Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Prince + Way of the Turtle  (Read 1625 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

X-tra

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 464
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +1113
    • View Profile
    • a
Prince + Way of the Turtle
« on: January 27, 2021, 05:39:58 pm »
+1

An interesting little puzzler was raised on the Dominion Discord and I now seek more answers about it. Without any fluff, the question is:

Does Prince fail to play its set aside Action card if that card is played as Way of the Turtle?


Question might seem to point toward an obvious “yes”. But, why would that be? Prince’s only failing clause for re-playing its set aside Action card is that ”you fail to set it aside on a turn you play it”. This is normally avoided by Prince’s auto set-aside on discard mechanic. But what if you use Way of the Turtle on that Action card? Technically, you played that card this turn; and you successfully set it aside on that very same turn. Why would Prince fail to re-play it on subsequent turns? Why would Prince care about what set the card aside, whether it was the Prince itself who did it or something else?

Dominion Online says that regardless of my above enquiry, Prince does indeed fail to re-play a Turtle’d card. My question is, why? What is it that causes this failure?

Before anyone asks, there are strategical implications to use Way of the Turtle on a Prince’d card. For instance, if you have set aside a mandatory trasher, like Salvager, but your hand is simply too good for you to want to trash something. You could Turtle the Salvager and keep replaying it via Prince on your next turns. Thank you Gubump for imagining such a scenario!

Anyway, thanks for the clarification!
« Last Edit: January 27, 2021, 05:41:56 pm by X-tra »
Logged
Bottom text

dz

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 209
  • Shuffle iT Username: DZ
  • Respect: +342
    • View Profile
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2021, 09:52:32 pm »
+1


Does Prince fail to play its set aside Action card if that card is played as Way of the Turtle?

Question might seem to point toward an obvious “yes”. But, why would that be? Prince’s only failing clause for re-playing its set aside Action card is that ”you fail to set it aside on a turn you play it”. This is normally avoided by Prince’s auto set-aside on discard mechanic. But what if you use Way of the Turtle on that Action card? Technically, you played that card this turn; and you successfully set it aside on that very same turn. Why would Prince fail to re-play it on subsequent turns? Why would Prince care about what set the card aside, whether it was the Prince itself who did it or something else?

Dominion Online says that regardless of my above enquiry, Prince does indeed fail to re-play a Turtle’d card. My question is, why? What is it that causes this failure?

Anyway, thanks for the clarification!

It's because the stop moving rule doesn't work like that.

"If a card isn't where the effect would expect it to be, or has moved away from there and then back, it can't move the card."

Let's say you Prince a Transmogrify. You play it, put it on your Tavern mat, then immediately call it (it's still the start of your turn). Even though that same Transmogrify will get discarded from play this turn, Prince can't set it aside anymore, because of the stop moving rule. When Transmogrify went onto the Tavern mat, Prince has lost the card.

So if you remove a Princed card from play with Turtle, Prince loses track for the same reason as my Transmogrify example.

Now you may wonder, why do we need a stop moving rule at all? Because without it, it causes chaos. For example:

-You gain an Inn with Replace.
-You shuffle the Inn into your deck.
-Replace (somehow) finds the Inn inside of your deck and topdecks it.

or

-You gain an Experiment with Summon.
-You set it aside with Cargo Ship.
-Summon takes the Experiment from Cargo Ship and sets it aside again.
-Next turn, you play the Experiment with Summon, returns it, and then Cargo Ship takes the Experiment out of the supply and puts it back in your hand.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2021, 09:57:29 pm by dz »
Logged

X-tra

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 464
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +1113
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2021, 09:14:37 am »
0

"If a card isn't where the effect would expect it to be, or has moved away from there and then back, it can't move the card."

But the stop moving rule does not prevent a card from being played now, doesn’t it? Like using Throne Room on a Feast. Throne Room can still play that Feast, even though it is expected to be played from your hand and has since moved to the trash. Prince is the same: it plays a card; it doesn’t move it. Stop moving should not prevent Prince from playing that card. The actual thing that prevents Prince from playing its set aside Action card is that it is indeed successfully set aside on a turn you played it. Prince moves a card to be set aside so that its custom failure case doesn’t happen automatically. That's why Prince even has that extra "woops it failed" clause. Because stop moving doesn't just cut it. But what if something else does that for Prince?


Let's say you Prince a Transmogrify. You play it, put it on your Tavern mat, then immediately call it (it's still the start of your turn). Even though that same Transmogrify will get discarded from play this turn, Prince can't set it aside anymore, because of the stop moving rule. When Transmogrify went onto the Tavern mat, Prince has lost the card.

Because of that, the Transmogrify analogy isn’t equivalent, here. Prince fails to set it aside because it has indeed moved from play since it was played. Because it isn’t set aside, Prince’s failing clause jumps in. But with Way of the Turtle, the failing clause does not fail, since the card was indeed successfully set aside that turn. Stop moving should thus not prevent the set aside card from being played by Prince, just like a Throne Room shouldn't fail from playing Feast a second time.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2021, 09:16:04 am by X-tra »
Logged
Bottom text

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2021, 09:51:53 am »
+5

The key is that "if you fail to set it aside" is short-hand for "if you fail to obey Prince's instructions to set it aside". It doesn't matter that it got set aside in any way; it matters that Prince did not set it aside.

This is the same as the question asked about Treasure Map here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=15668.msg817682#msg817682.

When Treasure Map says "if you trashed two Treasure Maps", what it really means is "if you completed the instructions given on this card to Trash both this and a Treasure Map from your hand". It does not mean "did you trash two Treasure Maps in any way since you started resolving this card".

Same thing here. Prince isn't checking if the card was set aside in any way. It's checking specifically if its own side-aside instruction was followed.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

X-tra

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 464
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +1113
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2021, 10:10:36 am »
0

The key is that "if you fail to set it aside" is short-hand for "if you fail to obey Prince's instructions to set it aside". It doesn't matter that it got set aside in any way; it matters that Prince did not set it aside.

This is the same as the question asked about Treasure Map here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=15668.msg817682#msg817682.

When Treasure Map says "if you trashed two Treasure Maps", what it really means is "if you completed the instructions given on this card to Trash both this and a Treasure Map from your hand". It does not mean "did you trash two Treasure Maps in any way since you started resolving this card".

Same thing here. Prince isn't checking if the card was set aside in any way. It's checking specifically if its own side-aside instruction was followed.

Wouldn't that be worded such as: "Stop playing it if Prince fails to set it aside on a turn you play it." instead of "Stop playing it if you fail to set it aside on a turn you play it." if that were the case? The fact that it refers to "you" implies to me that you're the one who has to make it happen somehow; and Prince merely helps you to get there.

It is the same for Treasure Map I suppose, but this is a little confusing to me still. Because, if you read it in the most literal way, it seems to me that Prince simply cares about you setting aside the Action card, no matter how. There's some implicit reading there that isn't printed on the card if that truly works how you said it should.
Logged
Bottom text

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2021, 10:50:39 am »
+3

The key is that "if you fail to set it aside" is short-hand for "if you fail to obey Prince's instructions to set it aside". It doesn't matter that it got set aside in any way; it matters that Prince did not set it aside.

This is the same as the question asked about Treasure Map here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=15668.msg817682#msg817682.

When Treasure Map says "if you trashed two Treasure Maps", what it really means is "if you completed the instructions given on this card to Trash both this and a Treasure Map from your hand". It does not mean "did you trash two Treasure Maps in any way since you started resolving this card".

Same thing here. Prince isn't checking if the card was set aside in any way. It's checking specifically if its own side-aside instruction was followed.

Wouldn't that be worded such as: "Stop playing it if Prince fails to set it aside on a turn you play it." instead of "Stop playing it if you fail to set it aside on a turn you play it." if that were the case? The fact that it refers to "you" implies to me that you're the one who has to make it happen somehow; and Prince merely helps you to get there.

It is the same for Treasure Map I suppose, but this is a little confusing to me still. Because, if you read it in the most literal way, it seems to me that Prince simply cares about you setting aside the Action card, no matter how. There's some implicit reading there that isn't printed on the card if that truly works how you said it should.

I agree that the wording isn't completely literal. But it does match the general "if you do" concept that's used a lot of places in Dominion. It's reversed here, because it's asking "if you fail" instead of "if you do", but it's the same idea. It always means "if you were able to do follow the instructions that this card was asking you to follow".

Ritual says "Gain a Curse. If you do..." Say you buy Ritual, and reveal (old) Trader to prevent the gaining, gaining a Silver instead. You then reveal Watchtower to trash the incoming Silver. You have Sewers, so you also trash a Catacombs from your hand. You gain a Curse using Catacomb's "when you trash" ability. Ritual doesn't work, even though you gained a Curse, because you did not actually gain a Curse from Ritual's "gain a Curse" instructions.

Consistently, "if you did", and by association "if you fail", refer specifically to whether or not you were able to follow the instructions on the card.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

X-tra

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 464
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +1113
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2021, 11:13:32 am »
0

I guess, yeah, it's easier to see the association between causation and consequence if that link is positive. "If you do" makes it instinctively more clear to see that the card's effect itself must have caused the thing to happen for it to work. It seems pretty straightforward. I don't know why my brain has so much trouble seeing how Prince only cares about its own set aside mechanic though. Again, it must be because it's using a different type of "if you followed my and only my instructions" with the whole "failing" shenanigan. I don't think any other Dominion card use that sort of negative connection.

It would've been cool if Way of the Turtle worked, to be fair. :D
Logged
Bottom text

scolapasta

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 578
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2021, 11:57:31 am »
+3

The way I consider this is that when a card says "set aside", it means to a different area for each card that sets aside. Imagine if each card came with its own mat, then Prince would say "Put* an Action card costing up to $4 on the Prince mat".  Other cards that set aside would "put" cards on their own mats, and therefore Prince's put / set aside would fail.

* cards that officially have mats, i.e. specific "set aside" areas, use "put" instead of "set aside" - see Island, Native Village, Reserve cards

Practically, having a mat for each card doesn't make sense (both from a physical component way and a "more words on the card" way) so we're left with the simplified wording.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2021, 06:26:57 pm by scolapasta »
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2515
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1635
    • View Profile
Re: Prince + Way of the Turtle
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2021, 11:46:48 am »
0

Wouldn't that be worded such as: "Stop playing it if Prince fails to set it aside on a turn you play it." instead of "Stop playing it if you fail to set it aside on a turn you play it." if that were the case? The fact that it refers to "you" implies to me that you're the one who has to make it happen somehow; and Prince merely helps you to get there.

This question is actually so old that it's in my old FAQ with a link to Donald's answer.
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.046 seconds with 20 queries.