Print

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

[Jfrisch]

Throne Room, like Treasure map and Fool's gold, is a card which works exceptionally well when it combo's and quite mediocrely when it doesn't. Unlike treasure map and fool's gold, however, what throne-room can combine with varies from board to board and is, in general quite a broad range of cards. Also unlike Treasure map and fool's gold, throne room is invariably a bad opening card.

Throne-room is essentially a very weird village with a bonus (or, if you prefer, an of inverse shanty-town with a bonus), if it doesn't hit you are frustrated, if it does hit (it was worth the price.
   
Note that throne-room applied to even a worthless pearl diver, effectively acts like a village with a moderate bonus (probably one of the stronger 4 cost ones if it was a card) (look at the bottom card of your deck, draw either it or the top 1 + 2 actions). When throne-room hits pawn, you can get a peddler benefit (by choosing +1 action +2 cards, + 1 coin), or use a whole bunch of added flexibility. When throne-room hits a stackable attack (cursers/rabble/noble-brigand/torturer/etc) the end result is stupidly powerful, when throneroom hits a terminal drawer, you can draw an absurd amount of cards. When throneroom hits a good cantrip, you get a village with some very nice extras (for lab you get a level 2 city, for tournament/treasury you get a bazaar). With scheme on the board you can even get a permanent village with endgame explosion potential by constantly top decking throneroom/scheme.

Suffice it to say that if your throneroom hits it is worth it, this implies that if you are going for an engine already, throne room is a good buy once you have a few components ( 3/4 non-throne-room actions is sufficient. ). Now throne-room, like all villages, acts as an engine enabler, if you were already marginal about going for an engine, throne-room makes it worth going for one, village/draw engines gain extra viability when thronerooom is on the board (though they still want either a strong attack or +buy). If there is a stackable attack you can make an engine out of, it is almost certainly worth buying throne-rooms and add them to your engine. A throne roomed witch/mountebank is one of the harshest things in dominion and even the ordinarily maligned noble brigand/saboteur can prove deadly when stacked.

Certain specific cards should immediately make you consider throne room, bridge, which becomes much more potent when stacked, is naturally enhanced by throne room. Scheme can be throne roomed in order to create a permanent extra village per hand or a guaranteed throne room in the endgame. though all attacks benefit from throne room, rabble and torturer, which both offer big draws and are better when stacked are exceptionally fond of it.

Throne-room can be so powerful that certain card are specifically immune from throne-rooms benefits. Haggler, princess, highway, and goons, while all still giving some benefit when throne roomed, all have in play clauses that negate there most potent effects (extra cards, lower prices, extra vp per buy) from being doubled. These cards anti-synergize with throne-room and in general, are not it's best targets (though throne-room can still thrive when used on there support cards)

So when should you not go for throne room? Well, when engine potential is not there. If there are no can-trips present, throne room is nearly always a mistake (very heavy trashing can make it viable). If there is no +buy /strong attack, you should stick to big money X. Throne-room acts as a powerful engine enabler, if there's no reasonable engine to be enabled   the high frequency with which you will draw throne-room dead make it not worth your while.

Works with
Stackable attacks
Scheme
Bridge
Minion
Monument
Hunting Party
Talisman (gain extra cheap actions
Engines in general

Conflicts with
Goons

Tournament (a parried tournament is no good when throne-roomed, you are unlikely to have two provinces in hand at a time, and princess/followers are worse when throned)
Haggler
Highway
Fool's gold
Hoard
Militia
Treasure map
Ghost Ship (though being ghost-shipped allows you to move an unusable Throne Room)
Big money games in general

[DG]

If there are no can-trips present, throne room is a mistake

This isn't entirely true. This game shows DStern looting the black market using an engine powered almost entirely with thrones. http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20110319-184003-ba5cae6d.html. This is an extreme case but a more common example might be to open militia/chapel and then buy a throne for use with the militia to reach 5 income, with a plan to use the throne with later purchases too.

[Jfrisch]

Fair, heavy trashing can also suffice, BM filled with cantrips though, does imply there are cantrips.

[cherdano]

I would say "Works with" is missing Conspirator, Wharf, King's Court (since you will be loading up on actions and cantrips anyway) and Tactician (easier to hit TR with your best action).

[Davio]

Conflicts with Outpost, even worse than it does with Tactician.
With Tactician, at least you get the TR back into your discard pile immediately.
With Outpost, the TR stays tied to the Outpost and only gets discarded along with Outpost when you Clean up and try to take your 3rd turn.

Well, the fun part with Outpost at least is that you'll have 3 cards on your next regular turn, so you'll be safe from Minions. :p
Strike that, apparently you get 5 cards.

[jomini]

Tac/outpost is perfectly fine as long as you have a way to be sure to get a tac into your outpost hand. There are lot of cards that let you do that directly (haven, mandarin, royal seal, watchtower, etc.) and who slew of cards that let draw & discard to force the tac into the top 3 cards (warehouse, cellar, embassy, etc.).

Outpost/TR isn't great, but if your OP turns are going to be any good, then they likely be fairly action heavy and TR can be a good edition there.

[Jfrisch]

So throne room, SHOULD conflict with outpost, but in any situation where outpost is a worthwhile card (i.e. where you can likely get full hands from it, and actions are cheap) throneroom probably doesn't. That is, you don't go outpost unless you have a really strong engine roaring, in which case, throne room is nice.

[dondon151]

I'd posit that Throne Room does conflict with Outpost because there's a greater chance of drawing Throne Rooms dead in a smaller hand.

[WanderingWinder]

Throning a lab is better than a level two city, by a card.
I can't say that I really see any concrete flaws in your analysis, but I just don't agree with when it's useful. But I'd have to write a counter-article to explain, and I don't have a great way to phrase it right now. Maybe soon, I'll do so.

[Jfrisch]

suppose we have a hand with 4 cards, and a lab. After playing the lab we have 6 cards and 1 action.
suppose we have a hand with 3 cards, a throne room, and a lab. After playing the throned lab, we have 7 cards 2 actions. that is, 1 more card, and 1 more action than the lab alone. So the throne room, does act, in essence, like a level 2 city, the rest of the effect stems from the lab itself. To phrase it another way, I give throne room credit for one of the plays and the additional action necessary to make it, but I don't give it credit for the other play.

[Jfrisch]

Also, do you really agree with the analysis of when to use it as a whole, or just some specific sub-point. It feels uncontentious to me that the best use of throne room is with engines and that the presence of throne room should encourage you to go for an engine when, originally, it would have been a viable, but possibly sub-optimal decision.

[eHalcyon]

suppose we have a hand with 4 cards, and a lab. After playing the lab we have 6 cards and 1 action.
suppose we have a hand with 3 cards, a throne room, and a lab. After playing the throned lab, we have 7 cards 2 actions. that is, 1 more card, and 1 more action than the lab alone. So the throne room, does act, in essence, like a level 2 city, the rest of the effect stems from the lab itself. To phrase it another way, I give throne room credit for one of the plays and the additional action necessary to make it, but I don't give it credit for the other play.

Or to put it simply...

TR + Lab == City2 + Lab

[Galzria]

I think the point was, a level 2 city leaves you with 6 cards, 2 actions, compared to a throne room + lab, which leaves you with 7 cards, and 2 actions. Unless you're just ignoring card draw and pointing out that a throne roomed cantrip is effectively a village - ie. Leaves you with 1 more action than you started with?

[eHalcyon]

I think the point was, a level 2 city leaves you with 6 cards, 2 actions, compared to a throne room + lab, which leaves you with 7 cards, and 2 actions. Unless you're just ignoring card draw and pointing out that a throne roomed cantrip is effectively a village - ie. Leaves you with 1 more action than you started with?

Throning a Lab draws you 4 cards and leaves you with 2 actions.
Playing a level 2 City and a Lab draws you 4 cards (2 each) and leaves you with 2 actions.

So Throning a Lab effectively makes the TR a level 2 City.

[O]

I think the point was, a level 2 city leaves you with 6 cards, 2 actions, compared to a throne room + lab, which leaves you with 7 cards, and 2 actions. Unless you're just ignoring card draw and pointing out that a throne roomed cantrip is effectively a village - ie. Leaves you with 1 more action than you started with?

Throning a Lab draws you 4 cards and leaves you with 2 actions.
Playing a level 2 City and a Lab draws you 4 cards (2 each) and leaves you with 2 actions.

So Throning a Lab effectively makes the TR a level 2 City.

More generally, throne rooming X effectively makes TR a X + 1 action.

[Galzria]

That is only true for actions that provide ONE additional action however, which is why I don't like the comparison that says it is a level 2 city. Because every case is unique, it must be evaluated on a case to case basis.

[jonts26]

No it's basically true for terminals as well. Throning a Militia is like playing a Militia which gives +1 action then another Militia. It really only breaks down when the card has a 'while in play' requirement.

[WanderingWinder]

Also, do you really agree with the analysis of when to use it as a whole, or just some specific sub-point. It feels uncontentious to me that the best use of throne room is with engines and that the presence of throne room should encourage you to go for an engine when, originally, it would have been a viable, but possibly sub-optimal decision.

I more or less agree with what you say here. However, that's not really what I get from the article. And I'd probably not say what you're saying here the way you're saying it, even if I don't think it's wrong per se.

[twadd7777]

This may have already been stated but I do not believe Throne Room works with Library.

[jomini]

I'd posit that Throne Room does conflict with Outpost because there's a greater chance of drawing Throne Rooms dead in a smaller hand.

Which is true IFF the smaller hand does not have a larger concentration of actions than would typically be the case.

When do you play outpost? Generally only when you have a hand that can do something better than just buy a silver. If you can't reliably hit a big payout (at least 5 coin) with 3 cards, outpost is just a crappy workshop with a small bit of cycling. Outpost is worth it when you have a higher than average density of actions, particularly non-terminal actions. While there are some exceptions (e.g. outpost/venture can sometimes be worth it), normally the only way to get something good with three cards is to have enough actions to make it worthwhile. If you have said actions, most of the time TR makes it better and the odds of drawing a dead throne are more than twice as low as drawing a useful throne.

For instance, outpost/menage is very good with some trashing. TR works well here allowing you to get it out of hand (avoiding duplicates), get +actions, and doubling up your payout cards (TR/haggler let's you get 2 more coins without having to find another action or gain a second haggler). Odds of drawing TR dead are pretty low, TR/Haggler lets you get a TR/menage so the  only real shots are TR/green or TR/TR/TR. The former doesn't matter as much as much if you aiming for a double province turn followed by a a province outpost turn. The latter is sufficiently rare that it isn't worth considering.

I just don't see all that many viable outpost decks where TR is bad.

twadd: it depends on how you are playing the library (or watchtower for that matter). If you are using it as dead draw, then yeah TR is a bust. If you are using it with say festival/chapel/lib then it works quite well at giving you 2 more coin for only 4 coin. TR really does work extremely well with just about any setup that favors heavy actions.  Library without actions, like say as a  militia counter or just simple BM/lib hates throne room, but all BM setups are that way. Even something simple like village/black market/library can benefit from having throne room around.

[Jfrisch]

If you are playing BM X then yes, throne room is absolutely horrific with library. However it's pretty awful with envoy/smithy/councilroom as well if you are going action light. if you are going action heavy then, sure, throne room does not combo with library itself, but it combos with the stuff you are using with library,. Also throne rooming a library means the throne room had no effect which is really, not that painful for a throne room.
In general to see if throne room anti-combos with a card, don't only consider what happens when you throne room that card, but whether throne room is useful in the types of deck's that use that card. Outpost, again, being the prime example, you very rarely want outpost unless you have a super-action rich deck.

[Robz888]

I would add that Throne Room conflicts with Treasure Map. Not actively, I guess, but 99% of the time that Throne Room is bought after Treasure Map is bought, it's for a bad reason.

[Jfrisch]

added.

[jotheonah]

But if your hand is Throne Room-Treasure Map-Treasure Map-Treasure Map, you can get 8 Gold on deck with only 3 maps!



(not a serious comment)

[HiveMindEmulator]

But if your hand is Throne Room-Treasure Map-Treasure Map-Treasure Map, you can get 8 Gold on deck with only 3 maps!



(not a serious comment)

I don't think you can. Treasure map says "If you do trash two Treasure Maps", but you can only trash the first treasure map once.

[jonts26]

But if your hand is Throne Room-Treasure Map-Treasure Map-Treasure Map, you can get 8 Gold on deck with only 3 maps!



(not a serious comment)

I don't think you can. Treasure map says "If you do trash two Treasure Maps", but you can only trash the first treasure map once.

(not a serious comment)

[Galzria]

But if your hand is Throne Room-Treasure Map-Treasure Map-Treasure Map, you can get 8 Gold on deck with only 3 maps!



(not a serious comment)

I don't think you can. Treasure map says "If you do trash two Treasure Maps", but you can only trash the first treasure map once.

I haven't tested it, but a Throne Room on a Feast provides two cards, so I'm not sure, the Treasure Maps may set off twice. (I'm also not sure why the Feast thing works, but it does).

[dondon151]

I haven't tested it, but a Throne Room on a Feast provides two cards, so I'm not sure, the Treasure Maps may set off twice. (I'm also not sure why the Feast thing works, but it does).

Feast doesn't have a conditional clause that states that in order for a card to be gained, Feast must be trashed.

[Galzria]

I haven't tested it, but a Throne Room on a Feast provides two cards, so I'm not sure, the Treasure Maps may set off twice. (I'm also not sure why the Feast thing works, but it does).

Feast doesn't have a conditional clause that states that in order for a card to be gained, Feast must be trashed.

Fair enough. While it isn't logical to me, as you can't trash a card twice... since it doesn't specify "if you do", I can see why it would work. Damn you grammar rules!

[Tables]

That's exactly why it IS logical though. Playing a Throne Roomed Feast:

"Trash this card"
Okay, into the trash you go.
"Gain a card costing up to $5
Excellent, that's another Copper for the stack! Now I play my Feast again.
"Trash this card"
What card? I can't do this!
"Gain a card costing up to $5"
Okay. Fancy some variety, I'll have an Estate.

The clauses are seperate, so it's fine. Compare to running it with Treasure Maps.

"Trash this card and another Treasure Map from your hand"
Okay, treasure map in hand, and in play into the trash. Ooh, I wonder what's coming next?
"If you do, gain 4 Golds, putting them on top of your deck"
Well, I actually wanted more coppers, but... I guess I can live with this.
Now I play it again.
"Trash this card and another Treasure Map from your hand"
Huh? Well, here's the Map in my hand into the trash, but I can't find the 'this card' that's being referred to. Eh, can't affect much.
"If you do, gain 4 Golds, putting them on top of your deck"
Oh, hey, I guess I couldn't do that last thing. That's good, don't want my deck clogged with Golds.

The good thing about dominion cards is you can interpret them literally and get the correct result 99.8% of the time if you know the underlying rules. The bad thing is that a lot of people (and I don't mean this in an insulting way, just it's kinda how people are) don't get that literal interpretation thing, and make mental shortcuts that don't always work. Throne Room and Treasure Maps are two offenders, and together can be problematic.

[Kirian]

Oh, hey, I guess I couldn't do that last thing. That's good, don't want my deck clogged with Golds.

+1 just for that giggle.

[Kuildeous]

The good thing about dominion cards is you can interpret them literally and get the correct result 99.8% of the time if you know the underlying rules. The bad thing is that a lot of people (and I don't mean this in an insulting way, just it's kinda how people are) don't get that literal interpretation thing, and make mental shortcuts that don't always work. Throne Room and Treasure Maps are two offenders, and together can be problematic.

I know how that feels. We had that problem with Curses when we first started Dominion.

Literally, this is a card that is worth -1 VP and costs 0. By the rules, this card can be bought for 0, but there was a specific kingdom card that gave them out (the Witch). Also, it was always available.

Our brains couldn't just accept that that was it. By the rules that effectively meant that the Curse pile would sit there useless for most of the games. There had to be more. That's when the mental jump was made that since there was a cost to the Curse, there was a reason to buy one. What could that reason be? The next leap was that you could buy a Curse to give to someone else. Fortunately, we at least recognized that this made the Witch an unnecessary card, so we hit the interwebs to find out. Still, that thought was briefly in our minds. If we didn't stop to consider the ramifications, we could have ended up playing it that way. That is a mental shortcut that would have been a nasty shock later.

[ehunt]

One use of throne room, which doesn't come up that much but is worth knowing for when it does, is in a throne room wharf engine.

http://councilroom.com/game?game_id=game-20111002-095349-495b33a5.html

Trying to do this with a terminal draw that's any worse than wharf (i.e. any other terminal draw) is suicide. Of course the king's court is another story - probably somebody has built an engine out of king's courts and moats...

[jomini]

TR/terminal draw works fine with enough trashing; the real problem is getting the game to last long enough. In colony games, you can trash down to where odds of having two TR in your starting hand a very high, at that point TR becomes a village.

[qmech]

TR/terminal draw works fine with enough trashing; the real problem is getting the game to last long enough. In colony games, you can trash down to where odds of having two TR in your starting hand a very high, at that point TR becomes a village.

Maybe at first, but once you start greening you're going to stall hard.  Wharf has the huge advantage that even a single TR/Wharf this turn gives you 9 cards to find the combo again next turn.  (It's "partially non-terminal".)

[eHalcyon]

TR/terminal draw works fine with enough trashing; the real problem is getting the game to last long enough. In colony games, you can trash down to where odds of having two TR in your starting hand a very high, at that point TR becomes a village.

Maybe at first, but once you start greening you're going to stall hard.  Wharf has the huge advantage that even a single TR/Wharf this turn gives you 9 cards to find the combo again next turn.  (It's "partially non-terminal".)

On the next turn where you have 9 card, TR-Wharf are not in your deck so you can't find them again.  You'd need two of each to do it every turn.

[blueblimp]

TR/terminal draw works fine with enough trashing; the real problem is getting the game to last long enough. In colony games, you can trash down to where odds of having two TR in your starting hand a very high, at that point TR becomes a village.

Maybe at first, but once you start greening you're going to stall hard.  Wharf has the huge advantage that even a single TR/Wharf this turn gives you 9 cards to find the combo again next turn.  (It's "partially non-terminal".)

On the next turn where you have 9 card, TR-Wharf are not in your deck so you can't find them again.  You'd need two of each to do it every turn.

Yes, but if you play something like TR-TR-Wharf-Wharf, then one of those TRs does return to your deck, so you can get away with fewer TRs than Wharfs (unless you want to play them on something else too).

I agree that it's worth mentioning TR-Wharf as a combo, because it's a lot better than you'd expect. I first learned about it in guided's comment on the Swindler article.

[Geronimoo]

TR-Wharf is a viable engine, but it's a lot higher variance than Wharf Big Money and on average doesn't even seem to beat it.

[eHalcyon]

Yes, but if you play something like TR-TR-Wharf-Wharf, then one of those TRs does return to your deck, so you can get away with fewer TRs than Wharfs (unless you want to play them on something else too).

I agree that it's worth mentioning TR-Wharf as a combo, because it's a lot better than you'd expect. I first learned about it in guided's comment on the Swindler article.

Is that the proper cleanup procedure or a bug with isotropic?  Guided suggests that both TRs should remain in play as they are both needed to explain why both Wharves are being doubled.

[ftl]

That is proper cleanup procedure. It was clarified at one point by Donald.

[Galzria]

Yes, but if you play something like TR-TR-Wharf-Wharf, then one of those TRs does return to your deck, so you can get away with fewer TRs than Wharfs (unless you want to play them on something else too).

I agree that it's worth mentioning TR-Wharf as a combo, because it's a lot better than you'd expect. I first learned about it in guided's comment on the Swindler article.

Is that the proper cleanup procedure or a bug with isotropic?  Guided suggests that both TRs should remain in play as they are both needed to explain why both Wharves are being doubled.

I believe having both stay out was the original intention, but in play testing it was too confusing, so Donald changed it to only the most direct multiplier stayed out (KC-KC-Wharf-Wharf-Wharf only leaves out 1 KC, and 3 Wharves).

[blueblimp]

TR-Wharf is a viable engine, but it's a lot higher variance than Wharf Big Money and on average doesn't even seem to beat it.

Makes sense, since it only draws your deck and doesn't attack or give money, but if anything is added then it should be great. For example, I expect TR-Wharf-Bank would be completely ridiculous.

Yes, but if you play something like TR-TR-Wharf-Wharf, then one of those TRs does return to your deck, so you can get away with fewer TRs than Wharfs (unless you want to play them on something else too).

I agree that it's worth mentioning TR-Wharf as a combo, because it's a lot better than you'd expect. I first learned about it in guided's comment on the Swindler article.

Is that the proper cleanup procedure or a bug with isotropic?  Guided suggests that both TRs should remain in play as they are both needed to explain why both Wharves are being doubled.

It's the correct behaviour. That's why a pin like KC-KC-Outpost-Masquerade works.

[AJD]

Yes, but if you play something like TR-TR-Wharf-Wharf, then one of those TRs does return to your deck, so you can get away with fewer TRs than Wharfs (unless you want to play them on something else too).

I agree that it's worth mentioning TR-Wharf as a combo, because it's a lot better than you'd expect. I first learned about it in guided's comment on the Swindler article.

Is that the proper cleanup procedure or a bug with isotropic?  Guided suggests that both TRs should remain in play as they are both needed to explain why both Wharves are being doubled.

I believe having both stay out was the original intention, but in play testing it was too confusing, so Donald changed it to only the most direct multiplier stayed out (KC-KC-Wharf-Wharf-Wharf only leaves out 1 KC, and 3 Wharves).

Having both stay out was certainly what Donald originally stated; but then he was eventually convinced that the printed Seaside rules unambiguously imply that only the most direct one stays out, so he revised his ruling to be consistent with that.

[jomini]

TR/terminal draw works fine with enough trashing; the real problem is getting the game to last long enough. In colony games, you can trash down to where odds of having two TR in your starting hand a very high, at that point TR becomes a village.

Maybe at first, but once you start greening you're going to stall hard.  Wharf has the huge advantage that even a single TR/Wharf this turn gives you 9 cards to find the combo again next turn.  (It's "partially non-terminal".)

That depends on your setup. First and most obvious are chip engines. Goons, monuments, and bishops can let you build TR engines that hit reliably; treating TR as a gimped village isn't good, but being the only one with a chip engine can be quite strong in a long enough game. TR/Goons/watchtower/chapel will trounce any non-engine if the game lasts long enough.

Secondly, you can deal with green in a lot of ways - like controlling your top deck. Things like ghost ship, secret chamber (when attacks are out), courtyard, mandarin, etc. can let dump cards back on deck to increase odds of hitting the needed 2 TR's & draw to start off the chain. Alternatively you can play around with top decking cards gained - watchtower (can also double as draw), royal seal, and develop all let you dump cards on top of the deck for.

Third, another shot is just mega-turning it. TR/draw/mint/remodel can allow you to spam gold & remodel to provinces. Your opponent has to recover extremely quickly after you nab 3 or 4 provinces in one turn before you remodel provinces -> provinces and win out (particularly as you may go TR -> Remodel and burn two provinces). Other options, like HoP decks, can also win before the engine chokes on green.

Other options like islands can come into play. The big problem is that you need enough TR's to hit TR/TR/draw to set off a chain. This requires that either the unreliability of the engine be overcome by the payout (i.e. a HoP deck that powers out 4 provinces & 3 duchies when the engine finally hits on all cylinders), be mitigated by the cards, or that the other options be terrible. Yes, Big Money/TR/Terminal Draw sucks, but if you are building a TR engine anyways, having action payouts is almost certain to be more cost effective for an honest engine; there are lots of them that work.

[qmech]

Maybe at first, but once you start greening you're going to stall hard.  Wharf has the huge advantage that even a single TR/Wharf this turn gives you 9 cards to find the combo again next turn.  (It's "partially non-terminal".)

On the next turn where you have 9 card, TR-Wharf are not in your deck so you can't find them again.  You'd need two of each to do it every turn.

Playing a single TR/Wharf this turn.  Of course you can't chain a single Wharf.

Geronimoo's observation that BM/Wharf will frequently beat TR/Wharf rings true.

[Kahryl]

The best way to think of a throne room is that it turns itself into a clone of another action with a "+1 action" tacked on.

So if you throne room a smithy the throne room is basically "+1 action, +3 cards"

Or if you throne a cantrip, it becomes a village (TR on upgrade is "+2 actions, +1 card, trash a card from your hand, gain a card costing $1 more")

So throne rooms are good for accumulating action points. For supplementing villages or turning cantrips into villages or playing a terminal twice without a village.

The drawback that makes this model of TR imperfect is that you have to immedately play the card after the card's clone. A real "+1 action, +3 cards" action could be played, then the village it drew played, then the real smithy played while still retraining an action point, but you can't do this with throne room -> smithy.

[bedlam]

I can't wrap my head around why throne room doesn't work with goons. If goons is played twice, i should get two vp's with each buy right. Why doesn't that work?

[WanderingWinder]

I can't wrap my head around why throne room doesn't work with goons. If goons is played twice, i should get two vp's with each buy right. Why doesn't that work?

Because a goons has a 'while this card is in play' clause preceding the VP chip condition. So, while throne room PLAYS goons twice, it can't put two copies of the card in play. One copy in play = 1 VP chip per buy.

[Robz888]

I can't wrap my head around why throne room doesn't work with goons. If goons is played twice, i should get two vp's with each buy right. Why doesn't that work?

Because Goons only gives you that benefit "while it is in play." The card specifically says "when this is in play." Actions "in play" are different from actions "played." It's a tricky difference. Throne Room causes you to play a card twice, not put a card "in play" twice. It's already in play: you put it in play the first time. So cards that confer some benefit "when in play" do not see that benefit stacked. This is also true of Highway and Princess.

Now, you do get the +$2 from Goons twice, because that benefit is conferred when you play Goons. And TR makes you play Goons twice. But it doesn't put Goons "in play" twice, because it can't.

I know it's confusing.

[jotheonah]

It's like, imagine that Goons is a blue dog.

No wait, don't do that.

[dondon151]

I just remembered winning a 2 player Throne Room game by building a draw engine with Throne Room + Moat and megaturning with Goons. Fun stuff.

It's certainly much weaker than KC, but it can still make mildly ridiculous things happen.

[chinano]

It really only breaks down when the card has a 'while in play' requirement.

Hey guys, you all look pretty confident about this (said in the article and many times in discussion), BUT:
it doesn´t matter how many times Haggler is in play, but how many time it was played - you played it through TR, so when you buy a card:
you check whether Haggler is in play ...it is ...and gain a card
you check for the second time whether Haggler is in play ...it is  ...and gain a second card

Jfrisch: and by the way, you wrote:
Works with:
Talisman (gain extra cheap actions)

SO, TR either wors with neither of it, or with both (which I believe and hope  )

[polonkus]

It really only breaks down when the card has a 'while in play' requirement.

Hey guys, you all look pretty confident about this (said in the article and many times in discussion), BUT:
it doesn´t matter how many times Haggler is in play, but how many time it was played - you played it through TR, so when you buy a card:
you check whether Haggler is in play ...it is ...and gain a card
you check for the second time whether Haggler is in play ...it is  ...and gain a second card

Jfrisch: and by the way, you wrote:
Works with:
Talisman (gain extra cheap actions)

SO, TR either wors with neither of it, or with both (which I believe and hope  )

Sorry, you're thinking about it too logically.

[Young Nick]

You play Haggler twice, but the physical card is only in play once.

[chinano]

You play Haggler twice, but the physical card is only in play once.

i think i get it... does it mean that when there is written "while THIS is in play," it means the EXACT card and not just any Haggler?
because if not, then when you would check if Haggler is in play, then take a card, then check again - and the one haggler is still there, so that´s what i meant... nevermind, thank you...

[RD]

You play Haggler twice, but the physical card is only in play once.

i think i get it... does it mean that when there is written "while THIS is in play," it means the EXACT card and not just any Haggler?
because if not, then when you would check if Haggler is in play, then take a card, then check again - and the one haggler is still there, so that´s what i meant... nevermind, thank you...

I still don't think you're quite there. The thing is that the "while in play" part is completely separate from the Action ability. It's more akin to "when you gain this card" abilities or Reaction abilities or whatever.

Imagine that in Guilds, there was an Action card like this. "Choose a card from your hand and put that card into play. Do not "play" this card; don't even bother to read it at this point. Just physically take the card out of your hand and lay it on the table in front of you, along with the other cards that are 'in play,' and then go on with your turn." Okay, I might need to tighten up the wording But the point is that if you played this card on Haggler or Goons, you would still get to use their "while in play" abilities. As long as that Haggler is sitting in the play area, it changes the rules of the game, and that's all there is to it. You don't care how the Haggler got there: whether you played it once or twice (or in this case not at all) this turn, or whether there is a Throne Room tucked behind it as a handy reminder of times past. You only care whether it's there or not when its ability is triggered by buying a card.

Now of course that would be a pretty terrible card idea. It has very few interesting interactions and is also super-confusing. In actual Dominion the only way to have a card "in play" is that you played it at some point, and that's probably always going to be true. (OK, full disclosure: I always thought it would be neat if Havened cards were 'in play' instead of 'set aside'.) But the idea stands: there's a sharp distinction between "is this card in play [sitting in the play area]" and "did you play this card this turn," which also matters in edge cases like Conspirator and Horn of Plenty and so forth.

[Dulkal]

i think i get it... does it mean that when there is written "while THIS is in play," it means the EXACT card and not just any Haggler?

Yes, 'this' always refers to a specific instance of a card, not the card type. If a card refers to the card type, it refers to the card name.

So yes, you get one extra card for each haggler that is lying on the table in front of you.