Print

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

[eHalcyon]

I sort of feel like BoM throne rooms itself.  When you play it, the instruction is to play it (again) as a different card.  It stays in play, turns into a different card, and I play it again (from in play).

This is incorrect though.  As discussed earlier in the thread, BoM's mimicry is not an on-play effect.  That is, you don't play BoM and then subsequently play it as something else.  Rather, it's very first play is already as something else -- it mimics another card before being played.

Therefore, when you play TR-BoM, TR has no idea that the card being throned was, is, or will be a BoM.  It just sees it as a Feast (or whatever you choose).  You don't actually play TR-BoM, you play TR-Feast, with the peculiarity that the Feast you are playing is really a BoM in disguise.

Even if that's the case, there's not really, I don't think, such a thing as TR-Feast.  There's TR-Card.  If it transforms just before you play it (because it says play this as) then it becomes feast for TR to play it the first time.  As part of becoming another card, it loses its transforming text until it leaves play, so Smithy wouldn't allow you to pick twice.

But if it becomes feast, gets played as feast by TR, leaves play, becomes BoM again, then the TR plays "it" again and a new selection needs to be made so that TR can play it as some other card.

Not sure what you mean there.  TR-Card is a general case, but what is that Card?  In this case, it is Feast.  And the second time, when TR plays "it", "it" still refers to Feast.

[pst]

As discussed earlier in the thread, BoM's mimicry is not an on-play effect.  That is, you don't play BoM and then subsequently play it as something else.  Rather, it's very first play is already as something else -- it mimics another card before being played.

That makes sense to me, mostly since the alternative interpretation when BoM is BoM again when played the second time (because it's in the trash then) has the problem that since BoM isn't "in play" when it becomes that other card it won't leave play! Only if it is retrieved from trash (as the card it pretends to be!) could it then enter play and then leave play. Surely too much bother to track!

But (and now I'm repeating a point from another thread), then I think that Procession-BoM should gain a card costing one more than the card BoM pretends to be, not one more than the BoM itself. Why would Procession suddenly see BoM for what it really is when it enters the trash if Throne Room doesn't?

[jamuspsi]

Not sure what you mean there.  TR-Card is a general case, but what is that Card?  In this case, it is Feast.  And the second time, when TR plays "it", "it" still refers to Feast.

I think "it" refers to the card you chose, which has since transformed back to BoM because it moved to the trash.

Edit:

Because of the text of Throne Room.  "Choose an Action card in your hand. Play it twice."  In fact, if it said "Action" and not "Action card" I think I'd have a different opinion here.  As it is, "it" seems to me to refer specifically to the card you chose, regardless of what it has changed into between the two playings of it.

[Voltaire]

I sort of feel like BoM throne rooms itself.  When you play it, the instruction is to play it (again) as a different card.  It stays in play, turns into a different card, and I play it again (from in play).

This is incorrect though.  As discussed earlier in the thread, BoM's mimicry is not an on-play effect.  That is, you don't play BoM and then subsequently play it as something else.  Rather, it's very first play is already as something else -- it mimics another card before being played.

Therefore, when you play TR-BoM, TR has no idea that the card being throned was, is, or will be a BoM.  It just sees it as a Feast (or whatever you choose).  You don't actually play TR-BoM, you play TR-Feast, with the peculiarity that the Feast you are playing is really a BoM in disguise.

Even if that's the case, there's not really, I don't think, such a thing as TR-Feast.  There's TR-Card.  If it transforms just before you play it (because it says play this as) then it becomes feast for TR to play it the first time.  As part of becoming another card, it loses its transforming text until it leaves play, so Smithy wouldn't allow you to pick twice.

But if it becomes feast, gets played as feast by TR, leaves play, becomes BoM again, then the TR plays "it" again and a new selection needs to be made so that TR can play it as some other card.

Nooooo! You're making this much harder than needed.

It does seem that BoM introduces a unique phase - instant metamorphosis - as you place it in play. "This is a Feast!" you say. Throne Room is waiting for a card. By the time it lands, it's a Feast! TR-Feast happens! Gain cards! Ok, that's over. Now what? Ah, there's a BoM in the trash! Ok, that action is over.

[eHalcyon]

As discussed earlier in the thread, BoM's mimicry is not an on-play effect.  That is, you don't play BoM and then subsequently play it as something else.  Rather, it's very first play is already as something else -- it mimics another card before being played.

That makes sense to me, mostly since the alternative interpretation when BoM is BoM again when played the second time (because it's in the trash then) has the problem that since BoM isn't "in play" when it becomes that other card it won't leave play! Only if it is retrieved from trash (as the card it pretends to be!) could it then enter play and then leave play. Surely too much bother to track!

But (and now I'm repeating a point from another thread), then I think that Procession-BoM should gain a card costing one more than the card BoM pretends to be, not one more than the BoM itself. Why would Procession suddenly see BoM for what it really is when it enters the trash if Throne Room doesn't?

I think I could explain this but it's difficult.

I actually think it would make more sense if TR-BoM let you choose a different card with each BoM.  I'm just trying to understand it given Donald X's ruling.

The reason why I think it should be TR-BoM is that TR says "Choose an Action card in your hand.  Play it twice."  When you choose BoM in your hand, it is still BoM; it hasn't transformed yet.

[() | (_) ^/]

I sort of feel like BoM throne rooms itself.  When you play it, the instruction is to play it (again) as a different card.  It stays in play, turns into a different card, and I play it again (from in play).

This is incorrect though.  As discussed earlier in the thread, BoM's mimicry is not an on-play effect.  That is, you don't play BoM and then subsequently play it as something else.  Rather, it's very first play is already as something else -- it mimics another card before being played.

Therefore, when you play TR-BoM, TR has no idea that the card being throned was, is, or will be a BoM.  It just sees it as a Feast (or whatever you choose).  You don't actually play TR-BoM, you play TR-Feast, with the peculiarity that the Feast you are playing is really a BoM in disguise.

Even if that's the case, there's not really, I don't think, such a thing as TR-Feast.  There's TR-Card.  If it transforms just before you play it (because it says play this as) then it becomes feast for TR to play it the first time.  As part of becoming another card, it loses its transforming text until it leaves play, so Smithy wouldn't allow you to pick twice.

But if it becomes feast, gets played as feast by TR, leaves play, becomes BoM again, then the TR plays "it" again and a new selection needs to be made so that TR can play it as some other card.

Not sure what you mean there.  TR-Card is a general case, but what is that Card?  In this case, it is Feast.  And the second time, when TR plays "it", "it" still refers to Feast.

What he is saying is that the first time TR plays the BoM-as-Feast, the card is removed from play (because of its Feastiness).  At that time, BoM is no longer Feast, so it should be BoM-as-something-else for round 2 of the TR.

Unfortunately, I don't think it holds water.  Good observation, but the problem is that Round 2 of the TR does not specify that the card has to remain in play, just that the card had to have been the one selected for play.  In this case, TR selected a BoM-as-Feast, not just a BoM simply, and thus the effects of its Feastiness must be what happens during TR2.

[Donald X.]

Oooh, not if there aren't any Feasts left in the supply, you can't!   

Just look at the randomizer card.

[Donald X.]

Since Dominion cards are sort of like little computer programs, it might be useful to imagine implementing it as a computer program (in pseudo-code). This is how I might first try to implement Band of Misfits. It's not a perfect solution, but at least it illustrates the general idea. And it shows why it's pretty natural for the second play of BoM to allow a different choice than the first one, in my opinion.

Yet the two entities who've programmed it, Doug Z. and funsockets, both have it working according to my ruling.

[Voltaire]

The reason why I think it should be TR-BoM is that TR says "Choose an Action card in your hand.  Play it twice."  When you choose BoM in your hand, it is still BoM; it hasn't transformed yet.

Impossible, I say, for a few reasons. Chiefly: TR-BoM is impossible. BoM will always transform into something else. It is impossible to ever choose BoM.

EDIT: To be clear, of course you can play TR-BoM physically, but for gameplay reasons, you will never TR-BoM. You might TR-Feast, or TR-Village, or TR-Sea Hag, but never TR-BoM.

Of course, in all these examples, BoM is hiding as the TR action.

[blueblimp]

Since Dominion cards are sort of like little computer programs, it might be useful to imagine implementing it as a computer program (in pseudo-code). This is how I might first try to implement Band of Misfits. It's not a perfect solution, but at least it illustrates the general idea. And it shows why it's pretty natural for the second play of BoM to allow a different choice than the first one, in my opinion.

Yet the two entities who've programmed it, Doug Z. and funsockets, both have it working according to my ruling.

Yes, but as I understand it, they were both adding it on to an existing system, which may have had some assumptions about things-that-can't-happen that required some weird modifications. The card is very awkward to implement.

Edit: To be more specific, if I were working with an existing implementation of Dominion rules, I might handle the card by just adding some special-case code for BoM to multiplier cards. Slightly ugly, but it gets the job done. But that doesn't say much about how the rules should work, because in the rules, Throne Room doesn't say anything specifically about BoM.

[jamuspsi]

But (and now I'm repeating a point from another thread), then I think that Procession-BoM should gain a card costing one more than the card BoM pretends to be, not one more than the BoM itself. Why would Procession suddenly see BoM for what it really is when it enters the trash if Throne Room doesn't?

Probably because of order.  "Trash a card.  Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it."  In the first step, BoM moves into the trash and then turns back into BoM.  "it" still refers to the card you trashed, which at the time of the second step, is a BoM.  (Rather than, for instance, "Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than the trashed card cost when it was trashed.")

Unfortunately, I don't think it holds water.  Good observation, but the problem is that Round 2 of the TR does not specify that the card has to remain in play, just that the card had to have been the one selected for play.  In this case, TR selected a BoM-as-Feast, not just a BoM simply, and thus the effects of its Feastiness must be what happens during TR2.

I think TR selected an action card from your hand, which was most definitely BoM at that step, since it hasn't been (about to be) played yet.  At any rate, regardless of whether it selected BoM-as-Feast, that card is no longer BoM-as-Feast by the time TR2 rolls around.

(Obviously, Donald has prerogative to issue clarifications or errata whenever he feels, but I don't think the cards as written suggest the ruling as given for TR-BoM-Feast.)

[pst]

Yet the two entities who've programmed it, Doug Z. and funsockets, both have it working according to my ruling.

Code is law!

Since a higher percenage of all Dominion-play will be online soon, many people will refer to how the server works rather than look at an FAQ when they don't agree on how it should be when playing in meatspace, I think.

[eHalcyon]

The reason why I think it should be TR-BoM is that TR says "Choose an Action card in your hand.  Play it twice."  When you choose BoM in your hand, it is still BoM; it hasn't transformed yet.

Impossible, I say, for a few reasons. Chiefly: TR-BoM is impossible. BoM will always transform into something else. It is impossible to ever choose BoM.

This is what I argued.  But the Procession ruling is strange then!

the thing is, if you haven't played BoM, what is it?  It's a BoM.  That's what it is for the purposes of Hunting Party, or TfB, or Wishing Well, etc.  So when you play TR, it has two steps.  The first step is to choose a card in your hand.  While it is in your hand, isn't it a BoM?



A way to resolve this:

You play TR and choose BoM, as per the first step.  Now you start the second step (play it twice) and TR goes:

- I am going to play BoM twice.
- BoM goes, "actually, I'm a Feast."
- TR says "whaaa.... OK then, I will play Feast twice."

And so it plays Feast twice.  Between the first and second play, BoM-Feast disappears into the trash and reverts back into BoM, but TR doesn't care anymore and doesn't see it revert.

[Voltaire]

The reason why I think it should be TR-BoM is that TR says "Choose an Action card in your hand.  Play it twice."  When you choose BoM in your hand, it is still BoM; it hasn't transformed yet.

Impossible, I say, for a few reasons. Chiefly: TR-BoM is impossible. BoM will always transform into something else. It is impossible to ever choose BoM.

This is what I argued.  But the Procession ruling is strange then!

I am thinking this answers that.

Probably because of order.  "Trash a card.  Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it."  In the first step, BoM moves into the trash and then turns back into BoM.  "it" still refers to the card you trashed, which at the time of the second step, is a BoM.  (Rather than, for instance, "Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than the trashed card cost when it was trashed.")

[blueblimp]

The reason why I think it should be TR-BoM is that TR says "Choose an Action card in your hand.  Play it twice."  When you choose BoM in your hand, it is still BoM; it hasn't transformed yet.

Impossible, I say, for a few reasons. Chiefly: TR-BoM is impossible. BoM will always transform into something else. It is impossible to ever choose BoM.

This is what I argued.  But the Procession ruling is strange then!

the thing is, if you haven't played BoM, what is it?  It's a BoM.  That's what it is for the purposes of Hunting Party, or TfB, or Wishing Well, etc.  So when you play TR, it has two steps.  The first step is to choose a card in your hand.  While it is in your hand, isn't it a BoM?



A way to resolve this:

You play TR and choose BoM, as per the first step.  Now you start the second step (play it twice) and TR goes:

- I am going to play BoM twice.
- BoM goes, "actually, I'm a Feast."
- TR says "whaaa.... OK then, I will play Feast twice."

And so it plays Feast twice.  Between the first and second play, BoM-Feast disappears into the trash and reverts back into BoM, but TR doesn't care anymore and doesn't see it revert.

My issue here is: the word "it". For this post, it will be useful to have a way to refer to a class of cards, rather than a particular card. So "Feast" will refer to the class of all Feast cards, whereas "a Feast card" is just one particular Feast card.

On the Throne Room, you're essentially saying that "it" refers to Feast as a class of cards. So Throne Room is doing: choose a card, get its class (it's at this point that BoM transforms to a Feast), then play according to that class's rules twice. To me, this feels really unnatural given the wording of TR.

[() | (_) ^/]

I think TR selected an action card from your hand, which was most definitely BoM at that step, since it hasn't been (about to be) played yet.  At any rate, regardless of whether it selected BoM-as-Feast, that card is no longer BoM-as-Feast by the time TR2 rolls around.

(Obviously, Donald has prerogative to issue clarifications or errata whenever he feels, but I don't think the cards as written suggest the ruling as given for TR-BoM-Feast.)

Yes, but you're Throne Rooming a BoM-as-Feast, not a BoM simply.  To "Throne Room" something is not simply to choose it with Throne Room, but to also play it with Throne Room.  To be "activated" by Throne Room means both chosen AND put in play, and as soon as you say "play," BoM is a Feast (or whatever).  You don't stop saying "play" until the Throne Room has run it's course.

====

Essentially:

Play Throne Room.
Choose a card.  (What card?  BoM.)
Play that card twice.  (What card? BoM-as-Feast.)

vs.

Play Throne Room.
Choose a card.  (What card?  BoM.)
Play that card twice.  (What card? BoM-as-Feast.)
Play the chosen card. (BoM-as-Feast)
Reevaluate the status of the chosen card.
Play the chosen card. (BoM)

====

Scenario 1 looks like Throne Room... simple and direct.
Scenario 2 adds in a lot more that isn't simply or directly on Throne Room.

[blueblimp]

I think TR selected an action card from your hand, which was most definitely BoM at that step, since it hasn't been (about to be) played yet.  At any rate, regardless of whether it selected BoM-as-Feast, that card is no longer BoM-as-Feast by the time TR2 rolls around.

(Obviously, Donald has prerogative to issue clarifications or errata whenever he feels, but I don't think the cards as written suggest the ruling as given for TR-BoM-Feast.)

Yes, but you're Throne Rooming a BoM-as-Feast, not a BoM simply.  To "Throne Room" something is not simply to choose it with Throne Room, but to also play it with Throne Room.  To be "activated" by Throne Room means both chosen AND put in play, and as soon as you say "play," BoM is a Feast (or whatever).  You don't stop saying "play" until the Throne Room has run it's course.

====

Essentially:

Play Throne Room.
Choose a card.  (What card?  BoM.)
Play that card twice.  (What card? BoM-as-Feast.)

vs.

Play Throne Room.
Choose a card.  (What card?  BoM.)
Play that card twice.  (What card? BoM-as-Feast.)
Play the chosen card. (BoM-as-Feast)
Reevaluate the status of the chosen card.
Play the chosen card. (BoM)

====

Scenario 1 looks like Throne Room... simple and direct.
Scenario 2 adds in a lot more that isn't simply or directly on Throne Room.

But with Scenario 1, that means that the wording "play it twice" and "do this twice: play it" mean different things. Which, IMO, is extremely non-intuitive.

[eHalcyon]

My issue here is: the word "it". For this post, it will be useful to have a way to refer to a class of cards, rather than a particular card. So "Feast" will refer to the class of all Feast cards, whereas "a Feast card" is just one particular Feast card.

On the Throne Room, you're essentially saying that "it" refers to Feast as a class of cards. So Throne Room is doing: choose a card, get its class (it's at this point that BoM transforms to a Feast), then play according to that class's rules twice. To me, this feels really unnatural given the wording of TR.

I tend closer to thinking your way, but Donald made his ruling and I can mostly see it from that perspective too, which is why I am trying to understand it better from that side.  But I know what you're getting at!

[blueblimp]

My issue here is: the word "it". For this post, it will be useful to have a way to refer to a class of cards, rather than a particular card. So "Feast" will refer to the class of all Feast cards, whereas "a Feast card" is just one particular Feast card.

On the Throne Room, you're essentially saying that "it" refers to Feast as a class of cards. So Throne Room is doing: choose a card, get its class (it's at this point that BoM transforms to a Feast), then play according to that class's rules twice. To me, this feels really unnatural given the wording of TR.

I tend closer to thinking your way, but Donald made his ruling and I can mostly see it from that perspective too, which is why I am trying to understand it better from that side.  But I know what you're getting at!

Fair enough. I just don't mind being contrary if I think I might be right.

[eHalcyon]

My issue here is: the word "it". For this post, it will be useful to have a way to refer to a class of cards, rather than a particular card. So "Feast" will refer to the class of all Feast cards, whereas "a Feast card" is just one particular Feast card.

On the Throne Room, you're essentially saying that "it" refers to Feast as a class of cards. So Throne Room is doing: choose a card, get its class (it's at this point that BoM transforms to a Feast), then play according to that class's rules twice. To me, this feels really unnatural given the wording of TR.

I tend closer to thinking your way, but Donald made his ruling and I can mostly see it from that perspective too, which is why I am trying to understand it better from that side.  But I know what you're getting at!

Fair enough. I just don't mind being contrary if I think I might be right.

Same, but I am OK thinking about it the official way since I can see how could be right as well!  Since I don't think the ruling is definitely wrong, I'm not going to argue too much about it.

[jsimantov]

"Choose an Action card in your hand. Play it twice."

Throne Room thinks, "Okay, so the player has chosen this Action card, its name happens to be Band of Misfits (but I don't really care about that), so let's put the card into play and execute it....WHOA OMG SOMETHING WEIRD HAPPENED WHEN I PUT THE CARD INTO PLAY--BUT I DON'T CARE, I'LL JUST EXECUTE IT ANYWAY."

When you Throne Room (or King's Court) an action card, I don't see how Throne Room cares about the NAME of the card it plays twice; it cares about the actual physical card. It told you to choose a card. You did. So there's a card, which is a physical object in the world. The sequence of events is:

1. Throne Room puts the physical card you selected into play.
2. The when-played instructions on the physical card are executed in order.
3. Throne Room puts the physical card you selected into play a second time (although what actually happens is that the card is either already in play or Throne Room has lost track of it, so this fails).
4. The when-played instructions on the physical card are executed in order.

When you put BoM into play, it immediately turns into a different Action card from the Supply. For as long as it remains in play, it is that card. So obviously if you Throne Room a Band of Misfits card, and play that BoM card as a Village, the physical card will be a Village for both plays.

But this is muddy if the card leaves play during the first time it's played by Throne Room. If you Throne Room a BoM and choose for it to be Mining Village, then the BoM card is a Mining Village for the entire time it is in play. But hey, let's say you chose to trash that Mining Village on the first play. So now the physical card that was Throne Roomed is in the trash, and is no longer a Mining Village, it's a BoM!

So I'm curious what makes Throne Room remember that the card it played was a Mining Village.

[jamuspsi]

Essentially:

Play Throne Room.
Choose a card.  (What card?  BoM.)
Play that card twice.  (What card? BoM-as-Feast.)

vs.

Play Throne Room.
Choose a card.  (What card?  BoM.)
Play that card twice.  (What card? BoM-as-Feast.)
Play the chosen card. (BoM-as-Feast)
Reevaluate the status of the chosen card.
Play the chosen card. (BoM)


Scenario 1 looks like Throne Room... simple and direct.
Scenario 2 adds in a lot more that isn't simply or directly on Throne Room.

Scenario 1 definitely acts more like a traditional throne room in terms of what it eventually does.  But that's why this is a weird interaction!  I think my issue is that there is no such thing as BoM-as-Feast.  It is one single card from your hand that goes through more than one identity.  Throne room does not say "Choose a card from your hand.  Play it, then play it again as the same card it was when you played it the first time."

[blueblimp]

Analogy: "Pick someone you know. Visit him at home today and ten years from now." If this person changes houses 5 years from now, would you in 10 years go to his old home to visit him?

[eHalcyon]

How about this:

You play TR-BoM, choosing to make BoM a Feast.

TR plays it the first time.  It sees BoM as a Feast.  It is trashed and you gain some card, doesn't matter what it is.  BoM goes into the trash, losing its Feast identity.

TR now has to play "it" a second time, where "it" is a Feast that has become a BoM in the trash.  The thing is, TR doesn't know what's happening in the trash.  It doesn't know that Feast changed; it lost track of it.  As far as it knows, it is still a Feast.  So TR plays Feast a second time.

[eHalcyon]

Analogy: "Pick someone you know. Visit him at home today and ten years from now." If this person changes houses 5 years from now, would you in 10 years go to his old home to visit him?

But what does the home represent and what does the person represent?  I can't quite parse this analogy to make sense of either perspective.