Print

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

[zporiri]

with the insane amount of play testing that Donald X and others do, i think it is insulting to say that there is a misprint. i dont think it's possible with the thousands of hours they put in

[mnavratil]

Or you just draw a Gold with your +1 Card, and don't want another one which is behind it as it will make you overplay for Province.

The best example of this would be treasure map.  You know that the next 4 cards of your deck are golds.  You may only want one of those golds, and intentionally guessing Curse will result in a guaranteed province next turn.

Or leaving a copper there with Cartographer so that Loan will trash it.

[eHalcyon]

Is it significant that Market Square's reaction triggers on 'When one of your cards is trashed' rather than 'When you trash a card'?

Maybe not the intention, but I think this wording will help alleviate confusion from people playing Swindler.  "I played Swindler and trashed your card, so I can reveal Market Square now, right?"  Nope, not right.

[polonkus]

with the insane amount of play testing that Donald X and others do, i think it is insulting to say that there is a misprint. i dont think it's possible with the thousands of hours they put in

O rly.
How about the TR/KC + duration brouhaha.
noob.

[LastFootnote]

with the insane amount of play testing that Donald X and others do, i think it is insulting to say that there is a misprint. i dont think it's possible with the thousands of hours they put in

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

[jamuspsi]

re wishing well intentional failure: you are down to 6 cards in your deck.  You know that you have not played your counting house.  You need one more card from wishing well to hit $8 this turn.  If you guess correctly, you'll force a reshuffle when you draw your next hand, and your coppers won't be in the discard anymore.

[Donald X.]

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

Really you were insulting my ability to proofread. And hey there was an error caught at the last minute by Georg, the German translator (Hunting Grounds said "when this is trashed" rather than "when you trash this").

[jamuspsi]

Is it significant that Market Square's reaction triggers on 'When one of your cards is trashed' rather than 'When you trash a card'?

Maybe not the intention, but I think this wording will help alleviate confusion from people playing Swindler.  "I played Swindler and trashed your card, so I can reveal Market Square now, right?"  Nope, not right.

I think that's specifically that each other player reveals the top card and trashes it- the victim does the trashing anyway.

[LastFootnote]

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

Really you were insulting my ability to proofread. And hey there was an error caught at the last minute by Georg, the German translator (Hunting Grounds said "when this is trashed" rather than "when you trash this").

Hey dude, I didn't start this thread. Also, I have no idea how the proofreading/printing process works. For all I knew, you OKed a bunch of lines of text and they got added onto the actual cards later. All I knew is that the thread said 'misprint' and some dude thought it meant 'badly designed'. So I clarified. Sorry you felt insulted.

[polonkus]

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

Really you were insulting my ability to proofread. And hey there was an error caught at the last minute by Georg, the German translator (Hunting Grounds said "when this is trashed" rather than "when you trash this").

Hey dude, I didn't start this thread. Also, I have no idea how the proofreading/printing process works. For all I knew, you OKed a bunch of lines of text and they got added onto the actual cards later. All I knew is that the thread said 'misprint' and some dude thought it meant 'badly designed'.

I think that was the trademark DXV "humor"...

[blueblimp]

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

Really you were insulting my ability to proofread. And hey there was an error caught at the last minute by Georg, the German translator (Hunting Grounds said "when this is trashed" rather than "when you trash this").

Hey dude, I didn't start this thread. Also, I have no idea how the proofreading/printing process works. For all I knew, you OKed a bunch of lines of text and they got added onto the actual cards later. All I knew is that the thread said 'misprint' and some dude thought it meant 'badly designed'. So I clarified. Sorry you felt insulted.

I actually read his post as saying "you're not insulting my design skills, you're insulting my proof-reading skills, and proof-reading errors do happen".

FWIW, I made an off-hand "misprint" comment in another thread (about the $4 Knight), but I didn't mean much by it. Just was a surprise, is all.

[Donald X.]

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

Really you were insulting my ability to proofread. And hey there was an error caught at the last minute by Georg, the German translator (Hunting Grounds said "when this is trashed" rather than "when you trash this").

Hey dude, I didn't start this thread. Also, I have no idea how the proofreading/printing process works. For all I knew, you OKed a bunch of lines of text and they got added onto the actual cards later. All I knew is that the thread said 'misprint' and some dude thought it meant 'badly designed'. So I clarified. Sorry you felt insulted.

Oops, when I said "you" I meant Beyond Awesome. I do not feel insulted, man, Beyond Awesome will have to work harder than that.

[LastFootnote]

I actually read his post as saying "you're not insulting my design skills, you're insulting my proof-reading skills, and proof-reading errors do happen".

Yeah, good call. I need to lighten up. It's been a stressful week.

Oops, when I said "you" I meant Beyond Awesome. I do not feel insulted, man, Beyond Awesome will have to work harder than that.

Thanks for clarifying!

[Beyond Awesome]

'Misprinted' does not mean 'badly designed'. Printing errors happen. Even if Donald and the playtesters perfected a card, it could conceivably be misprinted. You can stop feeling offended now.

Really you were insulting my ability to proofread. And hey there was an error caught at the last minute by Georg, the German translator (Hunting Grounds said "when this is trashed" rather than "when you trash this").

Hey dude, I didn't start this thread. Also, I have no idea how the proofreading/printing process works. For all I knew, you OKed a bunch of lines of text and they got added onto the actual cards later. All I knew is that the thread said 'misprint' and some dude thought it meant 'badly designed'. So I clarified. Sorry you felt insulted.

Oops, when I said "you" I meant Beyond Awesome. I do not feel insulted, man, Beyond Awesome will have to work harder than that.

No insult meant. Misprints happen all the time. It happens with other games--see the Underground River in Betrayal on House on the Hill. Even Magic has misprints here and there. In Zendikar block, a card had the Artifact type accidentally left off. That's a big misprint. Also, Donald, I have heard stories of where edits are okayed, but then they reverted back to a pre-edit version, which would actually be the publisher fault or someone else's fault.

[Donald X.]

No insult meant. Misprints happen all the time. It happens with other games--see the Underground River in Betrayal on House on the Hill. Even Magic has misprints here and there. In Zendikar block, a card had the Artifact type accidentally left off. That's a big misprint. Also, Donald, I have heard stories of where edits are okayed, but then they reverted back to a pre-edit version, which would actually be the publisher fault or someone else's fault.

Oh the Dark Ages rulebook does have a misprint. Two coin symbols are missing in some examples. It was caught too late to fix. It had been correct and I didn't catch it when it changed.

We have had a few things over the years but have done well misprint-wise.

Anyway Rebuild is as intended, I really did say to put "cheaper" on Catacombs, and one of the Knights costs $4 somehow, even though that means the randomizer doesn't match it (also true for the Knight that's a Victory card).

[Razzishi]

One of the definitions of "cheap" is "of inferior quality" (at least, according to m-w.com), so I think when you trash Catacombs you can gain any card that is recognizable as being of lower quality, even if it costs the same or more.

Ok, not really.  But it seems ultra-imprecise to use cheap there. 

[engineer]

Is $4P cheaper than $5?

[Archetype]

Is $4P cheaper than $5?

Money wise? Yes

Potion wise? No

Potion scale on a different ladder than regular cards, but people refer to a Potion Cost as being ~$2.

So usually, no

[engineer]

Is $4P cheaper than $5?

Money wise? Yes

Potion wise? No

Potion scale on a different ladder than regular cards, but people refer to a Potion Cost as being ~$2.

So usually, mo

Wait, so then is $0P cheaper than $5?  Can I get a transmute when I chuck my catacombs?

[Archetype]

I'm assuming no, but you're going to have to ask Donald about that one.

[Beyond Awesome]

And, this is why I don't like the word cheaper, because cheaper doesn't necessarily mean costing less.

[WanderingWinder]

I'm assuming no, but you're going to have to ask Donald about that one.

No, he doesn't. It is clearly not lower-costing. 3<3p, but nothing with a potion is ever less than anything with. As is quite clear from the alchemy rulebook.

[engineer]

Well, I'm sure that's in the FAQ.  I do agree that "cheaper" is a bit imprecise, though it has the advantage of being less wordy.  I respect Donald's oft-maligned desire to prize clarity and simplicity in the card text.  This one seems like a push to me.

[dondon151]

Anyway Rebuild is as intended, I really did say to put "cheaper" on Catacombs, and one of the Knights costs $4 somehow, even though that means the randomizer doesn't match it (also true for the Knight that's a Victory card).

Is there a mechanics reason why the "cheaper" wording is preferred over "costing less than?"

[Archetype]

I'm assuming no, but you're going to have to ask Donald about that one.

No, he doesn't. It is clearly not lower-costing. 3<3p, but nothing with a potion is ever less than anything with. As is quite clear from the alchemy rulebook.

Huh, yeah that makes sense. I actually dont own Alchemy, so I was going off of what the ruling would most likely be