think "it should match the rulebook" is any kind of reason to rule that way, since the rulebook actually doesn't say that.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

My guess for the original ruling of Militia being one-at-a-time: Draw to X is one at a time, so why not discard down to X? I personally think that makes sense.

[crj]

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

Some of us are involved in programming language specification...

[GendoIkari]

My guess for the original ruling of Militia being one-at-a-time: Draw to X is one at a time, so why not discard down to X? I personally think that makes sense.

I don't think the comparison works, because "+3 cards" is also one at a time, while "discard 3 cards" is not.

[FemurLemur]

None of the 2E cards combo differently with other cards because of the changes they received

That's definitely not true. There are a handful of cards which combo differently between editions as a result of intentional functional changes they received. I already listed some of them for you, such as Possession, which will interact with cards which cost/give debt in a completely different way, and Trade Route, which combos with cards like Hunting Grounds in 2E but not in 1E.

Or if they do, it's extremely marginal. That is not the case with 1E and 2E Cellar on a board with Way of the Chameleon.

"Marginal" in this case seems like a matter of opinion. I don't personally see how it's any less marginal than Trade Route working with on-trash VP gainers differently.

Posession handles an entire mechanic differently depending on which version you use. To me, that's far less marginal than this Way of the Chameleon discrepancy.

[segura]

But... I think Dominion's rules should be stable as much as possible - meaning a rule change should have a good reason.

Nah. Dominion rules should be as much in flux as possible, in order to account for new or hitherto unseen combinations and interactions that require clarifications, amendments and changes.
That's simply how evolving card games (e.g. also CCGs and LCGs) are, rules do become more complex over time and change.

The option that you implicitly advocate is the lazy one (which is thankfully not the case here): a designer not caring about unclear stuff and updating the rules. The notion that you can see everything about something which is still evolving in advance is pretty unrealistic.

[Donald X.]

I simply share the opinion that Donald used to have. None of the 2E cards combo differently with other cards because of the changes they received, or if they do, it's extremely marginal. (Masq is the obvious exception, although still pretty marginal, but it was errataed to avoid that very combo.) That is not the case with 1E and 2E Cellar on a board with Way of the Chameleon.

I still heavily prefer not having errata. I just eventually hit the point of the errata being sufficiently necessary.

Errata is less of a problem today than it used to be; everyone has the combined knowledge of humanity in their pocket, and can look it up. It's still way better to not have it though. And I mean, that's my direction here with Militia; the rulebook says that you get to see only the top card, I want that to be the rule and to make sense.

You could make a thread in rules for this, present your case for your side; this thread is for bonus previews.

[Donald X.]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

What do you mean? That the rule suggests that Militia makes you discard all at once? Why do you think that? Nobody would read that rule and conclude that Militia is all at once, nor that it's one at a time. That all comes from Militia's card text.

Nobody would read that rule at all. When possible, rules should match what’s intuitive.

Are you saying nobody would read the rulebook?

I can say it. People in general heavily prefer not reading the rulebooks. You do really get something from having an intuitive result.

[Donald X.]

None of the 2E cards combo differently with other cards because of the changes they received

That's definitely not true. There are a handful of cards which combo differently between editions as a result of intentional functional changes they received. I already listed some of them for you, such as Possession, which will interact with cards which cost/give debt in a completely different way, and Trade Route, which combos with cards like Hunting Grounds in 2E but not in 1E.

And now Cellar (and Storeroom and Storyteller and Oracle) is functionally different with Way of the Chameleon (sadly).

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

[AJD]

I understand why it isn't, but given this it's kind of a shame that Populate is gain one from each Action pile, rather than just from each Kingdom pile.

(and uh I guess I'm glad that Alliance doesn't give you a Curse as well, although that would be cute for completeness's sake)

[Wizard_Amul]

The most common times this will bought will probably be when you are able to get the last province...if you're getting provinces as your main point source, the person who empties the last province(s) can now get 10 points for 10 coins instead of 6 points for 8 coins, since you don't mind the stop cards as much if you're trying to maximize points on your last 1-2 turns of the game. This will change the endgame math a bit. With 6 stop cards at once, I can't see you wanting to get this earlier over just Provinces unless you're playing something like a money deck with Palace, Gardens, etc.

[scolapasta]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

The Bizarro Populate! 10 VP (under normal circumstances) for $10.

I wonder if we'll see a watchtower-like "exile on gain" that would make this a very attractive option.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

The Bizarro Populate! 10 VP (under normal circumstances) for $10.

I wonder if we'll see a watchtower-like "exile on gain" that would make this a very attractive option.

I've been wondering about an Exile version of Watchtower too.  It would seem to be an ideal fit for this event.  If you can instantly Exile them, then it's basically equivalent to a Colony for $1 less

[silverspawn]

So Alliance gives you 6 cards with 10 VP and 6$ among them. That's roughly 3 Harems + 3 Estates (+ 1VP).

Obviously good (1) in the end game when you just care about the VP and (2) if you can easily get rid of all the cards you don't want. Not so clear in many other cases.

[Oyvind]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

I just want you to know that I’m extremely grateful for the extra effort you put in, not only previewing even more things, but also following the threads and clarifying things for us as we go! Is it possible to ask for a preview containing just the names of all the non-previewed cards from the expansion?

I have to reorganize my storage solution, so it would be an immensely helpful preview for me. I have everything so far, and I’m not planning on stopping. My 5-row BCW shoe box is packed, and I had to remove the randomizers earlier. Now I have to go to two (large e-raptor) boxes, so I’m really curious to see where to put everything.

A big THANK YOU, Donald! Both for the above-mentioned stuff and the fact that you’ve designed my favorite table-top game ever and continue to put out more cards. Fan for life, here!

[Awaclus]

Is it possible to ask for a preview containing just the names of all the non-previewed cards from the expansion?

Yes, it's possible to ask.

[Jeebus]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

The rulebook says: "If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."
Defining Militia as one card at a time does not contradict this, since it doesn't even evoke the rule.

If all Dominion players were computers, this would be enough.

What do you mean? That the rule suggests that Militia makes you discard all at once? Why do you think that? Nobody would read that rule and conclude that Militia is all at once, nor that it's one at a time. That all comes from Militia's card text.

Nobody would read that rule at all. When possible, rules should match what’s intuitive.

Are you saying nobody would read the rulebook?

I can say it. People in general heavily prefer not reading the rulebooks. You do really get something from having an intuitive result.

Sure. But if that's what LastFootnote was saying, he was undermining his own point, and you are undermining yours too, which was that the ruling should change because that's somehow what the rulebook says.

This has been one of the oddest conversations I've had here (which says a lot):

-The Militia rule needs to change because of what the rulebook says.
-The rulebook doesn't say that.
-People are not computers.
-Do you mean that people would misinterpret the rulebook?
-People don't read rulebooks.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

So far, we have seen: 15 Cards, leaving 15 for the release and remaining bonus previews; 5 Ways, leaving 15 for the release and remaining bonus previews; 4 Events, leaving 16 for the release and remaining bonus previews. With 8 days to go until the release (!), perhaps we could get 2 Cards, 2 Ways, 3 Events, and one day with just the names of the rest, leaving 13 of each for the release?

I don't have any specific things to ask for, though. I'm really enjoying them so far, and can't wait for the release! I always expect each expansion to be the last, so I am always pleasantly surprised when another one comes out.

[villafan001]

The most common times this will bought will probably be when you are able to get the last province...if you're getting provinces as your main point source, the person who empties the last province(s) can now get 10 points for 10 coins instead of 6 points for 8 coins, since you don't mind the stop cards as much if you're trying to maximize points on your last 1-2 turns of the game. This will change the endgame math a bit. With 6 stop cards at once, I can't see you wanting to get this earlier over just Provinces unless you're playing something like a money deck with Palace, Gardens, etc.

This changes the “Penultimate Province Rule” equation considerably, since now your opponent could get up to 10pts even if there is no +Buy.

Things like this are why I absolutely love events and other “landscape” cards - rather than just adding one new aspect to the game, they completely change the balance of some or all other components in the game, providing massive strategic variety. I for one would be glad for an expansion of just landscapes. I certainly think there is potential for more Landmarks - you can make ordinarily unplayable cards a must-buy with one of those in the right circumstances.

[J Reggie]

Oh man, these 3am (for me) previews have been a trip. I woke up just long enough to read the text of this Event, then proceeded to dream about it the rest of the night.

[Minotaur]

Late to the thread, but is Militia a problem yet?  Village Green could have been worded like Tunnel.  It's not unreasonable for the implied rules to be "yeah, it's basically like Tunnel".

If, say, Barren Village - Action-Ruins-Reaction - +2 Actions ///// If you discard this other than during cleanup, gain a Ruins.......

...then accountability with pre-existing discarding is a big issue.

So it's sort of forbidden for a mechanic like that to exist.  A card that worked this way would have to come with setup rules that warp the rules of the entire game.

Unless it's just a card that is just too awesome to not exist and then we have to retroactively change all of the rules, and now Dominion logs tell us ALL OF THE DISCARDS.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

Late to the thread, but is Militia a problem yet?  Village Green could have been worded like Tunnel.  It's not unreasonable for the implied rules to be "yeah, it's basically like Tunnel".

Militia's a debate because you can choose "now" for Village Green. The question is, "what if I discard down to three, but then I react and play a Village Green so I have 4 cards? Do I have to discard another one?" If they're discarded at once, and then reactions take effect, then the answer is "no, you've already discarded." But if they're discarded one-at-a-time, the answer is, "yes, you have finished discarding a card, and you have reacted to it. Now you have to check if there are more than 3 cards in your hand. There are, so discard another one."

If you have an opinion, you should go to the separate thread I started.

[crj]

Alliance looks like it will have fun synergies with Groundskeeper and with Changeling...

(Not with Goons, alas.)

[Minotaur]

If you have an opinion, you should go to the separate thread I started.

Oh, ok.  Yes, that is tricky.

Do I just have to Search for it or what?

[FemurLemur]

The option that you implicitly advocate is the lazy one (which is thankfully not the case here): a designer not caring about unclear stuff and updating the rules.

I don't think I'd go that far. I think a more charitable interpretation is that Jeebus advocates for an approach with greater pre-planning and consideration for how word/rule choices will impact future design space, which would actually take much more work up-front. Though you and I do agree that it's not realistic to expect to anticipate everything. Especially in a world with limited time where you actually need to start selling those expansions at some point.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

Do I just have to Search for it or what?

Whoops! Forgot to link it.

Here is the link to the thread to which the debate has been moved. Also it's in Rules Questions.

[FemurLemur]

I'm definitely into having more expensive Events! I remember when it just seemed like a given that there'd never be Kingdom cards over $8, because they'd be so swingy and situational and terrible. Events are such an elegant way to implement expensive card ideas.

[pst]

I for one would be glad for an expansion of just landscapes. I certainly think there is potential for more Landmarks - you can make ordinarily unplayable cards a must-buy with one of those in the right circumstances.

I would also like to get even more Landmarks, but I think that an expansion of just landscapes (and other horizontal cards) would be a bad move businesswise. I may be wrong, but I suspect that a non-negligible part of potential buyers would think that they will could manage with just their own printouts for those cards, which probably isn't a big thing with cards that are in your deck.

[spineflu]

I for one would be glad for an expansion of just landscapes. I certainly think there is potential for more Landmarks - you can make ordinarily unplayable cards a must-buy with one of those in the right circumstances.

I would also like to get even more Landmarks, but I think that an expansion of just landscapes (and other horizontal cards) would be a bad move businesswise. I may be wrong, but I suspect that a non-negligible part of potential buyers would think that they will could manage with just their own printouts for those cards, which probably isn't a big thing with cards that are in your deck.

It'd also be the first expansion that wasn't playable with just itself + a pack of base cards, and an unsound business decision in that respect.

[villafan001]

I for one would be glad for an expansion of just landscapes. I certainly think there is potential for more Landmarks - you can make ordinarily unplayable cards a must-buy with one of those in the right circumstances.

I would also like to get even more Landmarks, but I think that an expansion of just landscapes (and other horizontal cards) would be a bad move businesswise. I may be wrong, but I suspect that a non-negligible part of potential buyers would think that they will could manage with just their own printouts for those cards, which probably isn't a big thing with cards that are in your deck.

It'd also be the first expansion that wasn't playable with just itself + a pack of base cards, and an unsound business decision in that respect.

I suppose a man can dream...it could be a way to go back to small expansions though, to pad them with extra horizontals.

[ben_king]

I suppose a man can dream...it could be a way to go back to small expansions though, to pad them with extra horizontals.

Why would you want a small expansion, though, when you could have a large expansion?

[SuperHans]

I suppose a man can dream...it could be a way to go back to small expansions though, to pad them with extra horizontals.

Why would you want a small expansion, though, when you could have a large expansion?

I expect if landscapes were to ever return, they’ll just be added to a large expansion like when events returned in Empires and Menagerie. Who knows, maybe we get a promo landmark some day.

[Donald X.]

I just want you to know that I’m extremely grateful for the extra effort you put in, not only previewing even more things, but also following the threads and clarifying things for us as we go! Is it possible to ask for a preview containing just the names of all the non-previewed cards from the expansion?

Thanks, but I am going to leave it at a card a day; there isn't long to wait for the names anyway. If the set gets delayed a day or two, the rulebook still may not.

[GendoIkari]

Who knows, maybe we get a promo landmark some day.

Summon.

[mxdata]

Who knows, maybe we get a promo landmark some day.

Summon.

Summon's an event, though, not a landmark

[NoMoreFun]

Late to the thread, but is Militia a problem yet?  Village Green could have been worded like Tunnel.  It's not unreasonable for the implied rules to be "yeah, it's basically like Tunnel".

Militia's a debate because you can choose "now" for Village Green. The question is, "what if I discard down to three, but then I react and play a Village Green so I have 4 cards? Do I have to discard another one?" If they're discarded at once, and then reactions take effect, then the answer is "no, you've already discarded." But if they're discarded one-at-a-time, the answer is, "yes, you have finished discarding a card, and you have reacted to it. Now you have to check if there are more than 3 cards in your hand. There are, so discard another one."

If you have an opinion, you should go to the separate thread I started.

Alternatively, just pick "next turn" and you not only get that card in your hand, but you're protected from other discard attacks and get to use the +Actions the card has to offer. A few edge cases where you wouldn't want to do that (e.g. Possession, Tormentor) but it's not a problem that will pop up in most games.

[GendoIkari]

Who knows, maybe we get a promo landmark some day.

Summon.

Summon's an event, though, not a landmark

Thought it said landscape. Oops.

[guidobass]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

But if you are discarding 2 Reaction cards do you only get to use the one you leave on top, as you have lost track of the Reaction that doesn't get shown?

[Donald X.]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

But if you are discarding 2 Reaction cards do you only get to use the one you leave on top, as you have lost track of the Reaction that doesn't get shown?

Lose-track / stop-moving (who knew that changing the name would just mean saying both names) no longer loses stuff in the discard pile. You can use both reactions. We can concoct a scenario where you can't use one of the reactions because the other causes you to shuffle your discard pile into your deck.

[GendoIkari]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

But if you are discarding 2 Reaction cards do you only get to use the one you leave on top, as you have lost track of the Reaction that doesn't get shown?

Lose-track / stop-moving (who knew that changing the name would just mean saying both names) no longer loses stuff in the discard pile. You can use both reactions. We can concoct a scenario where you can't use one of the reactions because the other causes you to shuffle your discard pile into your deck.

Even before the discard / stop-moving errata, you were able to use a Tunnel that was discarded with another card on top of it. Is there a rule that if a discarded Tunnel gets shuffled into your deck because of another reaction, that you can’t still use the Tunnel? Stop-moving doesn’t stop Tunnel from working, does it?

[Jeebus]

In order to match rulebook rulings (e.g., they only get to see one card), I think Militia has to be "pick the order, then discard them all at once." So that's my tentative ruling.

But if you are discarding 2 Reaction cards do you only get to use the one you leave on top, as you have lost track of the Reaction that doesn't get shown?

Lose-track / stop-moving (who knew that changing the name would just mean saying both names) no longer loses stuff in the discard pile. You can use both reactions. We can concoct a scenario where you can't use one of the reactions because the other causes you to shuffle your discard pile into your deck.

Even before the discard / stop-moving errata, you were able to use a Tunnel that was discarded with another card on top of it. Is there a rule that if a discarded Tunnel gets shuffled into your deck because of another reaction, that you can’t still use the Tunnel? Stop-moving doesn’t stop Tunnel from working, does it?

The reason it was possible to reveal a covered Tunnel from your discard pile must have been because you knew where the Tunnel was (and revealing it was not moving it, so lose-track didn't enter into it even when covered cards in discard were lost-track of). But if you actually shuffle the Tunnel, how can you reveal it?

[hhelibebcnofnena]

Late to the thread, but is Militia a problem yet?  Village Green could have been worded like Tunnel.  It's not unreasonable for the implied rules to be "yeah, it's basically like Tunnel".

Militia's a debate because you can choose "now" for Village Green. The question is, "what if I discard down to three, but then I react and play a Village Green so I have 4 cards? Do I have to discard another one?" If they're discarded at once, and then reactions take effect, then the answer is "no, you've already discarded." But if they're discarded one-at-a-time, the answer is, "yes, you have finished discarding a card, and you have reacted to it. Now you have to check if there are more than 3 cards in your hand. There are, so discard another one."

If you have an opinion, you should go to the separate thread I started.

Alternatively, just pick "next turn" and you not only get that card in your hand, but you're protected from other discard attacks and get to use the +Actions the card has to offer. A few edge cases where you wouldn't want to do that (e.g. Possession, Tormentor) but it's not a problem that will pop up in most games.

Of course, in actual games you can do that. But the rules need to support these ridiculous scenarios, don't they? Besides, edge-cases are fun!

[dsplaisted]

My son loves Dominion and chickens are his favorite animal.

When he heard about the theme of this set he wanted to know if there would be a chicken card.

Can you spoil any chicken-related cards?

Thanks!

[Donald X.]

When he heard about the theme of this set he wanted to know if there would be a chicken card.

Can you spoil any chicken-related cards?

I don't know if this will do much for you, but there's one in the art for Livery.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

Hunh, so this gives you the opportunity to play a Treasure card after buying something else!  Interesting twist!

[LaLight]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

another card contributing to infinite loops, huh

awesome

[mxdata]

Gamble + Village Green would be a decent combination.  Reveal the VG and play it, choosing the "next turn" option

Gamble + Patron would also be a good combination, since you'd be able to both reveal it for +1 coffers, and play it for +$2 and +1 villager, with the $2 returning what you spent on Gamble, netting you +1 coffer and +1 villager

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

another card contributing to infinite loops, huh

awesome

How would it make for an infinite loop?  You're either playing the card or discarding it, either way, the top card is different the next time you play it

[LaLight]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

another card contributing to infinite loops, huh

awesome

How would it make for an infinite loop?  You're either playing the card or discarding it, either way, the top card is different the next time you play it

yeah, but a lot of infinite loops on this site that i have seen used topdeciing and then drawing and playing all the same cards and now it is easier

[crlundy]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.

Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

another card contributing to infinite loops, huh

awesome

How would it make for an infinite loop?  You're either playing the card or discarding it, either way, the top card is different the next time you play it

yeah, but a lot of infinite loops on this site that i have seen used topdeciing and then drawing and playing all the same cards and now it is easier

Or you've drawn your deck already, and you can gain a card to your discard pile and play it right away with Gamble.

[LaLight]

oh i guess if you have +buy token on Duchess tou can piledrive them (but why)

[LaLight]

ah, no, sorry

[villafan001]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

another card contributing to infinite loops, huh

awesome

How would it make for an infinite loop?  You're either playing the card or discarding it, either way, the top card is different the next time you play it

yeah, but a lot of infinite loops on this site that i have seen used topdeciing and then drawing and playing all the same cards and now it is easier

I can see you could get a loop of quite a few iterations but you won’t get an infinite loop here - you need to keep generating +2 to keep buying Gamble, and you need to keep gaining something, otherwise your deck eventually runs out. Even for cards that give you both of those things, there are only a finite number of them in the supply.

[LaLight]

here's one: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=17909.msg740343#msg740343

as far as i am aware there's more

[DEGwer]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

[DEGwer]

here's one: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=17909.msg740343#msg740343

as far as i am aware there's more

It doesn't work now because the Overlord has changed. It does not trash itself now.

[silverspawn]

More practically relevant: whenever the mean $-producing-power of cards in your deck is > 2, you can and should gamble through your entire deck every turn. You can do this even if you draw a dud. Say you only have 4$. You just gamblegamblegamblegamblegamblegamble and (if the order of cards is not sufficiently unfortunate) end up with 4$ + <buying power in your deck> - 2*<number of cards in your deck>.

This means you can construct an arbitrarily strong deck without any draw in it. If you have, say, counterfeit, that is already enough. Trash your coppers, buy enough golds, and there you go – you'll even get the extra +buys by flipping counterfeits with Gamble. You can also mix in lots of terminal +$ like wine merchant.

[villafan001]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

After you’ve bought the Bonfire, how do you restart the loop?

[LaLight]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

After you’ve bought the Bonfire, how do you restart the loop?

Well, you buy Gamble and so on

[villafan001]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

After you’ve bought the Bonfire, how do you restart the loop?

Well, you buy Gamble and so on

Yes, I see, having played the Platina mid-loop. Neat - and only requires KC, Lurker, Watchtower, Mandarin, a card that gives tokens, Colony/Platinum and two events!

[DEGwer]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

After you’ve bought the Bonfire, how do you restart the loop?

Well, you buy Gamble and so on

Yes, I see, having played the Platina mid-loop. Neat - and only requires KC, Lurker, Watchtower, Mandarin, a card that gives tokens, Colony/Platinum and two events!

Actually, Platinums are not necessary because we can just replace them by bunch of Golds. Tokens can also be omitted because we can do like KC(gamble)-KC-Lurker-Margrave-Lurker. We can do similar things via Toil. Furthermore, we don't even need Mandarin; if we played some number of Priests, we can afford to buy Gamble and Bonfire by Bonfire itself (although I don't like infinite loops that depend on Priests).

[LaLight]

and we can have most of the cards from a single black market

[trivialknot]

Thoughts on bonus previews:

Way of the Chameleon: It seems really powerful with non-terminal money cards like Courtier or Coven, but in the typical case it probably just ensures that there are even more options for draw.  And you can turn your overdraw into $$.  Overall, I suspect this is less zany than it first appears.  But I'm sure my friends and I will have fun arguing about the rules.

Way of the Rat: I had a fan event that was pretty similar to this.  TBH, it was a dud, just not very interesting--sometimes cards were cheaper, and that was it.  I think this one's a bit more interesting though, because it costs an action rather than coin.

Village Green: Maybe we can revisit those days when people thought Tunnel was really powerful, and tried triggering the reaction every way imaginable.  And then people seem to have figured out that tunnels aren't that strong.  But maybe this could be strong?  Well it's a village+, so the floor is pretty high.

Alliance: I love this.  Something that really appeals to me about Dominion, is this narrative arc where you build up, and then your deck slowly collapses as you cash out.  Alliance offers the option for even more dramatic collapse.  I sure hope this is good sometimes.

Gamble: The first main use I see is to clear out the bottom of your shuffle, especially if you know what's down there and don't want it to skip.  The second main use is, when drawing deck, to play something you just gained.  Like Innovation.  Innovation is good, so I'm sure this is good as well.

[mxdata]

Seems like a really good use would be with cards like Barge or Mastermind.  If you bought them and topdecked them, then bought Gamble, you can get them played right at the start of your next turn

Way of the Turtle + Gamble would be really strong, especially with topdecking

[naitchman]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

Nice loop.

That being said, infinite loops already exist without this card. It's not even worth paying attention to the existence of a loop if it requires more than 5 specific cards (it's almost never going to come up). This requires at least 6 specific cards (don't forget the bonus tokens requires peasant). It's possible, but this is not something that going to come up realistically in gamble games.

[Jeebus]

Bonus Preview 5: Gamble

Here's another Event. They travel in pairs.



Sometimes, it's really a gamble. Sometimes you know what card is next. Sometimes you even just bought it.

Wow, playing Actions in your Buy phase seems to be the new thing. Before we had Capitalism, Innovation and Scepter. Before that, getting +Actions in your Buy phase was some weird edge case scenario that people asked about and was only possible with +1 Action token on Crown or a split pile, or an Echanted Crown.

Now we have, so far, also Gamble and Toil. And with Ways, Crown can do Action-y things in your Buy phase.

I also think this is the first card that directly lets you play a Treasure in the second part of your Buy phase (when you're buying cards). Before, this was only possible with Innovation in combination with Crown, Black Market or Storyteller.

[villafan001]

Here is an infinite loop:

+1 Card on King's Court
+1 Buy on Lurker
a Watchtower in hand
a King's Court, a Lurker and a Mandarin in Trash
2 Platinums in play


buy Gamble to play King's Court (Draw a Lurker via +1 Card token)
play this Lurker three times, gain Lurker (top), King's Court (top), Mandarin (trash)
gaining Mandarin topdecks 2 Platinums
buy Gamble twice to play them
buy Bonfire to trash a King's Court and a Lurker

Here we gain 10$ and 3 Buys by spending 9$ and 1 Buy. The board is now identical to the begging. That is an infinite loop.

Nice loop.

That being said, infinite loops already exist without this card. It's not even worth paying attention to the existence of a loop if it requires more than 5 specific cards (it's almost never going to come up). This requires at least 6 specific cards (don't forget the bonus tokens requires peasant). It's possible, but this is not something that going to come up realistically in gamble games.

I made the chances of getting the exact five cards required in any given kingdom as just over one in five trillion. Plus you’ve got the two events, I suppose, but my statistics A-Level was too long ago...

[faust]

That being said, infinite loops already exist without this card. It's not even worth paying attention to the existence of a loop if it requires more than 5 specific cards (it's almost never going to come up). This requires at least 6 specific cards (don't forget the bonus tokens requires peasant). It's possible, but this is not something that going to come up realistically in gamble games.

Really, anything with more than 3 specific card-shaped things is not worth considering outside of puzzles.

That said, Gamble + Mandarin is definitely a combo worth keeping in mind, especially with Treasures that make +buy. Just imagine a Mandarin/Capital/Gamble deck...

[dsplaisted]

When he heard about the theme of this set he wanted to know if there would be a chicken card.

Can you spoil any chicken-related cards?

I don't know if this will do much for you, but there's one in the art for Livery.

Well, it's better than nothing. 

How about Way of the Chicken as a promo card?

[michaeljb]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

[villafan001]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

[scolapasta]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

[Jeebus]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

I agree, but it's definitely unclear.

This is actually the first card that plays a card from your deck! (No, you don't actually play it from your deck, you reveal it first.)

[scolapasta]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

I agree, but it's definitely unclear.

This is actually the first card that plays a card from your deck!

The closest examples I can find are cases involving gaining and without a "may": "If X, gain Y. Otherwise, do Z".

In these cases if the Y pile is empty, such that you cannot gain Y, I'm fairly certain you wouldn't do Z.

Example: Jester: "Each other player discards the top card of their deck. If it's a Victory card they gain a Curse; otherwise they gain a copy of the discarded card or you do, your choice."

So discard a Province, no curses left, there's no way you'd gain a Province.

(other such examples are Tormentor and Leprechaun)

[GendoIkari]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

I agree, but it's definitely unclear.

This is actually the first card that plays a card from your deck!

No, Herald did also.

Given that it gets discarded otherwise though; I have to wonder why Donald didn't use the Vassal wording?

Actually, this makes me pretty sure that you get to keep an unplayed Action or Treasure on top of your deck. If it did get discarded or played no matter what, I'm pretty sure he would have used Vassal's wording. The difference between Gamble and Vassal is specifically that with Greed you can choose to not play an action and just keep it on top. Which you're going to want to do plenty often.

[popsofctown]

tfw you Freudian slip one of DXV's other games

[ben_king]

Given that it gets discarded otherwise though; I have to wonder why Donald didn't use the Vassal wording?

Actually, this makes me pretty sure that you get to keep an unplayed Action or Treasure on top of your deck. If it did get discarded or played no matter what, I'm pretty sure he would have used Vassal's wording. The difference between Gamble and Vassal is specifically that with Greed you can choose to not play an action and just keep it on top. Which you're going to want to do plenty often.

On Discord, Donald X. has said

If you don't play the card you discard it, whether or not it's an Action/Treasure.

The wording is the way it is because of various cards that can move when they're discarded.  There's less potential confusion if you can't both move it with its reaction and play it.

[michaeljb]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

Also a programmer, also how I interpreted it 

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

I agree, but it's definitely unclear.

This is actually the first card that plays a card from your deck!

No, Herald did also.

Given that it gets discarded otherwise though; I have to wonder why Donald didn't use the Vassal wording?

Actually, this makes me pretty sure that you get to keep an unplayed Action or Treasure on top of your deck. If it did get discarded or played no matter what, I'm pretty sure he would have used Vassal's wording. The difference between Gamble and Vassal is specifically that with Greed you can choose to not play an action and just keep it on top. Which you're going to want to do plenty often.

I thought there had been a ruling about when a card is revealed, the default is that it returns to where it was revealed from, assuming the effect that revealed it didn't provide further instruction. I'm pretty sure it came up around Herald.

On Discord, Donald X. has said

If you don't play the card you discard it, whether or not it's an Action/Treasure.

The wording is the way it is because of various cards that can move when they're discarded.  There's less potential confusion if you can't both move it with its reaction and play it.

Well I guess that settles it.

[LastFootnote]

If you choose not to play the Action/Treasure that Gamble reveals, it just returns to the top of the deck, right?

No, the “otherwise, discard it” means “discard it if you didn’t play it” regardless of what the card type is.

That's not how I interpret this. Maybe it's the programmer in me, but I see the "otherwise" only activating if the "if" condition ("if it's a Treasure or Action") returns false.

I agree, but it's definitely unclear.

This is actually the first card that plays a card from your deck!

No, Herald did also.

Given that it gets discarded otherwise though; I have to wonder why Donald didn't use the Vassal wording?

Actually, this makes me pretty sure that you get to keep an unplayed Action or Treasure on top of your deck. If it did get discarded or played no matter what, I'm pretty sure he would have used Vassal's wording. The difference between Gamble and Vassal is specifically that with Greed you can choose to not play an action and just keep it on top. Which you're going to want to do plenty often.

The reason it doesn't use the Vassal wording is that Vassal is already messy with Village Green, and the idea was not to replicate that with Gamble.

The wording of Gamble is ambiguous, but a clear ruling has been made: unplayed Treasures and Actions are discarded.

[Jeebus]

This is actually the first card that plays a card from your deck!

No, Herald did also.

D'oh. I thought Gamble played the card directly from your deck for some reason. But of course it's just like Herald, it plays a card revealed from your deck. Golem and Venture also do this, although not the top card.

EDIT: But Vassal is the only card that plays a card from your discard pile (and will remain so it seems).

[Jeebus]

On Discord, Donald X. has said

If you don't play the card you discard it, whether or not it's an Action/Treasure.

The wording is the way it is because of various cards that can move when they're discarded.  There's less potential confusion if you can't both move it with its reaction and play it.

Fix for next printing: If you didn't play it, discard it.

[mxdata]

Just thought of something: How does Village Green + Vassal work?  Taking the wording literally, it seems like Vassal would essentially allow you to play Village Green twice.  Vassal says "Discard the top card of your deck. If it is an Action card, you may play it.", so it seems like you should be able to both play it with Vassal, and play the Reaction.  Or would the stop-moving rule apply here, and after VG's reaction Vassal can no longer put it into play?

[Jeebus]

The reason it doesn't use the Vassal wording is that Vassal is already messy with Village Green,

and with Faithful Hound

[Jeebus]

Just thought of something: How does Village Green + Vassal work?  Taking the wording literally, it seems like Vassal would essentially allow you to play Village Green twice.  Vassal says "Discard the top card of your deck. If it is an Action card, you may play it.", so it seems like you should be able to both play it with Vassal, and play the Reaction.  Or would the stop-moving rule apply here, and after VG's reaction Vassal can no longer put it into play?

Yes, this is like Vassal + Faithful Hound. You may resolve the Faithful Hound, setting it aside, and then play it with Vassal (failing to put it into play).
With Village Green, you may resolve the Village Green, playing it, and then play it with Vassal (failing to put it into play - but of course it's already there).

Edit: I assume that a "Mining Village Green" played this way, if not trashed the first time, is lost track of when Vassal plays it, so it can't trash itself. Hmm, no I think it should work actually.

[Donald X.]

On Discord, Donald X. has said

If you don't play the card you discard it, whether or not it's an Action/Treasure.

The wording is the way it is because of various cards that can move when they're discarded.  There's less potential confusion if you can't both move it with its reaction and play it.

Fix for next printing: If you didn't play it, discard it.

And use the small font. The card just wouldn't have existed with that wording, because I vowed not to use the small font.

You can also not put +1 Buy on its own line, but it's not delightful to make exceptions there.

[Jeebus]

Fix for next printing: If you didn't play it, discard it.

And use the small font. The card just wouldn't have existed with that wording, because I vowed not to use the small font.

You can also not put +1 Buy on its own line, but it's not delightful to make exceptions there.

"If you didn't, discard it" would actually be enough. Not sure if that would fit.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 6: Camel Train

If you were wondering what else Exile could do, here is one such thing.



This can pick away at piles like a Lurker, but the cards are all reserved for you, provided you someday manage to get one honestly. Or if you don't ever need to draw them, but want them sitting there, it will do that for you too. And it comes with the promise of a Gold.

[Wizard_Amul]

Bonus Preview 6: Camel Train

If you were wondering what else Exile could do, here is one such thing.



This can pick away at piles like a Lurker, but the cards are all reserved for you, provided you someday manage to get one honestly. Or if you don't ever need to draw them, but want them sitting there, it will do that for you too. And it comes with the promise of a Gold.

Costing only 3, this seems quite good compared to duplicate, although I do see 2 downsides: you can't get victory cards with camel train and you have to know what card you want in advance (which admittedly could be a big difference in certain cases). Oh, and I just realized another caveat with exile...if the kingdom pile runs out, then you end up with not getting any exiled copies into your deck; imagine someone playing this multiple times late in the game on something like King's Court but then your opponent empties the pile leaving you with King's Courts stuck in exile. It's the ultimate "Yes, I definitely buy this to deny my opponent 3 copies of a card" (probably won't be too common but certainly could show up). The free gold at some point in the future is a pretty decent bonus, though; if you do end up wanting 1 gold, you will usually be happy with 2. If you don't want the gold, you aren't forced to ever take it.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 6: Camel Train

If you were wondering what else Exile could do, here is one such thing.



This can pick away at piles like a Lurker, but the cards are all reserved for you, provided you someday manage to get one honestly. Or if you don't ever need to draw them, but want them sitting there, it will do that for you too. And it comes with the promise of a Gold.

Yes!  My prediction that there'd be something similar to Lurker using the Exile mat was correct!  This card looks pretty convenient.  Would be great when you're trying to end the game on piles and don't want to end up with a bunch of useless cards in your deck, but also great for getting extra copies of cards you want in your deck, and therefore are going to be buying anyways

[mxdata]

Costing only 3, this seems quite good compared to duplicate, although I do see 2 downsides: you can't get victory cards with camel train and you have to know what card you want in advance (which admittedly could be a big difference in certain cases). Oh, and I just realized another caveat with exile...if the kingdom pile runs out, then you end up with not getting any exiled copies into your deck; imagine someone playing this multiple times late in the game on something like King's Court but then your opponent empties the pile leaving you with King's Courts stuck in exile. It's the ultimate "Yes, I definitely buy this to deny my opponent 3 copies of a card" (probably won't be too common but certainly could show up). The free gold at some point in the future is a pretty decent bonus, though; if you do end up wanting 1 gold, you will usually be happy with 2. If you don't want the gold, you aren't forced to ever take it.

Or even just your opponent using their own Camel Train to Exile the last KC - sure, they won't be able to use it, but they're keeping you from using your three KC's.  I suppose you'd generally want to be careful about using this if the pile is getting low and you're not going to be able to buy a copy that same turn for this very reason

I wonder how often you'd have a situation where someone uses Camel Train to Exile one or more copies of a card they want, and then buy that same card in their Buy phase to immediately discard from the Exile mat.  Seems like that would happen fairly often

Exiling does not count as gaining though, correct?  So, e.g., if you used Camel Train to Exile something with an on-gain bonus (such as this very card!) you don't get that bonus, yes?

[Donald X.]

Exiling does not count as gaining though, correct?  So, e.g., if you used Camel Train to Exile something with an on-gain bonus (such as this very card!) you don't get that bonus, yes?

Exiling is not gaining; this has been covered in these forums.

[mxdata]

So, the flavor text mentions 9 animals: Elephant, mice, horses, dogs, goat, rats, fox, camels, and turtle

Of those animals, we've seen 5: Camels, Horses, (Sheep)dogs, Rats, and Turtle, the last two as Ways, and the leaked Ways list also has Goat and Mouse, so, all but the Elephant and the Fox.  I'm wondering if those are also going to be cards now (maybe both attack cards?)

[mxdata]

Exiling does not count as gaining though, correct?  So, e.g., if you used Camel Train to Exile something with an on-gain bonus (such as this very card!) you don't get that bonus, yes?

Exiling is not gaining; this has been covered in these forums.

Just confirming that I was remembering that correctly, thanks

[LordClockworks]

Camel Train seems to be a cool new way of hoarding unused cards as well: For example you can hoard 10 coppers for Fountain, a mountain of useless actions for Vineyard or a mountain of silvers for Feodum and skip the pain of having to draw all of it. Or and you can simply hoard anything useless for your Gardens as well!

[crj]

So some people will use Camel Train to stockpile stuff they don't want in Exile? I see entertaining possibilities for a novel use of Swindler, here. (-8<

[crj]

Also, is it my imagination or is Camel Train the sweetest support for Gardens in the whole game?

[LaLight]

Also, is it my imagination or is Camel Train the sweetest support for Gardens in the whole game?

beggar tho

[crj]

Getting two exiled cards feels stronger than gaining 3 Coppers to hand? Especially since one of them can be from a pile the other players possibly wanted for their strategy and/or lets you three-pile quicker.

[theorel]

Feels like Workshop is better, because you can actually gain Gardens with it.  Eventually with Camel Train you'll need to figure out how you're going to consistently hit 4 while flooding with Gardens.

Beggar has that same advantage, flooding your deck with stuff and also helping you actually get Gardens.

[faust]

Yeah I'm pretty sure that Camel Train is pretty crap with Gardens. You'll never get to unexile those Golds because you'll never hit $6. You'll struggle to hit $4 quickly.

[silverspawn]

^ that will almost certainly happen. Also, you only gain the second card if you buy camel train. Beggar gives you 3 cards every time you play it.

[Jeebus]

If I play Wishing Well and wish for a Caravan, will it also find a Camel Train? (Sorry, stupid joke.)

[hhelibebcnofnena]

If I play Wishing Well and wish for a Caravan, will it also find a Camel Train? (Sorry, stupid joke.)

It was good until you ruined it with the parenthetical.

[trivialknot]

One dilemma this card presents: Do you exile a card that you're likely to gain this shuffle, or do you speculatively exile a card that you'll gain in a future shuffle?

I guess the way I use Duplicate, I often let it sit on the mat through shuffles, to wait for a better card.  Camel Train seems even better for this purpose, as Camel Train will not skip shuffles.  So we may see a lot of exiling-for-later with Camel Train.  Looking forward to it.


Something I'd like to see in future bonus previews, are attacks, or otherwise interactive cards/landscapes.

[GendoIkari]

If I play Wishing Well and wish for a Caravan, will it also find a Camel Train? (Sorry, stupid joke.)

It was good until you ruined it with the parenthetical.

Jokes are always funnier after you explain them.

[Jeebus]

If I play Wishing Well and wish for a Caravan, will it also find a Camel Train? (Sorry, stupid joke.)

It was good until you ruined it with the parenthetical.

Jokes are always funnier after you explain them.

Also, everybody takes my jokes seriously if I don't (like the one about Way of the Chameleon being zoologically exotic). But arguably that makes the joke funnier, because I actually seem like an idiot.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

[Aquila]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

And suddenly Cultist becomes the worst card in the game.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

And suddenly Cultist becomes the worst card in the game.

"Hey, thanks for the free Horses!"

[Oyvind]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

And suddenly Cultist becomes the worst card in the game.

Yes, in those 0.049 % of games they’re both included... Twice every 4 071 games.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

And suddenly Cultist becomes the worst card in the game.

"Hey, thanks for the free Horses!"

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

And suddenly Cultist becomes the worst card in the game.

Yes, in those 0.049 % of games they’re both included... Twice every 4 071 games.

Oh, for sure it's gonna be rare.  Even the more general combination of Looter + Way of the Horse will be rare.  Still, it's a pretty funny interaction.  And also, Ruins become quite appealing to buy in the rare games with both Way of the Horse and at least one Looter

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

In games with Shelters, you basically have a free Lab, since there's no pile for Necropolis to be returned to, so that would be pretty useful!

[faust]

Bonus Preview 7: Way of the Horse



Everything's a Horse! Handy if there are actions you don't want anymore, or never wanted, or if you're desperate.

And suddenly Cultist becomes the worst card in the game.

But at least you can get rid of it once you realize that!

[LordClockworks]

Feels like Workshop is better, because you can actually gain Gardens with it.  Eventually with Camel Train you'll need to figure out how you're going to consistently hit 4 while flooding with Gardens.

Beggar has that same advantage, flooding your deck with stuff and also helping you actually get Gardens.

Well, you aren't forced to keep every card exiled. You can start exiling silvers till a point you ready to go gardens(preferably just before a shuffle), then gain one silver and then your next shuffle is flooded with money to gain gardens, while you can start exiling gold to fight for provinces/duchies on lucky turns. So no - i think it is a good garden enabler.

[faust]

Feels like Workshop is better, because you can actually gain Gardens with it.  Eventually with Camel Train you'll need to figure out how you're going to consistently hit 4 while flooding with Gardens.

Beggar has that same advantage, flooding your deck with stuff and also helping you actually get Gardens.

Well, you aren't forced to keep every card exiled. You can start exiling silvers till a point you ready to go gardens(preferably just before a shuffle), then gain one silver and then your next shuffle is flooded with money to gain gardens, while you can start exiling gold to fight for provinces/duchies on lucky turns. So no - i think it is a good garden enabler.

If you're playing a Gardens rush, the point when you're ready to go for Gardens should be like the third shuffle. The "flood" of Silvers at that point is like 2 at best.

[silverspawn]

Another interesting aspect of way of the horse is that it makes 3-piling much harder. Have a great deck but the game is about to end? Return some of your cards to the supply.

[silverspawn]

Also, I believe all cards out of the black market become labs?

[Donald X.]

Also, I believe all cards out of the black market become labs?

Correct. Necropolis, Zombies, and Black Market cards have no pile to return to.

[LaLight]

can necromancer play cards from trash as Horses?

[Oyvind]

can necromancer play cards from trash as Horses?

I’m not DXV, but why couldn’t you?

[dz]

can necromancer play cards from trash as Horses?

I’m not DXV, but why couldn’t you?

Yes you can do that. They don't return to their piles (stop moving rule), but they're still Labs for Necromancer.

[Oyvind]

can necromancer play cards from trash as Horses?

I’m not DXV, but why couldn’t you?

You can play the card, but it won’t return to it’s pile, as you’re actually playing Necromancer, which tells you to leave the card in the Trash. This overrides the text of the Way that tries to move the second action card.

[LordClockworks]

Feels like Workshop is better, because you can actually gain Gardens with it.  Eventually with Camel Train you'll need to figure out how you're going to consistently hit 4 while flooding with Gardens.

Beggar has that same advantage, flooding your deck with stuff and also helping you actually get Gardens.

Well, you aren't forced to keep every card exiled. You can start exiling silvers till a point you ready to go gardens(preferably just before a shuffle), then gain one silver and then your next shuffle is flooded with money to gain gardens, while you can start exiling gold to fight for provinces/duchies on lucky turns. So no - i think it is a good garden enabler.

If you're playing a Gardens rush, the point when you're ready to go for Gardens should be like the third shuffle. The "flood" of Silvers at that point is like 2 at best.

I was talking more about a gardens slog. Thats the main synergy of CT with gardens after all. You can keep exiling hoards of useless cards upping your gardens points without junking your deck. Though if you aren't trying 3-pile exiling gold is probably the smartest option.

[GendoIkari]

can necromancer play cards from trash as Horses?

I’m not DXV, but why couldn’t you?

You can play the card, but it won’t return to it’s pile, as you’re actually playing Necromancer, which tells you to leave the card in the Trash. This overrides the text of the Way that tries to move the second action card.

For accuracy, the “leaving it there” part stops it from moving to in-play; the fact that it isn’t in the in-play area is what stops it from returning to its pile.

[GendoIkari]

I love that Way of the Horse just turns any card into Horse; and I hate that I didn’t think of it in the Ways prediction thread.

[silverspawn]

If you play a Horse as a Horse instead of as a Horse, that is probably a metaphor for something.

[rickert]

I am enjoying all of the Ways cards, but could we see 1 or 2 of the reaction cards? It would be cool if one of the ways was a reaction.

[GendoIkari]

I am enjoying all of the Ways cards, but could we see 1 or 2 of the reaction cards? It would be cool if one of the ways was a reaction.

I don't see how a Way could be a reaction... a Way is something you can choose to do when you play an action card; by the rules of Ways. If you want something that simply adds a reaction possibility to every action card; you would need some other sort of game-changing thing, like a Landmark or a card with an "in games using this" clause.

[Jack Rudd]

If you play a Horse as a Horse instead of as a Horse, that is probably a metaphor for something.

Agricola: Farmers of the Moor had a rule clarification that read "the Horse is not a horse, although it can count as a horse".

[AJD]

If you play a Horse as a Horse instead of as a Horse, that is probably a metaphor for something.

Unless, of course, the Way of the Horse is the famous Mr. Ed!

[hhelibebcnofnena]

I am enjoying all of the Ways cards, but could we see 1 or 2 of the reaction cards? It would be cool if one of the ways was a reaction.

I don't really want to see any more reaction cards. We've seen 3 already, and we know there are 5 total. I'd prefer to keep the other 2 a surprise.

[Gherald]

An event that interacts with Exile would be good next

[Jeebus]

In addition to Necromancer, BoM, Overlord, Captain and Inherited Estates can all play cards as Way of the Horse without having to return them.

[Jeebus]

What's the best way to refer to a card played as a Way, let's say Way of the Horse?

a card played as Way of the Horse?
a card played with Way of the Horse?
a Way of the Horse'd card?
a Way of the Horse card?
a card of the Horse?

I wonder how the rulebook says it.

[mxdata]

What's the best way to refer to a card played as a Way, let's say Way of the Horse?

a card played as Way of the Horse?
a card played with Way of the Horse?
a Way of the Horse'd card?
a Way of the Horse card?
a card of the Horse?

I wonder how the rulebook says it.

I'd go with Wayed Card, so "A Horsed [Card]"

[Wizard_Amul]

What's the best way to refer to a card played as a Way, let's say Way of the Horse?

a card played as Way of the Horse?
a card played with Way of the Horse?
a Way of the Horse'd card?
a Way of the Horse card?
a card of the Horse?

I wonder how the rulebook says it.

There doesn't have to be just one particular phrasing that is used. From Donald on previews 4 about Ways: "We turn the Action card sideways to remember which ones did the Way" and "This means for example that if you play Sheepdog via its reaction, that can still use a Way if you want." So, going by that, you could say something like "a card that did the Way of the Horse" or "a card that used the Way of the Horse."

[Gherald]

Animals will become verbs.

A horsed ruin
A turtled moneylender
You could rats a grand market
Ox your smithy

[Jeebus]

Animals will become verbs.

A horsed ruin
A turtled moneylender
You could rats a grand market
Ox your smithy

The problem what that is that Horse and Rats are cards. Ratsing a Grand Market could sound like trashing it with a Rats. I guess Horsing a card is clear though.
EDIT: It's actually "Way of the Rat", not "Rats". So it would be Ratting a Grand Market.

[AJD]

Personally I like "a card played according to the Way of the Horse".

[mxdata]

Personally I like "a card played according to the Way of the Horse".

That's awfully wordy though.  That would be like saying "A card played twice by Throne Room" as opposed to "A Throned card"

[Jeebus]

I'm reading The Fall of Gondolin, and in the city there are several clans that are called the folk of the Swallow, of the Fountain, of the Tree, etc., each with their own banner and captain.

I'm kind of liking "Smithy of the Rat", "Witch of the Mole", "Bounty Hunter of the Ox"...

EDIT: Oh, I just realized that there is a house of the Mole in the book too!

[Titandrake]

Animals will become verbs.

A horsed ruin
A turtled moneylender
You could rats a grand market
Ox your smithy

The problem what that is that Horse and Rats are cards. Ratsing a Grand Market could sound like trashing it with a Rats. I guess Horsing a card is clear though.
EDIT: It's actually "Way of the Rat", not "Rats". So it would be Ratting a Grand Market.

My instinct would be to say "I Rats my Grand Market" to mean "play with Way", and "Rats trashing my Grand market" to mean trashing it. I would guess ways are not ambiguous in practice.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 8: Way of the Pig, Way of the Sheep

As I've been saying, many of the Ways are simple. Here are two vanilla ones.



What is there to say, that wasn't said better by the cards?

[mxdata]

Looks like the Enchantress has settled down a bit and is now doing her magic on request

[silverspawn]

"You can't enchant me, I'm already a pig!"

[[TP] Inferno]

Enchantress is just a non-optional Way of the Pig, I guess.

[Willvon]

Little known fact. Pigs actually like whey. I worked at a farm where we raised pigs and cows and made our own cheese. We would give the whey to the pigs in their food. So in that case, the pigs always found their own whey.

[popsofctown]

I thought about sheep and it seemed boring, then I thought about it some more and it still seemed boring, then I thought about it again and it seems fascinating.

Sheep makes it much easier to buy fewer Silvers, which can lead to a much more powerful engine deck  Even if there are 5$ that must must be gained early, you can buy engine components that aren't appropriate for the earlygame - even village- turn 1-2.
It also has interesting implications for BMU decks that user a treasure-gainer.  Most BMU decks based on a treasure gainer perform more poorly than ones based on card draw or an attack because the thing that they do is gain treasure, even during the phase of the game where nothing but green matters but they're still in your deck.  Sheep lets you decide the time for gaining golds or silvers has ended and it's only provinces now.  The +2 cards Way is even better for this (has one already been spoiled?  It seems sure that there's going to be one) but this one counts too.

[chipperMDW]

Little known fact. Pigs actually like whey. I worked at a farm where we raised pigs and cows and made our own cheese. We would give the whey to the pigs in their food. So in that case, the pigs always found their own whey.

Ever since Ways were previewed, I've been wondering how long it would be before that pun occurd to someone.

[crj]

I'm glad Donald did two previews today. Way of the Pig by itself would have been... exactly what we were all expecting. A bit of an anticlimax. (-8

[crj]

Regarding names, we could be fancy and use the specialist adjectival forms: "porcine X" when you play X using Way of the Pig, Similarly acrodontine, equine, talpine, bovine, murine, ovine, chelonian for the others thus far officially announced.

Trouble is, though vocabulary is pretty large I still had to look up a "acrodontine". Most dictionaries have never heard of it; it's barely a word!

I suppose we could misuse "sheepish" and "molar"?

[GendoIkari]

Hard to see when you would use Way of the Sheep. You would have to have basically drawn your deck with spare actions and a card-draw or Village in your hand that you don’t need.

[crj]

I've not played using it yet, but popsofctown's observation makes sense: it's not a late-game thing; the difference it makes is in facilitating a better tempo to your early engine-building.

[grrgrrgrr]

Hard to see when you would use Way of the Sheep. You would have to have basically drawn your deck with spare actions and a card-draw or Village in your hand that you don’t need.

I think the opposite. It will especially make opening with villages far more appealing. And it definitely makes component-spamming more viable. I mean, the scenario you described isn't terribly uncommon.

[faust]

Hard to see when you would use Way of the Sheep. You would have to have basically drawn your deck with spare actions and a card-draw or Village in your hand that you don’t need.

I think the opposite. It will especially make opening with villages far more appealing. And it definitely makes component-spamming more viable. I mean, the scenario you described isn't terribly uncommon.

Plus having flexible virtual coin is a huge deal in draw-to-X engines.

[[TP] Inferno]

Hard to see when you would use Way of the Sheep. You would have to have basically drawn your deck with spare actions and a card-draw or Village in your hand that you don’t need.

I think the opposite. It will especially make opening with villages far more appealing. And it definitely makes component-spamming more viable. I mean, the scenario you described isn't terribly uncommon.

Plus having flexible virtual coin is a huge deal in draw-to-X engines.

And with Necropolis you are guaranteed to open with $5.

[mxdata]

Hard to see when you would use Way of the Sheep. You would have to have basically drawn your deck with spare actions and a card-draw or Village in your hand that you don’t need.

I think the opposite. It will especially make opening with villages far more appealing. And it definitely makes component-spamming more viable. I mean, the scenario you described isn't terribly uncommon.

Plus having flexible virtual coin is a huge deal in draw-to-X engines.

And with Necropolis you are guaranteed to open with $5.

And a chance of having $6 in one of your opening turns, if one of your hands is Necropolis + 4 coppers

[GendoIkari]

Fair, I hadn’t considered the upside of skipping silver especially. I was only thinking about midgame, when basically any action you bought should have a much stronger effect.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 9: Stampede

Here's another teased card: "5 or fewer."



Sadly the art doesn't show 5 horses.

[bargainingspice]

I mean, it does. It shows 5 horses, and also shows 3 more horses.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 9: Stampede

Here's another teased card: "5 or fewer."



Sadly the art doesn't show 5 horses.

Could make for an interesting 5/2 opening.  Also useful if you have a dud hand, but you still have $5 worth of treasures, say, three Victory cards, a Silver, and a Gold

[mxdata]

It occurs to me that discard attacks would not play nicely with this event.  After cleanup, you'll have a hand of 5 Horses.  If you are able to play all five on your next hand, you'll effectively start with 10 cards.  On the other hand, if you have to discard down to 3 cards, then you'll only have six cards in hand after playing the remaining three Horses.  Minion would be especially cruel after buying Stampede

[silverspawn]

5/2 with stampede turn 1 means you'll have 1 card costing up to 7$ after the first 2 turns rather than 2 cards costing up to 5$ and 2$, respectively. I'd go for it if there's altar or forge.

If you want 5/0 anyway, you can do it just for the hell of it.

[Hockey Mask]

Bonus Preview 9: Stampede

Here's another teased card: "5 or fewer."



Sadly the art doesn't show 5 horses.

Me: read card text, counted horses, shoulders fell, read your comment about number of horses, shoulders fell further

[scolapasta]

5/2 with stampede turn 1 means you'll have 1 card costing up to 7$ after the first 2 turns rather than 2 cards costing up to 5$ and 2$, respectively. I'd go for it if there's altar or forge.

If you want 5/0 anyway, you can do it just for the hell of it.

With Windfall as the 2nd landscape, you could buy it and net 3 Golds.

[m_knox]

I mean, it does. It shows 5 horses, and also shows 3 more horses.

Maybe there are 5 horses and 3 mares. Or something.

[Gherald]

A stampede (noun) involves a large group, look it up.  I don't think 5 qualifies as a large group, so they pictured more.

I guess 5 happen to be what settles on top of your deck/kingdom to be experimented with

----
Edit: Actually stampede is a verb too and that applies better here, since it's an Event.  Any number can stampede.

[Jimmmmm]

I don't think those back 3 really have their hearts in it.

[crj]

5/2 with stampede turn 1 means [...]
If you want 5/0 anyway, you can do it just for the hell of it.

Not just for the hell of it: if you only want to spend $5, you get to keep one of the Horses for later.

[crj]

Maybe there are 5 horses and 3 mares. Or something.

It's hard to gauge online whether or not you're joking. (Mares are horses; male horses are stallions or geldings.)

[crj]

Stampede feels if anything too powerful for 5/2 openings? But that's too obvious. It must have been playtested, and it has to be OK despite my intuition.

[silverspawn]

5/2 with stampede turn 1 means [...]
If you want 5/0 anyway, you can do it just for the hell of it.

Not just for the hell of it: if you only want to spend $5, you get to keep one of the Horses for later.

You can do that, but that would mean leaving two coppers on the top of your deck rather than in your discard pile. Which might or might not be worth the extra horse in your deck.

[GendoIkari]

It occurs to me that discard attacks would not play nicely with this event.  After cleanup, you'll have a hand of 5 Horses.  If you are able to play all five on your next hand, you'll effectively start with 10 cards.  On the other hand, if you have to discard down to 3 cards, then you'll only have six cards in hand after playing the remaining three Horses.  Minion would be especially cruel after buying Stampede

Other than the fact that you have no junk cards in hand; I think a Militia or Minion against 5 Horses is actually less harsh than it would be against 5 other non-junk cards that you want. Normally if a good action is discarded, it means one fewer times that you get to play it this game; it misses the shuffle. But with one-shots, Horse or otherwise, missing the shuffle isn’t as bad, because either way you end up playing it one time total. It delays the card getting played; but with a normal good action, it doesn’t just delay it, it cancels it.

[Gherald]

Against Militia, half the Stampede acts as a defense: you end up with a 6 card hand. The other half of the Stampede gets saved for later.

You paid $5 for this result.

Was that result better than buying something else for $5, and having a 3 card hand after the militia, and not having half the Stampede for later?

Well that depends, but it certainly can be most of the time.

Rule of thumb: If you can proc Stampede (<= 5 fewer cards in play) and you have a payload to draw and there's no other thing worth $5 you really need right at that moment, it's well worth the buy.

[hhelibebcnofnena]

I can imagine that a 2/5 opening of Chapel/Stampede would be fairly powerful for increasing reliability. You will be able to trash all Estates (and a Copper) turn 3, 64% of the time. Of the remaining 36%, 27% of the time you can still trash two of your Estates.

This can be really powerful if you get lucky in the opening, but only when paired with certain cards.

[crj]

if you only want to spend $5, you get to keep one of the Horses for later.

You can do that, but that would mean leaving two coppers on the top of your deck rather than in your discard pile. Which might or might not be worth the extra horse in your deck.

I thought about that a bit, and figured it's so early coppers are still a better than the average card in your deck.

[crj]

Having thought about this a bit more...

Gameplay: if playing a game with both Stampede and Tactician available, which would you buy, and why?

Artwork: never mind the number of horses, how are you going to domesticate those wild horses before your opponent has finished their turn?

[silverspawn]

The horses are fine, why are people even complaining about the horses. They can't all be the best horses ever.

[MiX]

The horses are fine, why are people even complaining about the horses. They can't all be the best horses ever.

The horses actually are the best Horses that exist. Just not the best horse, as Trusty Steed still exists.

[scolapasta]

Gameplay: if playing a game with both Stampede and Tactician available, which would you buy, and why?

Why not both?? Generate 5 in a turn with < 4 cards, (e.g Festival, then Mandarin*) then play Tactician and buy Stampede, next turn: 2 Actions, 2 buys, 15 cards in your hand!

* In this specific scenario, if you happened to already have a horse in hand, use Mandarin to put on top of your deck, actually start with 16 cards

[Gherald]

The horses are fine, why are people even complaining about the horses. They can't all be the best horses ever.

The horses actually are the best Horses that exist. Just not the best horse, as Trusty Steed still exists.

Also Destrier

[popsofctown]

I feel like a dunce, I don't get why this card is so great.  The key price point in dominion is to hit 5$ and buy one of the powerful 5$ actions that are key to engines.  If I buy this in any deck, I guarantee that my next turn I will hit 5$.  That's great! But uh.  I spent 5$ and a turn.  Aren't I kind of just spinning my wheels?  If my turn ends up being <stampede> <5$> action, but I could have instead had <5$ action> <4$ action>, wouldn't that have been better?  Maybe you can get to 5$ without playing out all of the Horses, then we're replacing that 3-4$ turn with Experiment and like, people say Experiment is fine, it's pretty fine, I haven't mastered when and when not to buy it but I get it.  I don't think 3$ Event "gain 2 horses" would have gotten the positive response people are putting forth so there must be something I'm missing.

Tactician's built in +buy is pretty key.  You could get access to some +buy and make this card good, I can see that.  Pay 5$ for this, draw up to 10 cards, play +buy, reach 10$, and you can buy two 5$ actions, over two turns.  It is not necessarily the case those two turns would have done that without the help if you're colliding Villages with Smithies.  This just doesn't seem worth it on the boards where the source of +buy isn't inherently attractive, but if it is, this does seem like a cool thing to do.

As for the use of skipping a Duchy for bomby double or triple Province turns, the restriction clause seems pretty likely to keep that from happening.

BMU is increasingly a battered and bruised underdog I like to route for and I want to hope this card is a good equalizer for that deck.  I think gaining nothing but a province across two turns is better than a 5$ silver for a BMU deck that has its desired terminal density.  The opportunity cost for engines is higher.

[Willvon]

So if I am not mistaken, so far we have seen all of the teaser phrases but 2:

"5 or fewer" - Stampede
"$1 less per"
"a different thing" - Scrap
"an unused Action"
"either now or" - Barge
"hand three times" - Mastermind
"instead, and vice-versa" - Way of the Chameleon
"instead of paying" - Animal Fair
"province, a duchy" - Alliance
"they discard their" - Coven

Let me know if there is something that I missed.

[mxdata]

So if I am not mistaken, so far we have seen all of the teaser phrases but 2:

"5 or fewer" - Stampede
"$1 less per"
"a different thing" - Scrap
"an unused Action"
"either now or" - Barge
"hand three times" - Mastermind
"instead, and vice-versa" - Way of the Chameleon
"instead of paying" - Animal Fair
"province, a duchy" - Alliance
"they discard their" - Coven

Let me know if there is something that I missed.

Correct

"$1 less per" is probably going to be a card whose cost is variable, similar to Peddler, i.e., "This card costs $1 less per [something]".  Probably something different from Peddler ("per card you gained this turn", maybe?), but I can't figure out what would make sense with "an unused Action"

[Wizard_Amul]

I feel like a dunce, I don't get why this card is so great.  The key price point in dominion is to hit 5$ and buy one of the powerful 5$ actions that are key to engines.  If I buy this in any deck, I guarantee that my next turn I will hit 5$.  That's great! But uh.  I spent 5$ and a turn.  Aren't I kind of just spinning my wheels?  If my turn ends up being <stampede> <5$> action, but I could have instead had <5$ action> <4$ action>, wouldn't that have been better?  Maybe you can get to 5$ without playing out all of the Horses, then we're replacing that 3-4$ turn with Experiment and like, people say Experiment is fine, it's pretty fine, I haven't mastered when and when not to buy it but I get it.  I don't think 3$ Event "gain 2 horses" would have gotten the positive response people are putting forth so there must be something I'm missing.

Tactician's built in +buy is pretty key.  You could get access to some +buy and make this card good, I can see that.  Pay 5$ for this, draw up to 10 cards, play +buy, reach 10$, and you can buy two 5$ actions, over two turns.  It is not necessarily the case those two turns would have done that without the help if you're colliding Villages with Smithies.  This just doesn't seem worth it on the boards where the source of +buy isn't inherently attractive, but if it is, this does seem like a cool thing to do.

As for the use of skipping a Duchy for bomby double or triple Province turns, the restriction clause seems pretty likely to keep that from happening.

BMU is increasingly a battered and bruised underdog I like to route for and I want to hope this card is a good equalizer for that deck.  I think gaining nothing but a province across two turns is better than a 5$ silver for a BMU deck that has its desired terminal density.  The opportunity cost for engines is higher.

I wouldn't say I'm an expert player, but I think there are a couple of times you might want this in the draw-your-deck paradigm. One big advantage over tactician is that this is an event that's always available, so you can choose to give up your mediocre turn to have a great next turn; this would usually be later in the game when there isn't a 5 cost you really want instead. Think of why expedition is good; I think Expedition is usually better since there is no condition to meet, though. Another way to use it is early on in the game as a one-time effect to accelerate your next turn but with the very real opportunity cost of not getting a 5 cost right now; think of something like Madman helping you guarantee getting an extra play of your early trasher/junker/attack/payload. I agree with you that it's quite a bit better in the early game if you have +buy already.

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 10: Cardinal

Another thing Exile can do is be mean.



This eats cards like a Knight, but you can get them all back, at least until the pile runs out. It's annoying, then more annoying, then you are hoping it hits your Duchies for you.

[Barbarossa41]

That card is.... Interesting.


I immediately see all sorts of broken combos with Capitalism

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 10: Cardinal

Another thing Exile can do is be mean.



This eats cards like a Knight, but you can get them all back, at least until the pile runs out. It's annoying, then more annoying, then you are hoping it hits your Duchies for you.

I knew there was going to be an Exile version of trashing attacks!

This seems like a very conditional card.  If your opponent is going heavy for Duchies, then it's likely to help them more than hurt them, by giving them a free Exile.  On the other hand, it could also be almost as good as a Knight in the early and mid-game, especially if your opponent isn't going for a Duchy-heavy strategy.  It would have an advantage over Knights in not triggering any when-trash effects, since nothing's actually being trashed, but that wouldn't be a very strong advantage in most games (which is presumably why it has +$2, is only $4, and lacks the Knights' mutually assured destruction clause)  Overall, though, it seems like a pretty good attack for the price, especially early in the game where getting $5 or $6 is difficult, so getting expensive cards Exiled would hurt a bit

[[TP] Inferno]

So are there any more previews after this? If there are, I would like to see the cards with the teaser text we haven't seen yet, namely '$1 less per' and 'an unused Action'.

[Donald X.]

So are there any more previews after this? If there are, I would like to see the cards with the teaser text we haven't seen yet, namely '$1 less per' and 'an unused Action'.

I expect to do a few more previews; you'll probably have to wait for the rulebook / release to see those two.

[Freddy10]

I already can see people watching their Mountebanks going to exile on T3 after opening 5/- 

[faust]

I already can see people watching their Mountebanks going to exile on T3 after opening 5/- 

Still better than being trashed and replaced by a Duchy...

[Hibernator]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?
Thank you

[D782802859]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?
Thank you

Given the fact that religious cards are always trashing based, and Exile is similar to trashing, this is unlikely. Plus, Cardinal doesn't really sound like an attack.

[Gherald]

I would assume the other religious card, Sanctuary, uses the new Exile mechanic as well.

(What would a little red bird be about here anyway? That's not a relevant archetype like Owl or Falcon or whatever.)

[Awaclus]

I immediately see all sorts of broken combos with Capitalism

Well... yeah, Capitalism performs its intended functionality on this card, like it does with all the other cards that give +coin. I guess if you want to call that "all sorts of broken combos" then I can see it too.

[segura]

Sweet, that's the trashing Attack with the Exile mechanic that I anticipated.

[mikechike]

Eats like a Knight, eats Knights real good. Any way to get them back from Exile with the cards we've seen so far, or other unique name piles like Castles?

[Gherald]

Not so far, but in general you'd be very happy if Castles could be Exiled for you.

[GendoIkari]

That card is.... Interesting.


I immediately see all sorts of broken combos with Capitalism

What sort of combo are you thinking of? Cardinal becomes a treasure, so it's non-terminal, but that's not different than the way that it makes any other terminal coin better.

[villafan001]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?
Thank you

Given the fact that religious cards are always trashing based, and Exile is similar to trashing, this is unlikely. Plus, Cardinal doesn't really sound like an attack.

There are numerous ecclesiastical cards in the game already, and all of them involve trashing - so Cardinal (in that sense) fits the bill. Great image as well, especially the cardinal’s hat.

[nmx]

I would assume the other religious card, Sanctuary, uses the new Exile mechanic as well.

(What would a little red bird be about here anyway? That's not a relevant archetype like Owl or Falcon or whatever.)

To go in the Sanctuary, of course.

[crj]

Artwork quibble: very few cardinals would have had a full beard in mediaeval times. Not many do, even now. It's not actually disallowed, it's just that they want to avoid looking Orthodox/Coptic.

[Donald X.]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?

No. We have notes now on what the cards are supposed to depict, so that mistakes like that aren't made.

[mxdata]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?

No. We have notes now on what the cards are supposed to depict, so that mistakes like that aren't made.

I would assume you have final approval anyways, even if the artist had made that mistake, right?

[villafan001]

Artwork quibble: very few cardinals would have had a full beard in mediaeval times. Not many do, even now. It's not actually disallowed, it's just that they want to avoid looking Orthodox/Coptic.

Not true: 23 popes in a row from 1523-1700 had beards and a majority overall have done. It was only actually against canon law for a brief period in the 20th century.

I realise Dominion is probably set *slightly* prior to 1523, but plenty before that had them.

[Hibernator]

I realise Dominion is probably set *slightly* prior to 1523, but plenty before that had them.

What about the man in the Library, he looks like he's dressing from the 19th century. And then in Empires you have Roman times. Dominion is the new Through the ages

[mxdata]

I realise Dominion is probably set *slightly* prior to 1523, but plenty before that had them.

What about the man in the Library, he looks like he's dressing from the 19th century. And then in Empires you have Roman times. Dominion is the new Through the ages

Next expansion "Dominion: Space Opera"

[popsofctown]

All the women travelers and the women half of the knight stack are very angry that Cardinal does not depict the average appearance for someone of that occupation from that time period.

[Hockey Mask]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?

No. We have notes now on what the cards are supposed to depict, so that mistakes like that aren't made.

Who didn’t make the notes about the five horse Stampede?

[ShoopOopADoo]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

Sorry if this was already asked, but say Estates are gone, can you still do an Alliance? Or do you have to be able to meet all of the requirements of the event in order to buy it?

[hhelibebcnofnena]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

Sorry if this was already asked, but say Estates are gone, can you still do an Alliance? Or do you have to be able to meet all of the requirements of the event in order to buy it?

You gain all of the cards that you can.

[Wizard_Amul]

Bonus Preview 4: Alliance

I guess it should be no surprise that some people wanted to see the teased cards; here's "province, a duchy":



You get all that stuff! You can't not take some of it.

Sorry if this was already asked, but say Estates are gone, can you still do an Alliance? Or do you have to be able to meet all of the requirements of the event in order to buy it?

The way that Dominion works is you follow a card's instructions from top to bottom, doing as much of it as you can. If there is something that you can't do, you just skip that part; the exception is if a card's instructions specify that some requirement must be met in order for the rest of the instructions to be carried out (look at Treasure Map for an example of a strict requirement; you only get the 4 golds if you actually trashed two Treasure Maps). Alliance has no requirements since it just states that you do things without some kind of "if" clause. To have Alliance be a requirement like you said, it would have to be worded something like "If the supply contains at least one of each of province, duchy, estate, copper, silver, and gold, then gain one of each of them."

[Donald X.]

I would assume you have final approval anyways, even if the artist had made that mistake, right?

Sometimes when a card is wrong I do get to say, and get it fixed. Sometimes we use the error because of the nature of it, e.g. it defies physics or history but no-one will care. For years I didn't see everything and so some stuff would just be a surprise on the cards.

For most companies I wouldn't expect to have any say on art; not my department. I might comment anyway if saw some, but you know. For example for Pina Pirata, I said, isn't this art too fiddly, and they said, what, you don't like it? And they used it and then you couldn't recognize the cards upside-down and they added icons and color-coding for later printings.

[Donald X.]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?

No. We have notes now on what the cards are supposed to depict, so that mistakes like that aren't made.

Who didn’t make the notes about the five horse Stampede?

Everyone? That sentence did not make much sense. Nevertheless I am betting you are looking for me to say, which I will, that I didn't think to mention the number of horses in the notes.

[mxdata]

Given that a cardinal is a bird and that the expansion is about animals, did you intend this card to depict a bird but the artitst went his/her own way?

No. We have notes now on what the cards are supposed to depict, so that mistakes like that aren't made.

Who didn’t make the notes about the five horse Stampede?

Everyone? That sentence did not make much sense. Nevertheless I am betting you are looking for me to say, which I will, that I didn't think to mention the number of horses in the notes.

It still works with eight horses on the art.  You're able to capture 5 of them, but the other 3 get away

[Donald X.]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

[Hockey Mask]

Well that looks like one I’ll get and hate myself for.

[Wizard_Amul]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

I like this way better than cursed gold. Not taking a spot in your deck meaning you can pick the turns when you want to use it makes it much more helpful and less swingy. I like events like these...they reward the skill of knowing when it's worth it to use them.

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Is the person on the art missing a hand?

[mxdata]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Another card-shaped thing that allows something other than 2/5 and 3/4 openings, since you can buy it in either, or both of your opening turns to add $2, although you'd probably need some good trashing to make that worthwhile

[silverspawn]

Interesting one. Similar to cursed gold but more powerful. For example, it has +buy.

I'll totally open Altar/Sentry/Curse/Curse.

[Ingix]

The +1 buy is only counteracting the fact hat you need a buy to get Desperation. And you can't "Throne" a Desperation.

[kieranmillar]

Is the person on the art missing a hand?

I think they're just scratching their arse. Probably in desperation.

[faust]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Just like going to the supermarket!

[Watno]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Is the person on the art missing a hand?

I assume that's the cause of the desperation.

[sc0UT]

I bet the person is going to steal some fruit. Whatch their (remaining) hand.

[theorel]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Is the person on the art missing a hand?

Looks like they've been caught stealing once before...

[Doom_Shark]

In a kingdom with this, coven, and a good trasher, I can see myself getting this just to start trashing the exiled curses early

[Emeric]

Rules book is online :
http://riograndegames.com/Game/1350-Dominion-Menagerie

[villafan001]

Rules book is online :
http://riograndegames.com/Game/1350-Dominion-Menagerie

Needless to say, it contains all of the kingdom cards.

[LostPhoenix]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Is the person on the art missing a hand?

Presumably the person is hiding some stolen fruit behind their back. Very appropriate art for the card imo.

[crj]

Hmm. Way of the Rat says "You may discard a Treasure to gain a copy of this." But Desperation says "You may gain a Curse. If you do, +1 Buy and +$2."

Now, I happen to prefer the old "if you do" wording over the modern "to", so I'm hardly complaining, but I am left wondering why Menagerie isn't consistent, here.

[spineflu]

Hmm. Way of the Rat says "You may discard a Treasure to gain a copy of this." But Desperation says "You may gain a Curse. If you do, +1 Buy and +$2."

Now, I happen to prefer the old "if you do" wording over the modern "to", so I'm hardly complaining, but I am left wondering why Menagerie isn't consistent, here.

because "+1 Buy and +$2" isn't a verb-y phrase the way "gain a copy" is?; altho i guess it could be phrased

You may gain a Curse for +1 Buy and +$2

[FrenziedHavoc]

The flood gates have opened.

[rickert]

Does this mean it is releasing tomorrow?

[dz]

Hmm. Way of the Rat says "You may discard a Treasure to gain a copy of this." But Desperation says "You may gain a Curse. If you do, +1 Buy and +$2."

Now, I happen to prefer the old "if you do" wording over the modern "to", so I'm hardly complaining, but I am left wondering why Menagerie isn't consistent, here.

The answer to any inconsistency in wording:

We may have talked about it but there's no real reason there. The cards try to be phrased well and are not all phrased at once.

I don't know if there was a reason. It got this wording and this wording seemed fine; the usual story when people want the story of the wording.

[crj]

Hmm. Goatherd: "+1 Card per card the player to your right trashed on their last turn"

What if they trash the same card twice? What if you can't tell?

[m_knox]

Hmm. Goatherd: "+1 Card per card the player to your right trashed on their last turn"

What if they trash the same card twice? What if you can't tell?

As far as I can tell, you cannot trash a card that is already trashed.
Or do you mean trashing a Fortress multiple times?

[crj]

Fortress is just the most obvious case. The game also contains several ways to gain stuff from the trash.

[Squidd]

Way of the (Royal) Seal made me laugh a little.

[villafan001]

Hmm. Goatherd: "+1 Card per card the player to your right trashed on their last turn"

What if they trash the same card twice? What if you can't tell?

There are quite a few cards that require close tracking in this set - Invest is one I didn’t expect, now you have to have two separate pools of Exiled cards and keep track of them. In general it does feel more and more like the game is being written for online play (which I don’t mind at all!).

[crj]

Oh boy: Seize the Day!

That's going to set up a fascinating game of chicken as the Provinces run low.

How is one supposed to track it, though? Time to break out the Project cubes from Renaissance?

[Willvon]

Bonus Preview 11: Desperation



It's the Event version of Cursed Gold. You can have more money, if you want it badly enough.

Is the person on the art missing a hand?

I hope he just has his hand behind his back. Otherwise, we know one of the reasons why he is so desperate.

[GendoIkari]

Typo in the rulebook; under the Way of the Mouse FAQ:

Text below a dividing line
(other that setup) will not do anything.

[GendoIkari]

Oh boy: Seize the Day!

That's going to set up a fascinating game of chicken as the Provinces run low.

How is one supposed to track it, though? Time to break out the Project cubes from Renaissance?

In practice, there will never be a question.... everyone will remember if it was bought by you. But in theory, you're right. The only other "once per game" event we've had, Inheritance, caused you to set aside a card which serves as a physical reminder.

[Willvon]

And now we know the last 2 teased cards.

"5 or fewer" - Stampede
"$1 less per" - Destrier
"a different thing" - Scrap
"an unused Action" - Way of the Mouse
"either now or" - Barge
"hand three times" - Mastermind
"instead, and vice-versa" - Way of the Chameleon
"instead of paying" - Animal Fair
"province, a duchy" - Alliance
"they discard their" - Coven

[Wizard_Amul]

Hmm. Goatherd: "+1 Card per card the player to your right trashed on their last turn"

What if they trash the same card twice? What if you can't tell?

I take it that it's not counting the physical copies of cards that were trashed but instead the number of times some card is trashed, so trashing one fortress four times would count as four cards trashed, even though it is only one physical copy of fortress that is being trashed. This is the only way that this makes sense to me; like you said, based on the fact that you couldn't know for sure if the player trashed four different fortresses one time each or one fortress four times, it must be counting the number of times some card was trashed.

[Jeebus]

Way of the (Royal) Seal made me laugh a little.

In addition, seals balance stuff on top of their snouts so it kinda fits with the mechanic.

[Wizard_Amul]

Oh boy: Seize the Day!

That's going to set up a fascinating game of chicken as the Provinces run low.

How is one supposed to track it, though? Time to break out the Project cubes from Renaissance?

It changes the endgame a ton. Assuming you've only bought provinces so far and your opponent hasn't bought any, if there are 6 provinces left and your opponent has 20 coins and 3 buys, you can't safely double province since your opponent could double province + seize the day and then double province + estate.

[Willvon]

Can someone help me understand this statement better?  The rulebook says in regard to Ways: “The choice to use a Way or not happens after "first" abilities on cards like Moat and Kiln.”

Moat says “When another player plays an Attack card, you may first reveal this from your hand”. Since this use of Moat is not playing the card, how would the “first” ability ever come before using Moat as a Way? The revealing and the playing of the card happen at completely different times, the “first” on someone else’s turn, the other on your turn. So why would it be necessary to make that distinction in the rules? Or is it referring to the idea that since an Attack card was put in play, even though you are playing it as a Way, other players can still “first” reveal their Moats if they want to do so? But if that is the case, why bother to reveal it?

I think I understand what it is referring to in regard to Kiln. You play Kiln, then you play the next card as a Way, but before resolving whatever the Way requires, you first gain a copy of that card since it is now in play. However, if you play Kiln as a Way, you don’t get to gain a copy of the card you play after it.

[Jeebus]

Can someone help me understand this statement better?  The rulebook says in regard to Ways: “The choice to use a Way or not happens after "first" abilities on cards like Moat and Kiln.”

Moat says “When another player plays an Attack card, you may first reveal this from your hand”. Since this use of Moat is not playing the card, how would the “first” ability ever come before using Moat as a Way? The revealing and the playing of the card happen at completely different times, the “first” on someone else’s turn, the other on your turn. So why would it be necessary to make that distinction in the rules? Or is it referring to the idea that since an Attack card was put in play, even though you are playing it as a Way, other players can still “first” reveal their Moats if they want to do so? But if that is the case, why bother to reveal it?

I think I understand what it is referring to in regard to Kiln. You play Kiln, then you play the next card as a Way, but before resolving whatever the Way requires, you first gain a copy of that card since it is now in play. However, if you play Kiln as a Way, you don’t get to gain a copy of the card you play after it.

When you play an Attack card, other players use Reactions before you decide to use it as a Way. This matters; you can see if everybody Moats your Attack before you decide.

[Tozar]

Interesting.  Some of the Ways are not in the rule book.  Don't think we've ever seen that before.  "Some of the Ways are very simple. Here are notes for the others."

[crj]

When you play an Attack card, other players use Reactions before you decide to use it as a Way. This matters; you can see if everybody Moats your Attack before you decide.

Concur.

I did figure it out, but I had to pause and think, mainly beause at first I read it as talking about using a Way on a play of Moat or Kiln. Possibly, that could have been worded better.

[Donald X.]

Does this mean it is releasing tomorrow?

Jay expects the physical copies in his warehouse around Monday (that's in Chicago).

However the online version will go up tomorrow.

[Donald X.]

Typo in the rulebook; under the Way of the Mouse FAQ:

Text below a dividing line
(other that setup) will not do anything.

Damn.

[Donald X.]

I take it that it's not counting the physical copies of cards that were trashed but instead the number of times some card is trashed, so trashing one fortress four times would count as four cards trashed, even though it is only one physical copy of fortress that is being trashed. This is the only way that this makes sense to me; like you said, based on the fact that you couldn't know for sure if the player trashed four different fortresses one time each or one fortress four times, it must be counting the number of times some card was trashed.

Yes, it's the number of times trashing a card occurred.

[mxdata]

Typo in the rulebook; under the Way of the Mouse FAQ:

Text below a dividing line
(other that setup) will not do anything.

Damn.

There's also an error in the recommended sets for Hinterlands.  The set "Intersection" says "Way of the Mouse-Crossroads"

EDIT: No, wait, never mind.  That means "the set aside card is Crossroads"

[scolapasta]

Typo in the rulebook; under the Way of the Mouse FAQ:

Text below a dividing line
(other that setup) will not do anything.

Damn.

There's also an error in the recommended sets for Hinterlands.  The set "Intersection" says "Way of the Mouse-Crossroads"

I assume that's meant to be the $2-$3 card Way Of the Mouse sets aside.

[J Reggie]

Typo in the rulebook; under the Way of the Mouse FAQ:

Text below a dividing line
(other that setup) will not do anything.

Damn.

There's also an error in the recommended sets for Hinterlands.  The set "Intersection" says "Way of the Mouse-Crossroads"

How is that a typo? Crossroads is the card for Way of the Mouse.

Edit, I guess I was ninja'd and didn't get a PPE.

[Donald X.]

The rulebook leaves out the simplest Ways, which means there are 7 you haven't seen yet. So here they are in text form.

Way of the Camel: Way
Exile a Gold from the Supply.

Way of the Frog: Way
+1 Action
When you discard this from play
this turn, put it onto your deck.

Way of the Goat: Way
Trash a card from your hand.

Way of the Monkey: Way
+1 Buy
+$1

Way of the Mule: Way
+1 Action
+$1

Way of the Otter: Way
+2 Cards

Way of the Worm: Way
Exile an Estate from the Supply.

[mxdata]

The rulebook leaves out the simplest Ways, which means there are 7 you haven't seen yet. So here they are in text form.

Way of the Camel: Way
Exile a Gold from the Supply.

Way of the Frog: Way
+1 Action
When you discard this from play
this turn, put it onto your deck.

Way of the Goat: Way
Trash a card from your hand.

Way of the Monkey: Way
+1 Buy
+$1

Way of the Mule: Way
+1 Action
+$1

Way of the Otter: Way
+2 Cards

Way of the Worm: Way
Exile an Estate from the Supply.

Way of the Worm could lead to some interesting play.  While Estates remain, it's essentially equivalent to +1VP, but once Estates are out, it becomes useless.  I suspect it would tend to lead to the Estates pile running out fairly early

[mxdata]

Typo in the rulebook; under the Way of the Mouse FAQ:

Text below a dividing line
(other that setup) will not do anything.

Damn.

There's also an error in the recommended sets for Hinterlands.  The set "Intersection" says "Way of the Mouse-Crossroads"

I assume that's meant to be the $2-$3 card Way Of the Mouse sets aside.

Yeah, I realized that after I posted.  Probably should've read what Way of the Mouse actually does before assuming it was an error *facepalm*

[Jeebus]

Wow, playing Actions in your Buy phase seems to be the new thing. Before we had Capitalism, Innovation and Scepter. Before that, getting +Actions in your Buy phase was some weird edge case scenario that people asked about and was only possible with +1 Action token on Crown or a split pile, or an Echanted Crown.

Now we have, so far, also Gamble and Toil. And with Ways, Crown can do Action-y things in your Buy phase.

I also think this is the first card that directly lets you play a Treasure in the second part of your Buy phase (when you're buying cards). Before, this was only possible with Innovation in combination with Crown, Black Market or Storyteller.

Add March to the list.

[urza]

We all thought "unused action" was going to be some kind of Diadem variant, but it's actually closer to Young Witch?  Very tricky!

[mxdata]

The rulebook leaves out the simplest Ways, which means there are 7 you haven't seen yet. So here they are in text form.

Way of the Camel: Way
Exile a Gold from the Supply.

Way of the Frog: Way
+1 Action
When you discard this from play
this turn, put it onto your deck.

Way of the Goat: Way
Trash a card from your hand.

Way of the Monkey: Way
+1 Buy
+$1

Way of the Mule: Way
+1 Action
+$1

Way of the Otter: Way
+2 Cards

Way of the Worm: Way
Exile an Estate from the Supply.

Way of the Worm could lead to some interesting play.  While Estates remain, it's essentially equivalent to +1VP, but once Estates are out, it becomes useless.  I suspect it would tend to lead to the Estates pile running out fairly early

Inheritance could let you play an Estate to Exile more Estates!  And as long as you're able to gain an Estate before the pile runs out, you have a bunch of Estates now

Also, Shelters games would likely lead to a rush on Estates, especially if there are plenty of +Actions in the kingdom so that you don't need to use Necropolis' +2 Actions

[crj]

Way of the Camel opens the possibility for an even more stupid version of the Donate pin: Donate everything except a single action that doesn't generate spending money. Now you have inescapable debt, despite a growing pile of exiled Gold you can never reach. (-8

[D782802859]

Way of the Camel opens the possibility for an even more stupid version of the Donate pin: Donate everything except a single action that doesn't generate spending money. Now you have inescapable debt, despite a growing pile of exiled Gold you can never reach. (-8

This feels like it should be a metaphor but I can't for the life figure out what it is.

[mxdata]

Does this mean it is releasing tomorrow?

Jay expects the physical copies in his warehouse around Monday (that's in Chicago).

However the online version will go up tomorrow.

So, it won't be available in stores until sometime next week?

[Willvon]

Can someone help me understand this statement better?  The rulebook says in regard to Ways: “The choice to use a Way or not happens after "first" abilities on cards like Moat and Kiln.”

Moat says “When another player plays an Attack card, you may first reveal this from your hand”. Since this use of Moat is not playing the card, how would the “first” ability ever come before using Moat as a Way? The revealing and the playing of the card happen at completely different times, the “first” on someone else’s turn, the other on your turn. So why would it be necessary to make that distinction in the rules? Or is it referring to the idea that since an Attack card was put in play, even though you are playing it as a Way, other players can still “first” reveal their Moats if they want to do so? But if that is the case, why bother to reveal it?

I think I understand what it is referring to in regard to Kiln. You play Kiln, then you play the next card as a Way, but before resolving whatever the Way requires, you first gain a copy of that card since it is now in play. However, if you play Kiln as a Way, you don’t get to gain a copy of the card you play after it.

When you play an Attack card, other players use Reactions before you decide to use it as a Way. This matters; you can see if everybody Moats your Attack before you decide.

Thank you Jeebus and CRJ. The wording just threw me off a little bit. 

[Doom_Shark]

Way of the Camel opens the possibility for an even more stupid version of the Donate pin: Donate everything except a single action that doesn't generate spending money. Now you have inescapable debt, despite a growing pile of exiled Gold you can never reach. (-8

This feels like it should be a metaphor but I can't for the life figure out what it is.

American higher education?

[Jack Rudd]

I just played a game in which Village Green appeared with Storeroom, Library and Forum. That's... pretty ideal conditions for it.

[mxdata]

I just played a game in which Village Green appeared with Storeroom, Library and Forum. That's... pretty ideal conditions for it.

Especially with Library, since you don't discard them until *after* you've drawn to seven.  That could potentially trigger quite a few VGs, giving you a big hand and lots of actions

[hhelibebcnofnena]

Ways override Enchantress, right? I'm definitely going to be overriding all my Enchanted cards with Way of the Pig.

[Ingix]

Ways override Enchantress, right?

Correct.

[Donald X.]

A release date update: delayed. The expansion is in Chicago, but there is a shortage of drivers, and it isn't expected to make it over to RGG's warehouse until Thursday.

[grrgrrgrr]

I also wonder: why aren't the Menagerie topics put in a Child board (that has Renaissance as subchild), like older previews?

[GendoIkari]

A release date update: delayed. The expansion is in Chicago, but there is a shortage of drivers, and it isn't expected to make it over to RGG's warehouse until Thursday.

This virus has officially gone too far this time.

[GendoIkari]

I also wonder: why aren't the Menagerie topics put in a Child board (that has Renaissance as subchild), like older previews?

Theory is the only one who can add child boards, and he's quite busy and hasn't been around lately.

[J Reggie]

Ways override Enchantress, right? I'm definitely going to be overriding all my Enchanted cards with Way of the Pig.

You can't turn me into a pig if I turn myself into a pig first!

[mxdata]

A release date update: delayed. The expansion is in Chicago, but there is a shortage of drivers, and it isn't expected to make it over to RGG's warehouse until Thursday.

This virus has officially gone too far this time.

It's a moot point for me, because my local game store isn't currently open due to Covid-19