Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers  (Read 2409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2923
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3702
    • View Profile
Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« on: October 03, 2012, 05:24:03 pm »
+2

In <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/863415/can-you-smuggle-a-mercenary-or-spoils-via-smuggler">this BGG thread</a>, Donald makes the following ruling:

If your opponent gained multiple $6-or-less cards on their previous turn, some of which have no copies available in the Supply (because the pile is empty, or because the wrong Ruins is on top, or because they gained Spoils or Prizes or whatever), and you play Smugglers, you're not required to gain a card. You can instead choose to gain a copy of the unavailable card, and fail to do so. So e.g. if you buy a Cache from the Black Market, and I Golem into a Smugglers, I don't have to gain a Copper; I can try to smuggle the Cache and gain nothing.

This means Smugglers differs from Workshop in this respect (if the Estate pile is empty, you can't play Workshop, choose Estate, and gain nothing) and resembles Tournament (if the Duchy pile is empty, you can play Tournament, discard Province, choose Duchy instead of Prize, and gain nothing).

I dunno, this ruling surprised me, anyway. Figured I'd post it here in case people hadn't seen it yet.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2012, 05:26:36 pm by AJD »
Logged

polonkus

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 222
  • Respect: +114
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2012, 07:41:19 pm »
0

Ah, Donald. Always making up new rules.
Almost as if he's not such a forward-thinking design genius after all.
I note that the current isotropic behavior contradicts the ruling here: http://boardgamegeek.com/article/10185678#10185678

User was temp banned for this post: "second offense".
« Last Edit: October 03, 2012, 10:01:54 pm by theory »
Logged
This user is banned.

pingpongsam

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1743
  • Shuffle iT Username: pingpongsam
  • Respect: +767
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2012, 10:28:20 pm »
0

Polonkus was banned for that or was the bannable content edited out?
Logged
You are the brashest scum player on f.ds.

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2012, 10:33:01 pm »
+1

Plunk us has a history of rude posts.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

plunkus

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2012, 11:09:34 pm »
0

Theory, I've had it with your bullshit fellation of DXV and the goons at Goko.
No need to bother banning this account, I won't be back.
Good luck with the vegetarianism.

Bye.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 08:01:04 am by theory »
Logged
This user is banned.

Robz888

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2618
  • Shuffle iT Username: Robz888
  • Respect: +3299
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2012, 11:15:13 pm »
+6

"Theory, I hate you! BLEEP you, man! And good luck with your diet."

Sorry, I thought this was the thread where we angrily leave the forum, swear at theory, and then offer him mild words of encouragement.
Logged
I have been forced to accept that lackluster play is a town tell for you.

HiveMindEmulator

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2222
  • Respect: +2090
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2012, 11:27:54 pm »
0

I think the difference is that Workshop asks you to pick a card from the supply, whereas the other stuff (Tournament, Wishing Well, Smugglers) asks you to pick a card from some other set of cards.
Logged

jotheonah

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 983
  • Respect: +942
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2012, 11:54:39 pm »
+12

Honestly, the ruling did strike me as a bit arbitrary.

But there's so many reasons not to care. Like how often does this ACTUALLY come up? 95% of the time if you don't want to gain anything, you just don't play the Smugglers. In the cases where you DO (Golem, blind draw off a TR'd TR) it's very unlikely that (A) your opponent gained a card from somewhere other than the supply last turn and (B) they also gained an undesirable card from the supply.

In the tiny fraction of games where this ruling is an issue, unless it's tournament play, you can choose to adjudicate it however you want with your friends. So, and I think DXV would say this too, in the grand scheme* of things, this ruling effects no one's life very much at all.


*Grand Scheme of Things- Action - 5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
+1 Buy

At the start of your Clean-Up phase, you may place an Action card from play back on your deck.
_______________
You may not buy this card if you have any Coppers in play.
Logged
"I know old meta, and joth is useless day 1 but awesome town day 3 and on." --Teproc

Brando Commando

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 255
  • Respect: +112
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #8 on: October 04, 2012, 11:00:17 am »
0

In the tiny fraction of games where this ruling is an issue, unless it's tournament play, you can choose to adjudicate it however you want with your friends. So, and I think DXV would say this too, in the grand scheme* of things, this ruling effects no one's life very much at all.

*Grand Scheme of Things- Action - 5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
+1 Buy

At the start of your Clean-Up phase, you may place an Action card from play back on your deck.
_______________
You may not buy this card if you have any Coppers in play.

+1 is not sufficient for my appreciation of this.
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1261
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #9 on: October 04, 2012, 01:29:58 pm »
0

Doesn't this fail the "strictly better than X" test, where X is treasury or market?

Still funny though.

Edit: Doh!  No copper clause.  I ignored the line because I thought it was a sig.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 01:32:17 pm by Captain_Frisk »
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

Squidd

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 173
  • Respect: +566
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #10 on: October 04, 2012, 01:30:20 pm »
0

Every time I'm behind one in traffic I want to know what a Grand Caravan does. I think it might be :

Action-Duration - $6
+1 Card
Now and at the start of your next turn: +1 Card, +1 Action
_____________
You may not buy this if you have more than 2 cards in play.
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8078
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #11 on: October 04, 2012, 02:02:34 pm »
+1

The word is "fellatio."
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8078
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Prepare to be boarded!
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #12 on: October 04, 2012, 02:05:34 pm »
+1

Every time I'm behind one in traffic I want to know what a Grand Caravan does. I think it might be :

Action-Duration - $6
+1 Card
Now and at the start of your next turn: +1 Card, +1 Action
_____________
You may not buy this if you have more than 2 cards in play.

After the first couple, you'd have to Smuggle or Highway/Workshop them.  I mean, the first one would have to be bought with two Golds, or a Baron and a Silver.  Or a Death Cart and a Copper.  I sense anti-self-synergy.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #13 on: October 04, 2012, 08:00:41 pm »
+1

Plunk us has a history of rude posts.

That post was certainly rude / ill-advised, but I'm a bit surprised that's even temp-bannable.  The second post was certainly bannable but the first was just typical internet jerkwaddery.

Seems more like theory got sick of the guy than anything.  I would hope it's more than that.  If this community gets too large, theory's gonna have a full-time job just banning rude members. :)
Logged

TfT

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Unexpected (to me) ruling on Smugglers
« Reply #14 on: October 04, 2012, 08:09:38 pm »
0

Speaking of having too many members, well, Goko is good for something.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.119 seconds with 21 queries.