Print

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

[Jeebus]

This is not really a rules question, since we know how it works. I'm just struggling to figure out how Lich's skipping turns works technically.

Lich just says "skip a turn", which is not technically accurate since you can't immediately do that when playing the card. Cards that give extra turns say "after this turn", which is accurate.

The Wiki says "when you would begin a turn, skip that turn".
The rulebook says "the next time you would take a turn, you don't".
(The rulebook is more accurate, since it's only supposed to work once, not whenever you would begin a turn for the rest of the game.)

But that description doesn't actually work, since several Lich plays is supposed to skip several consecutive turns. If we use the description above: With two "skip a turn" effects, they would both trigger at the same time, and you choose the order. The second one would fail to do anything, since you're already skipping that turn. So you would never skip more than one turn after x Liches played.

So how can we describe the timing so that consecutive turns are skipped? This must be the first ability in Dominion that sets up something to change in the future and stacks.

Describing "skip a turn" as immediately cancelling the next scheduled turn certainly doesn't work, since (1) you can get extra turns after that, and (2) you can choose which turn to resolve first and that's the turn that will be skipped.

The closest I've gotten is a recursive description:
The next time you would take a turn: If the turn is not already skipped, skip it. Otherwise, the next time you would take a turn, do as described in the previous sentence.

[GendoIkari]

I like the MTG rules for this situation. In short-hand:

 - "Skip a turn" effects are replacement effects (because "skip a turn" effectively means "instead of taking a turn, don't take a turn").

- When multiple replacement could be applied at the same time, you choose one to apply (same rule as Dominion, really).

- You repeat this process of picking another one if there are any left to pick.

- "If an event is replaced, it never happens". (Direct rules quote).

And

Anything scheduled for a skipped step, phase, or turn won’t happen. Anything scheduled for the “next” occurrence of something waits for the first occurrence that isn’t skipped. If two effects each cause a player to skip their next occurrence, that player must skip the next two; one effect will be satisfied in skipping the first occurrence, while the other will remain until another occurrence can be skipped.

What this means is that when you have 2 "skip your next turn" effects out there, and you are about to start a turn...

1. There are 2 replacement effects that could apply, so you choose one of them. You replace "start your turn" with "do nothing". (You choose Lich #1).

2. You check for other replacement effects to apply. There are none, because there is no turn about to start anymore, that event has already been replaced.

3. Lich #2 is still sitting around waiting for a turn to begin so it can skip that turn; because Lich #1 was applied to the last would-be turn, Lich #2 never had a turn to skip.

I think this matches up well with how other "replacement effects" in Dominion work. There are very few of those... but 1st edition Trader is probably the simplest example:

You are about to gain a Curse. You have 2 Traders in hand, so 2 different potential replacement effects that could replace this event (granted they are only potential replacement effects, because you would have to choose to reveal them, which is slightly different than replacement effects which are already there, like Lich). You reveal Trader #1. Now that Curse gain has been replaced; it never happened. You cannot reveal Trader #2 (or Trader #1 again) to replace that Curse gain; there is no Curse gain. (Of course you can reveal Trader 1 or 2 to replace that new Silver gain, but that's completely separate).

[Jeebus]

I like the MTG rules for this situation. In short-hand:

 - "Skip a turn" effects are replacement effects (because "skip a turn" effectively means "instead of taking a turn, don't take a turn").

- When multiple replacement could be applied at the same time, you choose one to apply (same rule as Dominion, really).

- You repeat this process of picking another one if there are any left to pick.

- "If an event is replaced, it never happens". (Direct rules quote).

Yes, this all matches how Dominion works.

Anything scheduled for a skipped step, phase, or turn won’t happen. Anything scheduled for the “next” occurrence of something waits for the first occurrence that isn’t skipped. If two effects each cause a player to skip their next occurrence, that player must skip the next two; one effect will be satisfied in skipping the first occurrence, while the other will remain until another occurrence can be skipped.

What this means is that when you have 2 "skip your next turn" effects out there, and you are about to start a turn...

1. There are 2 replacement effects that could apply, so you choose one of them. You replace "start your turn" with "do nothing". (You choose Lich #1).

2. You check for other replacement effects to apply. There are none, because there is no turn about to start anymore, that event has already been replaced.

3. Lich #2 is still sitting around waiting for a turn to begin so it can skip that turn; because Lich #1 was applied to the last would-be turn, Lich #2 never had a turn to skip.

I think this matches up well with how other "replacement effects" in Dominion work. There are very few of those... but 1st edition Trader is probably the simplest example:

You are about to gain a Curse. You have 2 Traders in hand, so 2 different potential replacement effects that could replace this event (granted they are only potential replacement effects, because you would have to choose to reveal them, which is slightly different than replacement effects which are already there, like Lich). You reveal Trader #1. Now that Curse gain has been replaced; it never happened. You cannot reveal Trader #2 (or Trader #1 again) to replace that Curse gain; there is no Curse gain. (Of course you can reveal Trader 1 or 2 to replace that new Silver gain, but that's completely separate).

The rule that you quoted would be an extra rule in Dominion. It would certainly make Lich work as it's supposed to with the simple phrasing that is given in the rulebook.

But does it match how replacement effects work in Dominion in general?

Two (1E) Traders work in essence how you said. (Both Traders trigger. You choose to reveal Trader #1, and the gain is cancelled. You can still reveal Trader #2, but there is not Curse gain so nothing happens.) The same happens with Trader (1E) and Possession.
But Trader and Possession are not "next" occurrences. Actually I don't think there are any "next" replacement effects except for Lich. Enchantress and Highwayman are "first". The play ability of the first card played is replaced, not the next.

If there were ever a card, let's say Stooge: "the next time you play a Silver this turn, it does nothing" and you played two of them, I would expect that it only affected the next Silver and did nothing to the one after that. But if the rule you quoted were a general rule of Dominion, then multiple Stooges would affect subsequent Silvers.

Of course, we don't really know how it would work. Only Donald can answer if that Magic rule also exists in Dominion and explains why Lich works like it does.

[GendoIkari]

I like the MTG rules for this situation. In short-hand:

 - "Skip a turn" effects are replacement effects (because "skip a turn" effectively means "instead of taking a turn, don't take a turn").

- When multiple replacement could be applied at the same time, you choose one to apply (same rule as Dominion, really).

- You repeat this process of picking another one if there are any left to pick.

- "If an event is replaced, it never happens". (Direct rules quote).

Yes, this all matches how Dominion works.

Anything scheduled for a skipped step, phase, or turn won’t happen. Anything scheduled for the “next” occurrence of something waits for the first occurrence that isn’t skipped. If two effects each cause a player to skip their next occurrence, that player must skip the next two; one effect will be satisfied in skipping the first occurrence, while the other will remain until another occurrence can be skipped.

What this means is that when you have 2 "skip your next turn" effects out there, and you are about to start a turn...

1. There are 2 replacement effects that could apply, so you choose one of them. You replace "start your turn" with "do nothing". (You choose Lich #1).

2. You check for other replacement effects to apply. There are none, because there is no turn about to start anymore, that event has already been replaced.

3. Lich #2 is still sitting around waiting for a turn to begin so it can skip that turn; because Lich #1 was applied to the last would-be turn, Lich #2 never had a turn to skip.

I think this matches up well with how other "replacement effects" in Dominion work. There are very few of those... but 1st edition Trader is probably the simplest example:

You are about to gain a Curse. You have 2 Traders in hand, so 2 different potential replacement effects that could replace this event (granted they are only potential replacement effects, because you would have to choose to reveal them, which is slightly different than replacement effects which are already there, like Lich). You reveal Trader #1. Now that Curse gain has been replaced; it never happened. You cannot reveal Trader #2 (or Trader #1 again) to replace that Curse gain; there is no Curse gain. (Of course you can reveal Trader 1 or 2 to replace that new Silver gain, but that's completely separate).

The rule that you quoted would be an extra rule in Dominion. It would certainly make Lich work as it's supposed to with the simple phrasing that is given in the rulebook.

I think this quoted rule follows naturally from the idea that replaced effects never happen. I believe MTG would work the same if that rule were not explicitly stated. As far as turn-skipper #2 is concerned, it never knew anything about a turn that was about to begin, it's still just waiting to do what it does.

But does it match how replacement effects work in Dominion in general?

Two (1E) Traders work in essence how you said. (Both Traders trigger. You choose to reveal Trader #1, and the gain is cancelled. You can still reveal Trader #2, but there is not Curse gain so nothing happens.)

Hmm I think you're right but this is not what I was thinking, and not how Magic works. I was thinking that you couldn't reveal the second trader because there's no longer a Curse gain to react to. But that's wrong; you're still within the window of the "would-gain-Curse" even though it's no longer true that you would gain a Curse. In Magic, once you choose a replacement effect to apply, other replacement effects can only see the new replaced event, they can't know anything about the event that would have happened if it hadn't been replaced.

*Edit* This part: - You repeat this process of picking another one if there are any left to pick... you said this was also how things work in Dominion, but not according to the way you say you can reveal a second Trader after the first is done. I guess I wasn't clear, but by "if there are any left to pick", I really meant "if there are any that still apply". You can't pick one that would have applied originally but no longer applies. The actual rule from Magic:

Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

If there were ever a card, let's say Stooge: "the next time you play a Silver this turn, it does nothing" and you played two of them, I would expect that it only affected the next Silver and did nothing to the one after that. But if the rule you quoted were a general rule of Dominion, then multiple Stooges would affect subsequent Silvers.

No, the rule I quoted would only change Stooge from how you expect if Stooge prevented the Silver playing at all, not if it let you play the Silver but then did nothing. Or alternatively, if Stooge reacted to "then next time you would follow a Silver's instructions" rather than "the next time you play a Silver". With the way you worded Stooge, both versions of Stooge would see that Silver being played, because the first Stooge you apply doesn't change the fact that the Silver was played. It was still played, so Stooge #2 can still apply to the Silver being played.

[ephesos]

One way to resolve the timing issue is to think of the turn order as something that exists before those turns are taken, like a deck of cards of alternating colors. So "skip a turn" just means "remove your next turn from the turn order", and you can do that at the moment you play a Lich. And if you play another Lich, you just remove another turn (and since the turn you previously removed is gone, you can't remove that turn a second time).

[dane-m]

One way to resolve the timing issue is to think of the turn order as something that exists before those turns are taken, like a deck of cards of alternating colors. So "skip a turn" just means "remove your next turn from the turn order", and you can do that at the moment you play a Lich. And if you play another Lich, you just remove another turn (and since the turn you previously removed is gone, you can't remove that turn a second time).

Jeebus has already explained why that doesn't work:

Describing "skip a turn" as immediately cancelling the next scheduled turn certainly doesn't work, since (1) you can get extra turns after that

Though I suppose one might get away with defining "skip a turn" to mean "at the end of your turn cancel your next scheduled turn".

[Jeebus]

I think this quoted rule follows naturally from the idea that replaced effects never happen. I believe MTG would work the same if that rule were not explicitly stated. As far as turn-skipper #2 is concerned, it never knew anything about a turn that was about to begin, it's still just waiting to do what it does.

But does it match how replacement effects work in Dominion in general?

Two (1E) Traders work in essence how you said. (Both Traders trigger. You choose to reveal Trader #1, and the gain is cancelled. You can still reveal Trader #2, but there is not Curse gain so nothing happens.)

Hmm I think you're right but this is not what I was thinking, and not how Magic works. I was thinking that you couldn't reveal the second trader because there's no longer a Curse gain to react to. But that's wrong; you're still within the window of the "would-gain-Curse" even though it's no longer true that you would gain a Curse. In Magic, once you choose a replacement effect to apply, other replacement effects can only see the new replaced event, they can't know anything about the event that would have happened if it hadn't been replaced.

*Edit* This part: - You repeat this process of picking another one if there are any left to pick... you said this was also how things work in Dominion, but not according to the way you say you can reveal a second Trader after the first is done. I guess I wasn't clear, but by "if there are any left to pick", I really meant "if there are any that still apply". You can't pick one that would have applied originally but no longer applies. The actual rule from Magic:

Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

Right, "if there are any left to pick" is how Dominion works; after all, you can't continue picking when there are none left. But I see now that you meant that effects could have been removed in the meantime. As you note, that is not how Dominion works. Effects that are put on the "to be resolved" list are never removed once they trigger. That is exactly why the Magic rule does not follow naturally from how Dominion works.

No, the rule I quoted would only change Stooge from how you expect if Stooge prevented the Silver playing at all, not if it let you play the Silver but then did nothing. Or alternatively, if Stooge reacted to "then next time you would follow a Silver's instructions" rather than "the next time you play a Silver". With the way you worded Stooge, both versions of Stooge would see that Silver being played, because the first Stooge you apply doesn't change the fact that the Silver was played. It was still played, so Stooge #2 can still apply to the Silver being played.

With Stooge, I meant it to work like Highwayman (and Enchantress and Ways). That means technically, as you note, "the next time you would follow the instructions of a played Silver". So to repeat: If played two Stooges, I would expect that it only affected the next Silver and did nothing to the one after that. But if the rule you quoted were a general rule of Dominion, then multiple Stooges would affect subsequent Silvers.

[Jeebus]

One way to resolve the timing issue is to think of the turn order as something that exists before those turns are taken, like a deck of cards of alternating colors. So "skip a turn" just means "remove your next turn from the turn order", and you can do that at the moment you play a Lich. And if you play another Lich, you just remove another turn (and since the turn you previously removed is gone, you can't remove that turn a second time).

Jeebus has already explained why that doesn't work:

Describing "skip a turn" as immediately cancelling the next scheduled turn certainly doesn't work, since (1) you can get extra turns after that

Though I suppose one might get away with defining "skip a turn" to mean "at the end of your turn cancel your next scheduled turn".

I don't think that would work either, for my number (2) reason, that you can choose which turn to resolve first and that's the turn that will be skipped. So at the end of your turn, there is no "next" scheduled turn.

Even if we could somehow make it work that you, at end of turn, would choose which turn to skip, that would actually not always be how Lich correctly is supposed to work. Let's say you play Lich and have no extra turns. At end of turn, you therefore must choose to skip your next normal turn. Then your opponent plays Possession, giving you an extra turn. The Possession turn happens before your normal turn, so should be the one that is skipped.

So because of Possession, at end of turn we can't know anything about what will be your next turn.

[dane-m]

So because of Possession, at end of turn we can't know anything about what will be your next turn.

Good point.

[majiponi]

When you play Lich, you take a "-1 Turn token".  Between turns, if you would take a turn, if you have any "-1 Turn tokens", you return one to cancel that turn.

Is it what Lich does?

[GendoIkari]

When you play Lich, you take a "-1 Turn token".  Between turns, if you would take a turn, if you have any "-1 Turn tokens", you return one to cancel that turn.

Is it what Lich does?

That's the ultimate effect that it has, but it doesn't clear up the main question being asked here, which is, if I understand correctly, "why can't you return more than one -1 turn token when you would take a turn? After all, you can reveal more than one Secret Chamber when an attack is played, or reveal more than 1 Trader (v1) when you would gain a card."

I am still uncertain about the Trader thing... do we know that timing windows for "would do X" continue to be in effect even after X stops existing as a thing you would do? I can't think of a situation where it could matter, other than the fact that we basically know that Lich does not work that way; Lich doesn't allow you to response to an already-canceled turn by returning a -1 turn token to try and cancel that turn again.

[Donald X.]

When you play Lich, you take a "-1 Turn token".  Between turns, if you would take a turn, if you have any "-1 Turn tokens", you return one to cancel that turn.

Is it what Lich does?

That is what it does.

Lich says, in its way, that you can't burn multiple skip-a-turn tokens at once. So you can't! That's all that's ever needed, there doesn't need to be something deeper. Is there something deeper? Further work there is sadly a low priority. *goes back to work*

[Jeebus]

When you play Lich, you take a "-1 Turn token".  Between turns, if you would take a turn, if you have any "-1 Turn tokens", you return one to cancel that turn.

Is it what Lich does?

Not quite, since you also skip your next normal turn, which is not "between turns".

Correcting that, your suggestion is basically: "when you would take a turn, if you have any -1 Turn tokens, you return one to cancel that turn."
As GendoIkari pointed out, this doesn't solve the problem, since the normal timing rules in Dominion would allow you to return several tokens when you would take a turn. Donald confirmed that Lich of course does not allow you to return several tokens. This is clear from the rulebook, but not from anything else.

That's the ultimate effect that it has, but it doesn't clear up the main question being asked here, which is, if I understand correctly, "why can't you return more than one -1 turn token when you would take a turn? After all, you can reveal more than one Secret Chamber when an attack is played, or reveal more than 1 Trader (v1) when you would gain a card."

I am still uncertain about the Trader thing... do we know that timing windows for "would do X" continue to be in effect even after X stops existing as a thing you would do? I can't think of a situation where it could matter, other than the fact that we basically know that Lich does not work that way; Lich doesn't allow you to response to an already-canceled turn by returning a -1 turn token to try and cancel that turn again.

All triggered abilities are resolved. (If another ability is triggered in the meantime, it will also be added to the list, but nothing is removed from the list.)

Here's one example: If you buy a cost-reduced Mint with Talisman in play, and trash the Talisman, the Talisman will still trigger.

Alse see here about Trader (1E) + Possession.

[GendoIkari]

All triggered abilities are resolved. (If another ability is triggered in the meantime, it will also be added to the list, but nothing is removed from the list.)

Here's one example: If you buy a cost-reduced Mint with Talisman in play, and trash the Talisman, the Talisman will still trigger.

Alse see here about Trader (1E) + Possession.

For sure my suggestion requires "would-instead" abilities from being considered a separate thing from "triggered abilities", which is how MTG works. "Would-instead" abilities aren't triggered abilities in MTG; they have a completely separate set of rules governing them.

The Mint/Talisman example doesn't relate here, because I'm not talking about the card with the ability going away, I'm talking about the "triggering event" going away. With the Mint/Talisman example, even after resolving Mint, it's still true that you bought a Mint, so Talisman (and anything else that triggers on-buy) still has an event to respond to. Buying Mint still happened.

The Possession/Trader example is the only thing I've seen that is the same sort of thing that I'm talking about. And I don't think Donald's linked response clarifies it one way or another. All he says is that Possession fails because it no longer has anything to do. My suggestion is that Possession never really tries. Perhaps that's contradictory with "Possession fails", but it's hardly conclusive. And the actual game outcome and sequence of events is indistinguishable between the two in that case.

The only rules question I can think of that would have a different noticeable outcome based on the answer is "after you have revealed Trader v1 to gain a Silver instead of gaining a Curse, can you choose to reveal that Trader again as part of the 'would gain a Curse', even though revealing Trader would fail to do anything in this case?" Based on the clear answer about how Lich works, (and acknowledging that "skip a turn" IS a "would-instead" ability, like it is in MTG), I would think the answer is "no", you can't reveal Trader again (because you can't return a second "skip a turn" token).

[Jeebus]

The Mint/Talisman example doesn't relate here, because I'm not talking about the card with the ability going away, I'm talking about the "triggering event" going away. With the Mint/Talisman example, even after resolving Mint, it's still true that you bought a Mint, so Talisman (and anything else that triggers on-buy) still has an event to respond to. Buying Mint still happened.

It's not the buying of Mint that is the issue, it's the clause "while you have this in play". That clause is no longer true by the time you resolve Talisman; it's actually a condition for Talisman to trigger at all. But since it already triggered, it gets resolved.

The Possession/Trader example is the only thing I've seen that is the same sort of thing that I'm talking about. And I don't think Donald's linked response clarifies it one way or another. All he says is that Possession fails because it no longer has anything to do. My suggestion is that Possession never really tries. Perhaps that's contradictory with "Possession fails", but it's hardly conclusive. And the actual game outcome and sequence of events is indistinguishable between the two in that case.

Donald specifically writes in that response that Possession tries to change "Bob gains Copper" into "Alice gains Copper".

[Jeebus]

I think I actually found an example of the opposite of what I've been saying in this thread.

Back when Possession allowed you to take the -$1 token from other players, it was possible to have several -$1 tokens. The question arose: what would happen if you had two tokens and then got +$1. The token says "when you get +$", so both tokens should then trigger, and you end up getting -$1 instead of getting +$1. After resolving the first token, you are getting +$0, but the other token already triggered, so it's also resolved. This corresponds to what I've been saying. ...But it doesn't involve a "when would" ability.

Donald actually ruled that you only remove one token in the above scenario, because the -$1 token should actually say "when you would get $". Based on this ruling, it appears that a "when would" ability fails to resolve if the thing that it's supposed to change isn't happening anymore.

This seems to contradict the notion that you still reveal a triggered Trader even if it fails to do anything because of Possession.

But I think it matches how Lich works.

[Jeebus]

When you play Lich, you take a "-1 Turn token".  Between turns, if you would take a turn, if you have any "-1 Turn tokens", you return one to cancel that turn.

Is it what Lich does?

Not quite, since you also skip your next normal turn, which is not "between turns".

Correcting that, your suggestion is basically: "when you would take a turn, if you have any -1 Turn tokens, you return one to cancel that turn."
As GendoIkari pointed out, this doesn't solve the problem, since the normal timing rules in Dominion would allow you to return several tokens when you would take a turn. Donald confirmed that Lich of course does not allow you to return several tokens. This is clear from the rulebook, but not from anything else.

I have to correct myself here. This actually does solve the problem, if we make it into a global rule not tied to playing Lich. With the "next time you would take a turn" phrasing, all "skip a turn" effects will trigger then and never again, but with a global "when you would skip a turn", it's always checked whenever you would take a turn during the game. This only works with tokens of course. Like a landscape card, the ability only triggers once, so there is no way to return several tokens.

(But taking the scenario with several -$1 tokens into account, it seems like Dominion might indeed have a rule for "would-instead" abilities separate from triggered abilities like GendoIkari suggested. Unlike the token variant of Lich proposed above with one global ability, the -$1 tokens each have their own separate ability that triggers when you would get $, so all of them do trigger at once if we follow the normal rule for triggered abilities. It seems that only a special rule for "would-instead" replacement abilities will make them work correctly. And in that case, Lich works as intended with just a "next time" ability being set up on play and no tokens.)