Print

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

[BiggerOil]

You're going to draw both of the cards anyway. Does it make any difference at all? Are there any edge cases?

[Kirian]

Presumably you mean for the active player.  I can't think of an edge case but there probably is one out there.  However, the reason for the wording is twofold.  First, the paragraph would get too complex if you make the active player special.  But more importantly, it requires players to remember the order they were drawn in.  No card in the game forces that.

[gman314]

But on isotropic, it could maybe just put the cards back automatically rather than prompting you to reorder therm.

[jsh357]

Caravan is a good edge case. 

[sudgy]

Caravan is a good edge case.

How does that work?

[Donald X.]

You're going to draw both of the cards anyway. Does it make any difference at all? Are there any edge cases?

If you were the only player doing this, it would be phrased like Catacombs; there's no point making you pick an order when you're just about to draw them (yes you could hypothetically make a card like "when you would draw a card, you may instead something something"). Oracle affects everyone though. Given that, I do not have a better way to phrase it. Handling the person playing it separately from the other players would be confusing and too wordy to fit.

Doug wanted to be precise and so was. And hey for all he knew I would spring "when you would draw a card" on him someday.

[jsh357]

Caravan is a good edge case.

How does that work?

I see why you're confused now--you're referring strictly to the active player.  In this case, no, I don't think it matters.

[heatthespurs]

How great that we finally have a question in this forum that has no edge case answers...

[SirPeebles]

The closest is that your opponent can gain a Gold by discarding a Tunnel.  If somehow a new card existed which cause you to, say gain an Embassy instead, then the active player would gain a Silver, and could topdeck it with a Watchtower.

[serakfalcon]

Doug wanted to be precise and so was. And hey for all he knew I would spring "when you would draw a card" on him someday.

This

[pinkymadigan]

Doug wanted to be precise and so was. And hey for all he knew I would spring "when you would draw a card" on him someday.

This

A fine example of future proofing in programming.

[Tables]

Doug wanted to be precise and so was. And hey for all he knew I would spring "when you would draw a card" on him someday.

This

A fine example of future proofing in programming.

Goko does the same. It's less about future proofing, more about doing what the card says, I think.

[pinkymadigan]

Doug wanted to be precise and so was. And hey for all he knew I would spring "when you would draw a card" on him someday.

This

A fine example of future proofing in programming.

Goko does the same. It's less about future proofing, more about doing what the card says, I think.

Yes, but they have started to add shortcuts (like Moat). And I think that while they make sense, there is more room for error when you start doing things like this. If you don't want unintended consequences, don't make cards do things they shouldn't, ya' know?

I just don't want to see things 'stream-lined' against the rules and that wind up breaking some edge case that's never been thought up before.

[AdamH]

How great that we finally have a question in this forum that has no edge case answers...

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1204.msg176945#msg176945

[popsofctown]

The closest is that your opponent can gain a Gold by discarding a Tunnel.  If somehow a new card existed which cause you to, say gain an Embassy instead, then the active player would gain a Silver, and could topdeck it with a Watchtower.

This is good work.  A bit more organic than potential "if you would draw a card" effects.

[AdamH]

How great that we finally have a question in this forum that has no edge case answers...

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1204.msg176945#msg176945

We did it, guys!

It's not actually an edge case! The astute reader will read the following posts (so I don't have to re-post them here) and discover that any "edge case" to this situation involves suboptimal play by the opponent.

[Kirian]

The closest is that your opponent can gain a Gold by discarding a Tunnel.  If somehow a new card existed which cause you to, say gain an Embassy instead, then the active player would gain a Silver, and could topdeck it with a Watchtower.

This is good work.  A bit more organic than potential "if you would draw a card" effects.

New rule:  Solving an edge case may not involve making up a card out of whole cloth.

[SirPeebles]

The closest is that your opponent can gain a Gold by discarding a Tunnel.  If somehow a new card existed which cause you to, say gain an Embassy instead, then the active player would gain a Silver, and could topdeck it with a Watchtower.

This is good work.  A bit more organic than potential "if you would draw a card" effects.

New rule:  Solving an edge case may not involve making up a card out of whole cloth.

Hmm...

Cloth Trader
$4 Action-Reaction

(something)
---
When you would gain a Treasure card, you may reveal this from your hand.  If you do, instead gain a Treasure card costing less.

There.  Now just reveal Cloth Trader to gain an IGG rather than a Gold after discarding a Tunnel to your opponent's Oracle.

[heron]

The only way that the reordering of cards from oracle on isotropic has any effect is if you take too long and your opponent force resigns you.

[HiveMindEmulator]

How great that we finally have a question in this forum that has no edge case answers...

We have now edge-cased the maxim that all questions on this forum have edge cases!