Print

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

[Jeebus]

Throne Room as I read it causes two sequential things to happen, not two simultaneous things. The thing that sets those two sequential things happening in motion is one thing that sets both in motion at once. But uh it's different from saying it's two simultaneous things. There's no ordering required. Well both things are the same but you know what I mean? At one moment in time, Throne Room queues up an action to be played twice in sequence. It's like uh Merchant Ship causes you to gain $2 at the start of your next turn, but the moment when it causes that to happen is when we reach that instruction when playing it, not next turn. Which would matter for Procession / Merchant Ship and man I wonder how the Germans are dealing with that since they used dividing lines on their duration cards.

Okay, if it's two sequential things then it's even clearer that it's not a Feast on second play. (But I'll say that the reason I concluded that "do X twice" has to trigger two simultaneous things, is that "gain two Coppers" does that. See my big post above for my reasoning and sourcing of this. I'd also argue that Merchant Ship actually sets up a later ability (it says "at your next turn") while Throne Room effectively says "now" to both effects.)

If it's simultaneous then they are both triggered, and then they get resolved in sequence. If Throne Room sets two sequential things in motion, that would mean the first is triggered and resolved, then the second is triggered and resolved. Remember, both are "play the card you chose". When the second is triggered (if the card is trashed at this point), we're definitely in the same situation as when the first one was triggered, i.e. "the card you chose" is a BoM. If this is the case, we don't even have to discuss the point below: whoever of us is right on that point, it's not a Feast on second play.

I think the key difference is that to me, you cannot play a BoM (unless no cheaper cards are in the supply). When you (try to) play it is always something else that you played. You didn't play a BoM. Anything that cares about you playing a BoM does not see that you did; you played whatever you picked instead. This is true even for Throne Room. You choose a card in your hand; you can choose BoM, that's fine. Then you play it twice and oops what you are playing twice is somehow a Feast instead. BoM is the only thing like this and well it was the only way I could see to make BoM work.

(I will reply to this presuming that Throne Room causes two simultaneous effects, because otherwise I don't see that what you're saying here is relevant.)
"You cannot play a BoM". A BoM will never end up being played, no. But as you say "you (try to) play it". To me it's the same as gaining a Copper and then not gaining a Copper anyway because I Tradered it to a Silver. I could never trigger the Trader if I didn't first resolve a gaining effect! So you need to resolve a play-BoM effect to ever trigger the BoM's ability. If you never resolve an effect that actually lets you play (or "try-to-play") it, it never lets you turn it into something else. And I'm sorry, but I cannot see how Throning a card lets you resolve what happens when that card is played both times, before you actually play either one. To reiterate, when you trigger the two effects, all Throne Room knows is that it's "the card you chose". (It also is a BoM at that point, but that doesn't really matter for anything.)

For me the important things at this point are:

- If at all possible I want the rulebook to be correct. People in general go to the rulebook, not to ds.
- If at all possible I want zero other situations in the game to be affected by how this goes.
- If at all possible I do not want to devote much time to this. I don't want anyone to feel shortchanged here, I will devote some continuing tiny amount of time to this if need be. But uh it could just be eating up hours and I do not imagine it is confusing most people or making them demand rules justice. So if some time passes here before maximum possible satisfaction is achieved, I am okay with that.

I get that, and I don't want to go in circles with you. I'm trying to be as clear as possible. For what it's worth, when I read the FAQ in the manual for BoM and it said "If you use Throne Room etc to play a BoM multiple times, you only pick what to play it as the first time; the other times it is still copying the same card" - I immediately figured that that probably doesn't account for cards that trash themselves, how could it.

Anyway, a big part of the reason I want to understand this is to get my huge FAQ correct on BGG, because if I'm wrong here, I must be misunderstanding something that I previously thought I understood. This is actually a pretty important part of how Dominion's timing works. When I sat down to really figure out how this would work, I actually hoped I would get to the same conclusion as you have.

[Donald X.]

Okay, if it's two sequential things then it's even clearer that it's not a Feast on second play.

I don't see this at all. It seems like a really moot thing to be arguing; I am saying it's "now Feast twice" and you are saying it's "now Feast and simultaneously Feast." In the second case we need a timing rule and in the first we don't, otherwise they are the same.

To me it's the same as gaining a Copper and then not gaining a Copper anyway because I Tradered it to a Silver.

That seems like a reasonable way to think of it.

When it's time to play that Throne'd card a second time, we try to put into the play area, and then do what it does. BoM is the only card that may change in the middle. It makes us say, what is Throne doing exactly, and the answer only matters for this question. My initial feeling was that Throne locked in the card functionality. If you have Throned BoM's in a bunch of games, mostly it won't have been Feast, and it will have been locked in, so it will seem normal that Feast locks in, is my feeling. Well it would if you somehow heard about this ruling.

[Schneau]

I think I've produced a compelling counterargument. See previous posts. Short version here in reply to what you wrote: When you Throned the BoM, you Throned it as BoM, not Feast. It doesn't turn into a Feast until you play it. Throning it triggers two effects: playing the chosen card and playing the chosen card. You resolve one first, then the other. First you play the chosen card. At that point does the chosen card's abilites trigger. BoM actually has a before-play ability that triggers then: it lets you choose another action card to play it as. You choose Feast and then the card is played as Feast. You trash it, it turns back into a BoM. You then resolve "play the chosen card" again, which is now a BoM.

Just choosing a card does not make any of its abilities trigger, unless the card had a "when you choose this" ability. BoM's before-play ability doesn't trigger when it's chosen.

BoM says "play this as if it were..." Throne makes you play a card. So you play BoM as if it were a Feast. That means you played a Feast. You Throned a Feast, so you Feast twice. You didn't play a BoM; that would be playing BoM as BoM, not as Feast.

You have not convinced me to change this stance. The BoM card reverts to a BoM, before the second Feast, but you didn't Throne a BoM.

I agree entirely with this. But, then why does Procession + BoM-as-Fortress gain a $6 card, not a $5 card? You "Processioned a Fortress". Procession never sees a BoM, as you've said here. Actually, this problem occurs with any Procession + BoM. Let's say you Procession a BoM-as-Moat. The BoM-as-Moat goes to the trash, do you get a $3 card or a $6 card. I think it should be a $3 card.

[AJD]

Okay, if it's two sequential things then it's even clearer that it's not a Feast on second play.

I don't see this at all. It seems like a really moot thing to be arguing; I am saying it's "now Feast twice" and you are saying it's "now Feast and simultaneously Feast." In the second case we need a timing rule and in the first we don't, otherwise they are the same.

The timing rule already exists, though (as we know from "gain two Coppers"). And it's still hard for me to conceptualize why, if we read "play it twice" as "play it; play it again", the second iteration shouldn't discover that the played card is now a Band of Misfits, not a Feast, and (try to) play that. If the Throne Room's two plays are triggered simultaneously, that does seem to be consistent with everything else you've said about how Throne Room behaves, as well as the Procession-BoM-Fortress interaction.

When it's time to play that Throne'd card a second time, we try to put into the play area, and then do what it does. BoM is the only card that may change in the middle. It makes us say, what is Throne doing exactly, and the answer only matters for this question. My initial feeling was that Throne locked in the card functionality. If you have Throned BoM's in a bunch of games, mostly it won't have been Feast, and it will have been locked in, so it will seem normal that Feast locks in, is my feeling. Well it would if you somehow heard about this ruling.

Sure, though there are lots of cards whose effects when Throne Roomed are counterintuitive. It never would have occurred to me that Throne Room–Herbalist doesn't allow you to top-deck two treasures until I started reading online Dominion discussion.

[AJD]

(This may be splitting hairs though)

[GendoIkari]

I think this entire thread needs to be made more complicated by replacing all talk of Throne Room with Band of Misfits as Throne Room.

[Donald X.]

I agree entirely with this. But, then why does Procession + BoM-as-Fortress gain a $6 card, not a $5 card? You "Processioned a Fortress". Procession never sees a BoM, as you've said here. Actually, this problem occurs with any Procession + BoM. Let's say you Procession a BoM-as-Moat. The BoM-as-Moat goes to the trash, do you get a $3 card or a $6 card. I think it should be a $3 card.

Because that's a separate step on Procession.

[Donald X.]

The timing rule already exists, though (as we know from "gain two Coppers"). And it's still hard for me to conceptualize why, if we read "play it twice" as "play it; play it again", the second iteration shouldn't discover that the played card is now a Band of Misfits, not a Feast, and (try to) play that. If the Throne Room's two plays are triggered simultaneously, that does seem to be consistent with everything else you've said about how Throne Room behaves, as well as the Procession-BoM-Fortress interaction.

It's not "play it; then play it again." It's "play it twice." Again I do not see a difference between "play it twice" and "play it twice simultaneously" except for whether you invoke the timing rule.

I will see if my playtesters want to comment on Throne + BoM + Feast.

[werothegreat]

The timing rule already exists, though (as we know from "gain two Coppers"). And it's still hard for me to conceptualize why, if we read "play it twice" as "play it; play it again", the second iteration shouldn't discover that the played card is now a Band of Misfits, not a Feast, and (try to) play that. If the Throne Room's two plays are triggered simultaneously, that does seem to be consistent with everything else you've said about how Throne Room behaves, as well as the Procession-BoM-Fortress interaction.

It's not "play it; then play it again." It's "play it twice." Again I do not see a difference between "play it twice" and "play it twice simultaneously" except for whether you invoke the timing rule.

I will see if my playtesters want to comment on Throne + BoM + Feast.

"Play it twice" and "Play it twice simultaneously" do make a difference with cards like Pawn or Pearl Diver.  If my understanding is correct, with Pearl Diver, you draw a card, then look at the bottom, decide, then draw another card, look at the bottom again, decide again, as opposed to drawing two cards and looking at the bottom twice.

[AJD]

The timing rule already exists, though (as we know from "gain two Coppers"). And it's still hard for me to conceptualize why, if we read "play it twice" as "play it; play it again", the second iteration shouldn't discover that the played card is now a Band of Misfits, not a Feast, and (try to) play that. If the Throne Room's two plays are triggered simultaneously, that does seem to be consistent with everything else you've said about how Throne Room behaves, as well as the Procession-BoM-Fortress interaction.

It's not "play it; then play it again." It's "play it twice." Again I do not see a difference between "play it twice" and "play it twice simultaneously" except for whether you invoke the timing rule.

...I don't think you're disagreeing with me? What I'm saying is that your explanation of the meaning of "play it twice" is consistent with it meaning the same thing as "play it twice simultaneously" and isn't consistent with "play it; play it again".

[Schneau]

I agree entirely with this. But, then why does Procession + BoM-as-Fortress gain a $6 card, not a $5 card? You "Processioned a Fortress". Procession never sees a BoM, as you've said here. Actually, this problem occurs with any Procession + BoM. Let's say you Procession a BoM-as-Moat. The BoM-as-Moat goes to the trash, do you get a $3 card or a $6 card. I think it should be a $3 card.

Because that's a separate step on Procession.

Sure, but how does Procession know it costs $5? Procession played a Fortress - it never saw a BoM, it saw a Fortress. It became a BoM when it hit the trash pile (or maybe when it hits your hand), but I feel like Procession doesn't know that it's a BoM - it thinks it's a Fortress.

[GendoIkari]

I agree entirely with this. But, then why does Procession + BoM-as-Fortress gain a $6 card, not a $5 card? You "Processioned a Fortress". Procession never sees a BoM, as you've said here. Actually, this problem occurs with any Procession + BoM. Let's say you Procession a BoM-as-Moat. The BoM-as-Moat goes to the trash, do you get a $3 card or a $6 card. I think it should be a $3 card.

Because that's a separate step on Procession.

Sure, but how does Procession know it costs $5? Procession played a Fortress - it never saw a BoM, it saw a Fortress. It became a BoM when it hit the trash pile (or maybe when it hits your hand), but I feel like Procession doesn't know that it's a BoM - it thinks it's a Fortress.

Here's my thinking on that. Procession indeed doesn't know that BoM exists... it thinks it played a Fortress, like you say. But, it doesn't know (or care) what Fortress cost when it was played. When it gets to the "costing $1 more" step, at that time it needs to check the cost. So it goes to where Fortress now is, and checks the cost. And it sees $5. It also has now changed names, but it doesn't care about that.

Say instead of BoM, there were a card/effect in play that causes the cost to be changed in the middle of an action. It could happen... "Reaction Bridge: when a card is trashed, you may reveal this from hand. If you do, the trashed card costs $1 less until end of turn." Ok, so you play Procession on Fortress, then when Fortress is trashed, you reveal Reaction Bridge. Now, Procession needs to gain a card costing $1 more... well it checks, and Fortress now only costs $3, so that's what matters.

Man, to be honest, I don't like that interpretation. Based on the blue dog rule, I would say that "Gain an Action card costing exactly $1 more than it" means "Gain an Action card costing exactly $1 more than the card that was trashed." Well, the card that was trashed cost $4 at the moment it was trashed, and I think that's all that should matter. It's not "costing $1 more than whatever the card that was trashed now costs." It's how much did the trashed card cost. But, I can live with the notion that changes in cost between the time of trashing and the time of gaining do matter.

[AJD]

But, I can live with the notion that changes in cost between the time of trashing and the time of gaining do matter.

This already (well, not with trashing) affects Smugglers.

You buy Province, I play Highway-Highway-Smugglers, I get the Province, because Smugglers doesn't care what Province cost when you gained it, only what it costs now.

[GendoIkari]

But, I can live with the notion that changes in cost between the time of trashing and the time of gaining do matter.

This already (well, not with trashing) affects Smugglers.

You buy Province, I play Highway-Highway-Smugglers, I get the Province, because Highway doesn't care what Province cost when you gained it, only what it costs now.

Excellent point.

[Jeebus]

Because that's a separate step on Procession.

Sure, but how does Procession know it costs $5? Procession played a Fortress - it never saw a BoM, it saw a Fortress. It became a BoM when it hit the trash pile (or maybe when it hits your hand), but I feel like Procession doesn't know that it's a BoM - it thinks it's a Fortress.

Here's my thinking on that. Procession indeed doesn't know that BoM exists... it thinks it played a Fortress, like you say. But, it doesn't know (or care) what Fortress cost when it was played. When it gets to the "costing $1 more" step, at that time it needs to check the cost. So it goes to where Fortress now is, and checks the cost. And it sees $5. It also has now changed names, but it doesn't care about that.

To my way of looking at it, it's not that it doesn't care about the cost of the card it's playing. It could have. It could have said: "You may play an Action card costing $3 from your hand twice." Now the instruction has to check the cost in order to trigger. But once it triggers, the card you chose (whatever it was) will be played twice! Even if it changes name, text, type or cost. Procession, like Throne Room, cares about the card you chose. The actual Procession doesn't check cost, so it doesn't care about the name, text, type or cost. Just that it's the card you chose to play. That also applies in the instructions following.
"Trash it." It refers to the card you chose and then played, whatever stats it may have now.
"Gain an Action card costing exactly 1 Coin more than it." It refers to the card you chose and then played and then trashed, whatever stats it may have now.

That was the big discussion over Ironworks + Trader, or part it. A lot of people thought that Trader substituted what you gained with a Silver. If it did, then Ironwork's "if it is an..." would refer to the gained card which is now Silver. But since Trader actually cancelled the whole gaining effect and instead made you do something else (which happened to be a new gaining effect, but could have been something else), then the first part of Ironworks ("gain a card costing up to 4 Coins") hadn't happened, so "if it is an..." had nothing to refer to.

The other part of that discussion was whether "it" refered to the printed card you chose to gain (meaning for instance "Great Hall" with its type, text and cost), or it refers to the gained card. The ruling was the latter. This is the "blue dog rule" that GendoIkari talks about.

Man, to be honest, I don't like that interpretation. Based on the blue dog rule, I would say that "Gain an Action card costing exactly $1 more than it" means "Gain an Action card costing exactly $1 more than the card that was trashed." Well, the card that was trashed cost $4 at the moment it was trashed, and I think that's all that should matter. It's not "costing $1 more than whatever the card that was trashed now costs." It's how much did the trashed card cost. But, I can live with the notion that changes in cost between the time of trashing and the time of gaining do matter.

I don't see that the "blue dog rule" says anything about the stats on the card it refers to. It just says that "it" is the physical card you gained. Similarly, Procession refers to the physical card you trashed. But nowhere does it say that the cost of that card (the card you trashed) that Procession now checks, was the cost when it was trashed, and not the current cost of that card. See also Smuggler, as was said.

So: We know that effects referring to a card, only check the current stats of that card. That's part of the reason that I say that Throne Room + BoM (Feast) lets you choose a new card the second time BoM is played.

[Jeebus]

Okay, if it's two sequential things then it's even clearer that it's not a Feast on second play.

I don't see this at all. It seems like a really moot thing to be arguing; I am saying it's "now Feast twice" and you are saying it's "now Feast and simultaneously Feast." In the second case we need a timing rule and in the first we don't, otherwise they are the same.

I don't understand most of that. If it's two sequential things, then it's "play it, then play it again". The second one isn't even triggered until after we have fully resolved the first one. And what I am saying is that it is not Feast, it's just "the card you chose". If you think I'm saying it's Feast, then it's clear you don't understand my reasoning.

I'd really wish you'd reply to what I'm concretely saying, such as this:

A) A card gives you an instruction when you play it.

B) That instruction then triggers, but isn't necessarily resolved. For instance Witch: Each other player gains a Curse. Let's say there are three other players. Whether this is three gaining effects at once, or three after each other, they have to be resolved after each other. If it's three gaining effects at once, all three effects are triggered before either one of them are resolved.

C) "Play it twice" triggers two play-card effects.

D) Either both effects are triggered at once, so that it means "play it twice, simultaneously", or one is triggered now and the other one is triggered after, so that it means "play it, then play it again". A third way of looking at it (although it seems wrong to me), since you compared to Merchant Ship, is that the second effect is now set up to happen after the first one. In that case it would be the same, the second one is triggered then resolved, after the first one is resolved.

E) In either case, the two effects have to be resolved sequentially.

F) Similar to how Tradering a Copper to a Silver can only happen when you try to gain the Copper, BoM's ability itself can't be triggered until you try to play the BoM.

G) You try to play the chosen card (the BoM) with Throne Room when the play-card effect is resolved, not when it's triggered.

H) Therefore, the BoM is not played as a Feast (in fact it's not a Feast) until you try to play the card. No matter what kind of timing we use, the second play-the-chosen-card happens after you have fully resolved the first.

You seem to be saying that even if Throne Room triggers one play-card now and one set up for later, it somehow knows that it's a Feast it's supposed to play. But at that point, when "setting up" (i.e. triggering) the effects, we haven't even chosen the Feast yet, because we haven't actually tried to play the card yet.

[Donald X.]

I will see if my playtesters want to comment on Throne + BoM + Feast.

Sir Martin has pointed out that you can reason that, the second time, you get nothing; BoM is in the trash, not in play, and whatever you pick for it to be, it will instantly stop being it.

[Donald X.]

...I don't think you're disagreeing with me? What I'm saying is that your explanation of the meaning of "play it twice" is consistent with it meaning the same thing as "play it twice simultaneously" and isn't consistent with "play it; play it again".

This continues to feel moot. We simultaneously trigger two plays of it. But we don't simultaneously trigger two plays of it at the same time. We simultaneously trigger two plays of it in sequence. It's identical except that you don't get to pick what order to do the two identical things.

We simultaneously commit to playing Feast at 1 PM and playing Feast at 2 PM. We don't commit to playing Feast twice at 1 PM and then push one back due to the scheduling conflict. We also don't play Feast at 1 PM, then see what we want to do next and realize it's playing Feast again.

[Donald X.]

I'd really wish you'd reply to what I'm concretely saying, such as this:

Sorry, I do not feel like I have been dodging anything.

A) A card gives you an instruction when you play it.

Not all instructions happen when cards are played. For example Peddler has a rule that functions when it's in the supply.

G) You try to play the chosen card (the BoM) with Throne Room when the play-card effect is resolved, not when it's triggered.

Treating it like Trader, when you *would* play Band of Misfits, you *instead* play another card. That happens *before* playing the card. Similarly Trader happens *before* gaining.

H) Therefore, the BoM is not played as a Feast (in fact it's not a Feast) until you try to play the card. No matter what kind of timing we use, the second play-the-chosen-card happens after you have fully resolved the first.

BoM was played as Feast, I don't imagine the card can work otherwise. With Trader, you gained Silver, not the Copper bought, in no sense did you gain Copper.

[AJD]

I will see if my playtesters want to comment on Throne + BoM + Feast.

Sir Martin has pointed out that you can reason that, the second time, you get nothing; BoM is in the trash, not in play, and whatever you pick for it to be, it will instantly stop being it.

The text of BoM isn't "while this is in play"; it's "until this leaves play". So really you might think that, instead of instantly stopping being what you pick, it'll actually stay what you pick forever (or until some wacky Graverobber shenanigans... which is absolute madness).

[engineer]

Man, I do not know why you guys have to make this so complicated.  Donald's explanation makes sense.  Think of it like a program: when a card is played, its instructions are loaded into the game state and executed to the extent possible.  TR just instructs you to execute those instructions to the extent possible twice. 

In this model, BoM simply has no instructions to execute upon play.  It immediately adopts the information of some other card when it's played, and that other card's instructions are loaded up and executed.  In this case, that other card is a feast.  Because of the TR, the feast's instructions are executed twice.  It doesn't matter that the BoM reverts to a BoM when it's in the trash.  The feast's instructions were already loaded up to be played twice. 

There is no synchronicity issue here.  Cards don't get played from the trash.  More specifically, when you TR a feast, you do NOT "play it once, and then play it again from the trash".  You just play it twice.  The first time you gain a card and trash the feast, and the second time you just gain a card, because you can't trash the feast if it's already in the trash.  It doesn't matter if the feast magically morphed into a unicorn when it hit the trash.

Now, if you had some hypothetical card that said "You may play an Action card from your hand twice. Trash it. Gain an Action card costing exactly $1 more than it." then it should matter that the BoM reverted to $5 in the trash, because when you execute these instructions, you look at the card in the trash to find its price.  Oh look, we do have that card, it's called procession, and that's exactly how it works.

[Jeebus]

Sorry, I do not feel like I have been dodging anything.

I'm sure you haven't on purpose, but you have though.

G) You try to play the chosen card (the BoM) with Throne Room when the play-card effect is resolved, not when it's triggered.

Treating it like Trader, when you *would* play Band of Misfits, you *instead* play another card. That happens *before* playing the card. Similarly Trader happens *before* gaining.

Yes, agreed. But it still doesn't happen until you get to the part when you resolve the play-card effect!

Take Trader and Possession. Both have a when-would-gain effect. Let's say you are Possessed, and you have a Trader, and you gain a Province. Possession's when-would-gain now triggers, but let's say you are made to reveal Trader before Possession's effect resolves. Now you gain a Silver and not a Province. Possession's effect triggers and resolves on the Silver, so the Possessor gains it instead. Possession's effect still needs to be resolved on the Province though. The Possessor was hoping to get that Province too. But the effect that was actually triggered was referring to a specific card (a Province) that was being gained at the moment. It's no longer being gained, so that ability doesn't work.

The point is that Possession's effect (triggered on the Province gain) was triggered, but failed when it was resolved. So a triggered effect doesn't necessarily happen according to how the conditions were when it was triggered. Throne Room triggers two effects, but resolves them after each other. That much we agree on I think. It's when the effect resolves that we *would* play the card, not when it's triggered! And at that point we check the card.

H) Therefore, the BoM is not played as a Feast (in fact it's not a Feast) until you try to play the card. No matter what kind of timing we use, the second play-the-chosen-card happens after you have fully resolved the first.

BoM was played as Feast, I don't imagine the card can work otherwise. With Trader, you gained Silver, not the Copper bought, in no sense did you gain Copper.

I'm not saying that you played BoM either. I'm saying that you chose BoM. Then you tried to play BoM and it turns out you played Feast. Then you tried to play the card again and now it matters what it is. If it's a BoM, you tried to play BoM and it turns out you played [action card].

[Jeebus]

Man, I do not know why you guys have to make this so complicated.  Donald's explanation makes sense.  Think of it like a program: when a card is played, its instructions are loaded into the game state and executed to the extent possible.  TR just instructs you to execute those instructions to the extent possible twice. 

Yes, but the instructions are not "play Feast twice", it's "play it twice". I can't be "play Feast twice" because you haven't chosen Feast yet! What it actually is, is "play the chosen card twice". Then you play it. Then, after that, you play it again.

The first time you play it (BoM), you actually just "try to play" it. What you actually end up playing is Feast. At this point the second "play the chosen card" is already queued up to happen, but doesn't change in any way just because you chose Feast now! When you actually get to the second "play the chosen card", it all depends on what that card is now. Almost always it's still the first card you chose to play (e.g. Smithy), because it's still in play. But in the case of Feast, it's now not Feast. The second "play the chosen card" cannot know that it was Feast, and doesn't care. It just cares about playing the card. If the card is a BoM, then again you will "try to play" it and instead play something else.

Maybe that was as clearly as I've ever said it.

[eHalcyon]

I will see if my playtesters want to comment on Throne + BoM + Feast.

Sir Martin has pointed out that you can reason that, the second time, you get nothing; BoM is in the trash, not in play, and whatever you pick for it to be, it will instantly stop being it.

The text of BoM isn't "while this is in play"; it's "until this leaves play". So really you might think that, instead of instantly stopping being what you pick, it'll actually stay what you pick forever (or until some wacky Graverobber shenanigans... which is absolute madness).

If it is no longer in play, one would assume that it left play at some point.

[AJD]

I will see if my playtesters want to comment on Throne + BoM + Feast.

Sir Martin has pointed out that you can reason that, the second time, you get nothing; BoM is in the trash, not in play, and whatever you pick for it to be, it will instantly stop being it.

The text of BoM isn't "while this is in play"; it's "until this leaves play". So really you might think that, instead of instantly stopping being what you pick, it'll actually stay what you pick forever (or until some wacky Graverobber shenanigans... which is absolute madness).

If it is no longer in play, one would assume that it left play at some point.

But if BoM were to be played as Feast and then not enter play (because of the lose-track principle), then it never leaves play after becoming Feast and therefore never turns back into BoM. (Which is madness.)