Print

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

[Jeebus]

Not really a rules question, but this seemed like the best place.

Donald, Beggar might be the one card you want to change in future editions. It doesn't say "you may discard this from your hand". Strictly speaking that's a mistake, and you've taken care to have "from your hand" everywhere else, but of course in practice nobody will misunderstand how to use it. So it wouldn't really be a rules change, just a correction.

[enfynet]

Actually, Market Square is the only one that says "from your hand."

[ftl]

It seems like for Market Square there could be some confusion IF that clause weren't there - it means that if you play a bunch of market squares and then a chapel, you can't discard the market square from play to gain gold.

But is there that confusion with beggar? I mean, where else would you discard it from? It can't be in play because it's not your turn, you can't really discard things from the discard pile?

[Jeebus]

Actually, Market Square is the only one that says "from your hand."

"Discard", yes. But all Reaction cards (except Tunnel) tell you to do something "from your hand". Lots and lots of other cards also says "from your hand". Explorer is one example.

It seems like for Market Square there could be some confusion IF that clause weren't there - it means that if you play a bunch of market squares and then a chapel, you can't discard the market square from play to gain gold.

But is there that confusion with beggar? I mean, where else would you discard it from? It can't be in play because it's not your turn, you can't really discard things from the discard pile?

Why is the clause there on Moat, Horse Traders, Fool's Gold, etc? Because if Moat had said just "reveal this", you could reveal it from anywhere - your discard pile, Supply, Trash, a mat... There's no rule that says you can't reveal or move cards that are anywhere, as long as they're not lost track of at least. There are cards that let you do things when it's not your turn, there's a card that lets you reveal cards in your discard pile (Tunnel), there are cards that let you move things out of Trash. Etc.

When it comes to discarding, it's true it often doesn't say "from your hand", because that's the default. But those instructions are telling you to discard other cards. Without specifying where those cards are, the default is that they're in your hand. Beggar on the other hand is telling you to discard itself, and we know where it is. If it happens to not be in your hand at the point when it triggers, it's still saying you may discard it (because it's missing the clause).

[sudgy]

I'll just mention that Donald has said that he never wants to change things in newer publications.

[werothegreat]

I'll just mention that Donald has said that he never wants to change things in newer publications.

Which I think is kind of a shame.  I really don't see a problem with a Second Edition putting a "may" on Throne Room.

[AJD]

Which I think is kind of a shame.  I really don't see a problem with a Second Edition putting a "may" on Throne Room.

The problem is that then people who had First Edition cards but had heard of the Second Edition would get into fights over what the rules were.

[yudantaiteki]

Not really a rules question, but this seemed like the best place.

Donald, Beggar might be the one card you want to change in future editions. It doesn't say "you may discard this from your hand". Strictly speaking that's a mistake, and you've taken care to have "from your hand" everywhere else, but of course in practice nobody will misunderstand how to use it. So it wouldn't really be a rules change, just a correction.

I don't think that's accurate.  "Discard" assumes from your hand and AFAIK most of the cards just say "discard", not "discard from the hand".  Reveal and trash specify the location, but not discard.

[Watno]

But is there that confusion with beggar? I mean, where else would you discard it from? It can't be in play because it's not your turn, you can't really discard things from the discard pile?

From set-aside-for-haven-land, the supply, island or native village mat.

[LastFootnote]

This is not a mistake on Beggar. Discarded cards are assumed to come from your hand unless otherwise specified. No card that makes you discard specifies 'from your hand', just like no card that gains specifies that the gained cards go 'to the discard pile'. It's right there in the rulebook from the original Dominion:

"Discard" – unless otherwise specified, discarded cards come from the player’s hand.

It's the very first thing mentioned under the definition of "Discard".

[Asper]

Which I think is kind of a shame.  I really don't see a problem with a Second Edition putting a "may" on Throne Room.

The problem is that then people who had First Edition cards but had heard of the Second Edition would get into fights over what the rules were.

Why? You follow what the card says, as always. Especially with Throne Room, where the lack of the "may" forms a gap in ruling that was not intended, i don't see a problem with that. If you Golem your Throne Room and don't want to use the Bishop in your hand, who's going to prove you have it? A "may" makes that gap disappear and changes almost nothing.

I too think that if reprints were done, it should only be made on cards where it was absolutely necessary. Donald did a very good job on avoiding such situations, and only because someone thinks a card is unbalanced is no reason to revise it (because if it were, i'd let Rebuild cost 6$ - i hate playing with that card...).

[enfynet]

Actually, Market Square is the only one that says "from your hand."

"Discard", yes. But all Reaction cards (except Tunnel) tell you to do something "from your hand". Lots and lots of other cards also says "from your hand". Explorer is one example.

It seems like for Market Square there could be some confusion IF that clause weren't there - it means that if you play a bunch of market squares and then a chapel, you can't discard the market square from play to gain gold.

But is there that confusion with beggar? I mean, where else would you discard it from? It can't be in play because it's not your turn, you can't really discard things from the discard pile?

Why is the clause there on Moat, Horse Traders, Fool's Gold, etc? Because if Moat had said just "reveal this", you could reveal it from anywhere - your discard pile, Supply, Trash, a mat... There's no rule that says you can't reveal or move cards that are anywhere, as long as they're not lost track of at least. There are cards that let you do things when it's not your turn, there's a card that lets you reveal cards in your discard pile (Tunnel), there are cards that let you move things out of Trash. Etc.

When it comes to discarding, it's true it often doesn't say "from your hand", because that's the default. But those instructions are telling you to discard other cards. Without specifying where those cards are, the default is that they're in your hand. Beggar on the other hand is telling you to discard itself, and we know where it is. If it happens to not be in your hand at the point when it triggers, it's still saying you may discard it (because it's missing the clause).

Treasury
 _ +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin, When you discard this from play, if you didn't buy a Victory card this turn, you may put this on top of your deck.

Herbalist
 _ +1 Buy, +1 Coin, When you discard this from play, you may put one of your Treasures from play on top of your deck.

Alchemist
 _ +2 Cards, +1 Action, When you discard this from play, you may put this on top of your deck if you have a Potion in play.

Tunnel
 _ 2 VP // When you discard this other than during a Clean-up phase, you may reveal it. If you do, gain a Gold.

Beggar
 _ Gain 3 Coppers, putting them into your hand. // When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain two Silvers, putting one on top of your deck.

Hermit
 _ Look through your discard pile. You may trash a card from your discard pile or hand that is not a Treasure. Gain a card costing up to 3 Coins. // When you discard this from play, if you did not buy any cards this turn, trash this and gain a Madman from the Madman pile.

Market Square
 _ +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy // When one of your cards is trashed, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, gain a Gold.

Treasury: Discard triggers from play. Nothing happens on opponents' turns.
Herbalist: Discard triggers from play. Nothing happens on opponents' turns.
Alchemist: Discard triggers from play. Nothing happens on opponents' turns.
Tunnel: Discard (by default) from hand. This card cannot be in play. Discard can happen on your turn or opponents' turns.
Beggar: Discard (by default) from hand. This card only triggers the discard during opponents' turns. Nothing happens on your turn.
Hermit: Discard triggers from play. Nothing happens on opponents' turns.
Market Square: Discard (by default) from hand. This card can be in play. Discard can happen on your turn or opponents' turns.

Market Square is the weird one because it can be in play when one of your cards is trashed. It has "from your hand" because it could be interpreted wrongly as part of the "while in play" text.

Moat
 _ +2 Cards // When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, you are unaffected by that Attack.

Secret Chamber
 _ Discard any number of cards. +1 Coin per card discarded. // When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, +2 cards, then put 2 cards from your hand on top of your deck.

Watchtower
 _ Draw until you have 6 cards in hand. // When you gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, either trash that card, or put it on top of your deck.

Trader
 _ Trash a card from your hand. Gain a number of Silvers equal to its cost in coins. // When you would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead, gain a silver.

Moat: Reveal only happens on an opponents' turn.

Secret Chamber: Reveal only happens on an opponents' turn.

Watchtower: Reveal can happen on your turn or an opponents' turn. "From your hand" means it cannot be in play.

Trader: Reveal can happen on your turn or an opponents' turn. "From your hand" means it cannot be in play.

---------------

I don't think there's much confusion here about these rules. I mean, I can't just point at Chapel on turn 1 and say "That says I can trash up to 4 cards from my hand" and proceed to trash 3 estates and a copper.

[LastFootnote]

Huh, I hadn't noticed that Market Square specifies 'from your hand'. I'd say it's a "mistake" on Market Square, not on Beggar. But it's just needless clarification, so it's not a big deal.

[werothegreat]

Huh, I hadn't noticed that Market Square specifies 'from your hand'. I'd say it's a "mistake" on Market Square, not on Beggar. But it's just needless clarification, so it's not a big deal.

Well, as enfynet just showed, I'd say it isn't needless.  I play a Market Square, then a Rats.  Without that "from your hand," there's really nothing stopping you from discarding it from play.

[Jeebus]

Tunnel: Discard (by default) from hand. This card cannot be in play. Discard can happen on your turn or opponents' turns.

No, Tunnel can also be discarded when set aside after you have revealed or looked at it from your deck.

Watchtower: Reveal can happen on your turn or an opponents' turn. "From your hand" means it cannot be in play.
Trader: Reveal can happen on your turn or an opponents' turn. "From your hand" means it cannot be in play.

No, unlike with "discard" it doesn't say anywhere that you reveal from your hand per default. So all reveal cards have to say "from your hand", and it isn't just because it can be in play.

I don't think there's much confusion here about these rules. I mean, I can't just point at Chapel on turn 1 and say "That says I can trash up to 4 cards from my hand" and proceed to trash 3 estates and a copper.

No, because that ability only triggers when the card is played. Beggar's ability (below the dividing line) triggers when another player plays an Attack. It triggers wherever the Beggar is. The same goes for Moat. The only question is whether you are able to resolve it. In order to resolve Moat, you have to reveal it from your hand. In order to resolve Beggar you have to discard it from your hand.

Maybe people are right that Beggar's text is correct. Actually Beggar is kind of unique, because it's the only card, along with Market Square, letting you discard itself. But there are a few cards that trigger when you discard them. Enfynet listed those cards. Tunnel is interesting, because it doesn't specify where it can be discarded from in order to trigger. "When you discard this other than during a Clean-up phase". If unspecified "discard" means "discard from play", even when referring to a specific card, like Tunnel does, then shouldn't that mean that Tunnel's Reaction only triggers when you discard it from your hand? I thought that since it does refer to a specific card (itself), rather than "a card" or "an Estate", etc, it knows where that card is, so it's telling you to discard the card from that location. And I assumed that would also go for Beggar. The difference is that Beggar is actually telling you to discard (if you want), while Tunnel is only saying what happens if you did discard. Maybe that means something..?

[AJD]

Which I think is kind of a shame.  I really don't see a problem with a Second Edition putting a "may" on Throne Room.

The problem is that then people who had First Edition cards but had heard of the Second Edition would get into fights over what the rules were.

Why? You follow what the card says, as always. Especially with Throne Room, where the lack of the "may" forms a gap in ruling that was not intended, i don't see a problem with that.

I'm honestly not sure what course of action you're suggesting here. If you're playing with First Edition cards, you follow what the card says, as always... meaning you're forced to Throne the action, since that's what the card says? Even if you know the card was subsequently revised?

[LastFootnote]

You're thinking about this wrong. Tunnel says "When you discard this, you may reveal it." By the time you reveal it, you've already answered the question of where it got discarded from. You just have to ask, "Did I discard this Tunnel?" Yes? Then you can reveal it.

Beggar actually allows you to discard it. Since it doesn't specify a source, it has to be from your hand. Otherwise, Hamlet would allow you to discard cards in play to gain an action or a buy.

[Asper]

Which I think is kind of a shame.  I really don't see a problem with a Second Edition putting a "may" on Throne Room.

The problem is that then people who had First Edition cards but had heard of the Second Edition would get into fights over what the rules were.

Why? You follow what the card says, as always. Especially with Throne Room, where the lack of the "may" forms a gap in ruling that was not intended, i don't see a problem with that.

I'm honestly not sure what course of action you're suggesting here. If you're playing with First Edition cards, you follow what the card says, as always... meaning you're forced to Throne the action, since that's what the card says? Even if you know the card was subsequently revised?

I'm not saying i want a revision, but if there was one, you need a way to decide which rules to play with. A simple and axiomatic "follow the card you play with" could solve that - it's like as if there were two slightly different cards that do almost the same, and we happen to have one of them on the board, but not the other. If a revision was made and its rulebook said "always play with the rules that fit the cards you play with", who could argue? I think it's more simple than expecting everybody to know the "new rules" by heart.

In the german translation some cards are mistranslated in a way that destroys balance... We need to play with the english rules even though the cards say something different, or some cards would just suck. So we decided to do that, most of the time. But in german, Kings Court also has no "may". If we played with the english rules all the time, we would need an extra rule-book to play... So in germany, we need to draw a line for when to follow the card and when to follow what was intended.

You have the luxury that if you just follow the card, everything will be fine. So yeah, if a revision was made, that would be my suggestion: If you don't want to play with old Throne Room, don't play with old Throne Room.

Or have a democratic process where you decide which rules to use. After all you are free to let your younger sister take that additional turn for Outpost even though she was possessed twice, because you don't want her to cry. I mean, rules are fine, but we are humans, not computers. But maybe that's the point of view of somebody who has to get along with rules issues, anyhow...

[LastFootnote]

In general, I think a good rule is that if there's an accountability issue, the step in question is optional. So for Moneylender, Mine, Throne Room, and Graverobber, since nobody can prove you have a Treasure or Action in your hand, you can always claim you don't. So the 'may' is implicit even if it's not printed on the card. It's faster than having the player reveal his hand in order to prove he doesn't have an appropriate card.

[hyramgraff]

Beggar
 _ Gain 3 Coppers, putting them into your hand. // When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this. If you do, gain two Silvers, putting one on top of your deck.

As written, you should be able to use Beggar's reaction to discard it from a Native Village mat.  I know of no rule that would make Beggar's reaction behave any differently when it is on a Native Village mat.

[WanderingWinder]

"Discard" – unless otherwise specified, discarded cards are from the player’s hand.

Edit: I see LF has edited this into his post in reply #9 already. I don't understand how it isn't definitive here.

[GendoIkari]

In general, I think a good rule is that if there's an accountability issue, the step in question is optional. So for Moneylender, Mine, Throne Room, and Graverobber, since nobody can prove you have a Treasure or Action in your hand, you can always claim you don't. So the 'may' is implicit even if it's not printed on the card. It's faster than having the player reveal his hand in order to prove he doesn't have an appropriate card.

I completely disagree. The accountability is the optional part. Throne Room and Moneylender work just fine without it, and in fact the accountability isn't necessary on things like Cutpurse even.  If you play Throne Room, and then don't play an action, but you had one in your hand, you just cheated. If someone plays Cutpurse-without-accountability, and you don't discard a Copper even though you had one, you just cheated. You don't have to have a rule, or a clause on a card, to say "don't cheat." Refusing to play trash a copper to Moneylender even though you have one is no different than sneaking a Gold from the pile and adding it to your deck when no one is looking. The clause is a nice thing to have to make everyone feel better about someone not obeying a card, but it's not necessary for a card to work. You simply do everything that the card says to do, and if you aren't thinking about cheating, or playing with people who would cheat, you never have to ask "but what if someone doesn't have an action when they play Throne Room, do they have to reveal their hand in that case?" No, they don't have to rival their hand. You trust that they aren't cheating,

[LastFootnote]

In general, I think a good rule is that if there's an accountability issue, the step in question is optional. So for Moneylender, Mine, Throne Room, and Graverobber, since nobody can prove you have a Treasure or Action in your hand, you can always claim you don't. So the 'may' is implicit even if it's not printed on the card. It's faster than having the player reveal his hand in order to prove he doesn't have an appropriate card.

I completely disagree. The accountability is the optional part. Throne Room and Moneylender work just fine without it, and in fact the accountability isn't necessary on things like Cutpurse even.  If you play Throne Room, and then don't play an action, but you had one in your hand, you just cheated. If someone plays Cutpurse-without-accountability, and you don't discard a Copper even though you had one, you just cheated. You don't have to have a rule, or a clause on a card, to say "don't cheat." Refusing to play trash a copper to Moneylender even though you have one is no different than sneaking a Gold from the pile and adding it to your deck when no one is looking. The clause is a nice thing to have to make everyone feel better about someone not obeying a card, but it's not necessary for a card to work. You simply do everything that the card says to do, and if you aren't thinking about cheating, or playing with people who would cheat, you never have to ask "but what if someone doesn't have an action when they play Throne Room, do they have to reveal their hand in that case?" No, they don't have to rival their hand. You trust that they aren't cheating,

I guess we'll just have to disagree. When I play IRL, I prefer to treat those four cards as if they have a 'you may' clause on them. The only times it matters is when playing with Throne Room or Golem.

EDIT: OK, that's not true. It matters with Conspirator and Peddler as well. There are probably some other cards I'm not considering, too. Not that it changes how I prefer to play.

[GendoIkari]

In general, I think a good rule is that if there's an accountability issue, the step in question is optional. So for Moneylender, Mine, Throne Room, and Graverobber, since nobody can prove you have a Treasure or Action in your hand, you can always claim you don't. So the 'may' is implicit even if it's not printed on the card. It's faster than having the player reveal his hand in order to prove he doesn't have an appropriate card.

I completely disagree. The accountability is the optional part. Throne Room and Moneylender work just fine without it, and in fact the accountability isn't necessary on things like Cutpurse even.  If you play Throne Room, and then don't play an action, but you had one in your hand, you just cheated. If someone plays Cutpurse-without-accountability, and you don't discard a Copper even though you had one, you just cheated. You don't have to have a rule, or a clause on a card, to say "don't cheat." Refusing to play trash a copper to Moneylender even though you have one is no different than sneaking a Gold from the pile and adding it to your deck when no one is looking. The clause is a nice thing to have to make everyone feel better about someone not obeying a card, but it's not necessary for a card to work. You simply do everything that the card says to do, and if you aren't thinking about cheating, or playing with people who would cheat, you never have to ask "but what if someone doesn't have an action when they play Throne Room, do they have to reveal their hand in that case?" No, they don't have to rival their hand. You trust that they aren't cheating,

I guess we'll just have to disagree. When I play IRL, I prefer to treat those four cards as if they have a 'you may' clause on them. The only times it matters is when playing with Throne Room or Golem.

I mean, there's nothing at all wrong with doing it that way, it's just that it is technically a variant (though normally variant refers to difference in game rules as a whole, not specific card rules. Might be better to say that it is technically not playing with Moneylender, but rather a fan card that's almost identical to Moneylender).

I just don't think that there's any question that Moneylender itself doesn't have an implicit "may." It says to do it, and the official rules say you do as much as you can. Why ask the question of "what if a person refuses to obey the rules of the game?"

[LastFootnote]

I guess we'll just have to disagree. When I play IRL, I prefer to treat those four cards as if they have a 'you may' clause on them. The only times it matters is when playing with Throne Room or Golem.

I mean, there's nothing at all wrong with doing it that way, it's just that it is technically a variant (though normally variant refers to difference in game rules as a whole, not specific card rules. Might be better to say that it is technically not playing with Moneylender, but rather a fan card that's almost identical to Moneylender).

I just don't think that there's any question that Moneylender itself doesn't have an implicit "may." It says to do it, and the official rules say you do as much as you can. Why ask the question of "what if a person refuses to obey the rules of the game?"

To be clear, this may never have come up for me in a real-life game. If it did, I'd always follow the wording on the card (trashing/playing an appropriate card if able). But if someone else chose not to and I somehow caught them, there's no way I'd call them out for cheating.