Print

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

[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.