Print

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

[grep]

Setup: Way of the Mouse points to Amulet

When I play Elder and a card using Way of the Mouse, should I be able to trigger two options of Amulet?

u plays an Elder.
u gets +$2.
u plays a Merchant Camp using Way of the Mouse.
u plays an Amulet.
u trashes a Curse.

[scolapasta]

No, because Elder doesn't play Amulet; Elder plays the card being played as Way of the Mouse, which in turn plays Amulet.

[GendoIkari]

I'm still fuzzy on what the "it" in Elder's text refers to. Donald has confirmed that it's not as simple as "it" being "the action card" (because if it were, then all plays of that action card this turn would be modified by Elder. So it seems like "it" must be something more like "this instance of playing the action card".

If it were simply "the action card" instead, then the answer to this question would be simpler, the card you played with Elder didn't give you any "choose one" instructions. Since it's not as simple as that, assuming that the answer given above is correct, then the "it" in Elder must mean something that eliminates indirect effects of playing the card and only cares about the text on the card itself.

In other words, the answer above (which I think is correct) seems to require "it" to mean "the action card", because "the playing of the card" did give you a choice of abilities, even though "the card" itself did not*. So it's kind of like "it" on Elder has to mean "the action card, as a result of being played by Elder".

To remove any ambiguity around Ways and stuff like that, the same question always could have been asked with simply playing Elder, choosing Throne Room, choosing Pawn.




*A bit more on this... I don't think there's a clear-cut set of rules defining what object actually "does" a thing in Dominion. Imagine if instead of "when it gives you a choice[...]" Elder said "when it makes you draw cards". Then you play it on a Festival that has your +1 card token on it. [The Festival] didn't make you draw cards, but [playing the Festival] did. That seems clear to me, and if Elder, instead of "it" simply used "[playing the card]", then I would find that wording strongly suggesting that Festival with a +1 card token should trigger whatever its ability is.

[ephesos]

I think the "it" in Elder is like the "that" in Way of the Chameleon's "Follow this card's instructions. Each time that would give you +Cards this turn, you get +$ instead, and vice versa." So "it" refers to "following the instructions of the card you just played with Elder".

The rest of the rulings seem consistent with how Way of the Chameleon works. When you replay a card you played with Way of the Chameleon, it doesn't apply to the second play. And when you play another card with a card you played using Way of the Chameleon, it doesn't apply when you're following the other card's instructions (unless you choose to use Way of the Chameleon on it separately).

[Jeebus]

As I wrote in the other thread, "it" is the Action card, but Elder is referring to playing it per Elder's instruction "you may play an Action card from your hand". It's not referring to other times you happen to play the card during the turn.

It's the same as with Moat really, which also says "it". You reveal Moat when an Attack is played to negate any effects that Attack has on you. It's not referring to any other card than that Attack card (not a Cultist played by it for instance) and only the effects it has when it was played that one time that you revealed Moat to, not any other time that card is played later.

[GendoIkari]

As I wrote in the other thread, "it" is the Action card, but Elder is referring to playing it per Elder's instruction "you may play an Action card from your hand".

This sentence confuses me; since Elder uses the word "it" to refer to it, then "it" can't be one thing while Elder is referring to another thing. Whatever Elder is referring to (which we know to be playing the action card per Elder's instruction), is what the "it" has to mean. At least, if we want to read the card as consistent with how the English language works.

It's the same as with Moat really, which also says "it". You reveal Moat when an Attack is played to negate any effects that Attack has on you. It's not referring to any other card than that Attack card (not a Cultist played by it for instance) and only the effects it has when it was played that one time that you revealed Moat to, not any other time that card is played later.

True, I suppose it is the same thing here. I guess I always interpreted the "it" in Moat to mean "the playing of the attack card" as opposed to "the attack card". But indeed you do have to just know that it's a bit more specific than that, it's only the instructions directly printed on the attack card itself that would otherwise affect you that are ignored by you; it's not any effects against you that the attack card might have.

That bit reminds of the thread where someone was asking about whether or not you should get to see the cards that Scrying Pool revealed if you used a Moat on it, because seeing those cards would be affecting you.

[Jeebus]

As I wrote in the other thread, "it" is the Action card, but Elder is referring to playing it per Elder's instruction "you may play an Action card from your hand".

This sentence confuses me; since Elder uses the word "it" to refer to it, then "it" can't be one thing while Elder is referring to another thing. Whatever Elder is referring to (which we know to be playing the action card per Elder's instruction), is what the "it" has to mean. At least, if we want to read the card as consistent with how the English language works.

I'm not really understanding you.
But let me rephrase. "it" is the Action card, but you also have to infer the clause "while you are playing it as per the previous instruction". Or to put it another way, rephrasing the card text: "You may play an Action card from your hand. While doing so, when the Action card gives you a choice of abilities..."

[GendoIkari]

As I wrote in the other thread, "it" is the Action card, but Elder is referring to playing it per Elder's instruction "you may play an Action card from your hand".

This sentence confuses me; since Elder uses the word "it" to refer to it, then "it" can't be one thing while Elder is referring to another thing. Whatever Elder is referring to (which we know to be playing the action card per Elder's instruction), is what the "it" has to mean. At least, if we want to read the card as consistent with how the English language works.

I'm not really understanding you.
But let me rephrase. "it" is the Action card, but you also have to infer the clause "while you are playing it as per the previous instruction". Or to put it another way, rephrasing the card text: "You may play an Action card from your hand. While doing so, when the Action card gives you a choice of abilities..."

Ok yes, this is basically the same thing I was trying to say in my first reply. That you have to infer an extra clause that isn’t explicitly written; that neither of the 2 possible interpretations of “it” actually make the card’s wording match the function if all you did was replace “it” with the thing that “it” refers to.