Print

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

[hsiale]

If I play BoM as Herbalist, should I get the possibility of topdecking one of my Treasures when I discard BoM from play?

[Davio]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

[LastFootnote]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm guessing that Band of Misfits as Herbalist does let you top deck a Treasure as you discard it from play. The timing is similar to trashing it when it's a Fortress, and I believe it returns to your hand under such circumstances.

[GendoIkari]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm guessing that Band of Misfits as Herbalist does let you top deck a Treasure as you discard it from play. The timing is similar to trashing it when it's a Fortress, and I believe it returns to your hand under such circumstances.

Correct. Scheme is indeed a bad comparison, because it only does something when you play it (though the thing that it does is to cause you to do something later). With BoM as Herbalist, I'm sure you're right. Herbalist is "when you discard this from play." I don't see any question that it was a Herbalist that was discarded from play. Fortress is a good comparison, and a trashed BoM as Fortress goes back into your hand.

[Davio]

Hmm, I thought Scheme mentioned it being discarded during Clean-up, but it only mentions the start of Clean-up.

[SCSN]

If it's indeed so that you are allowed to top-deck a treasure with BoM as Herbalist (can someone confirm this?), Goko does it wrong (to my great annoyance, yesterday).

[ftl]

Yes, they do it wrong. I think it's already been reported. The same bug apparently affects BoM as hermit, I think.

[florrat]

Yeah, I reported it a week ago when it happened to me:

https://getsatisfaction.com/goko/topics/band_of_misfits_as_herbalist-1iqq1k

And it was reported a "little" earlier as well:

https://getsatisfaction.com/goko/topics/band_of_misfits_as_hermit

[ftl]

Oh man. I reported that five months ago, and didn't even remember now.

[Simon (DK)]

I've reported it too some time ago. Don't remember how long.

[Kirian]

Oh man. I reported that five months ago, and didn't even remember now.

/sigh

[Puddleglumm]

Saw the Goko bug today, annoying. Strange that they handle trashing effects correctly for BoM but not discard from play effects. (Then again I guess it would have been a colossal screw-up to not handle trashing effects correctly considering how many there are in DA)

[Puddleglumm]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm curious, does anyone know if DXV has ever commented on why Herbalist and Scheme are worded differently? Since the intended effect is the same - put an action or treasure you played this turn on top of your deck - I would assume this is one of those cards he would go back and change the wording on to match scheme if he could.

[LastFootnote]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm curious, does anyone know if DXV has ever commented on why Herbalist and Scheme are worded differently? Since the intended effect is the same - put an action or treasure you played this turn on top of your deck - I would assume this is one of those cards he would go back and change the wording on to match scheme if he could.

Herbalist has the simpler, better wording. Scheme is worded like is due to Action–Duration cards. If there were Treasure–Duration cards, Herbalist would need a crazy wording, too.

[Puddleglumm]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm curious, does anyone know if DXV has ever commented on why Herbalist and Scheme are worded differently? Since the intended effect is the same - put an action or treasure you played this turn on top of your deck - I would assume this is one of those cards he would go back and change the wording on to match scheme if he could.

Herbalist has the simpler, better wording. Scheme is worded like is due to Action–Duration cards. If there were Treasure–Duration cards, Herbalist would need a crazy wording, too.

Hmm. Actually I was thinking more of why scheme is something that happens when you play it, vs herbalist being something that happens when you discard it. And of course it's obvious to me now, it's so it can work on itself, as well as get multiplied by throne room and kings court.

[AJD]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm curious, does anyone know if DXV has ever commented on why Herbalist and Scheme are worded differently? Since the intended effect is the same - put an action or treasure you played this turn on top of your deck - I would assume this is one of those cards he would go back and change the wording on to match scheme if he could.

Herbalist has the simpler, better wording. Scheme is worded like is due to Action–Duration cards. If there were Treasure–Duration cards, Herbalist would need a crazy wording, too.

Hmm. Actually I was thinking more of why scheme is something that happens when you play it, vs herbalist being something that happens when you discard it. And of course it's obvious to me now, it's so it can work on itself, as well as get multiplied by throne room and kings court.

No, I think LastFootnote's answer is real the answer to your question. "So it can work on itself [and] get multiplied by Throne Room" wasn't Donald X.'s priority. Making it work with Durations was the priority, and making it do its thing when you play it was the simplest way for that to happen.

[Davio]

Puzzle question:

Which Duration(s) you played this (not the previous) turn can get put on your deck with a Scheme you also played this turn?

[Jean-Michel]

Puzzle question:

Which Duration(s) you played this (not the previous) turn can get put on your deck with a Scheme you also played this turn?

Failed Tactician.

[loppo]

Puzzle question:

Which Duration(s) you played this (not the previous) turn can get put on your deck with a Scheme you also played this turn?

an Outpost played during an outpost-turn.

[Davio]

That's the two I was thinking of, kudos for finding them both.

[AJD]

Puzzle question:

Which Duration(s) you played this (not the previous) turn can get put on your deck with a Scheme you also played this turn?

an Outpost played during an outpost-turn.

I'm pretty sure that, for reasons which don't make sense to me, Outpost is not cleaned up till the next turn even if you do play it on an Outpost turn.

However, Haven played when you don't have any other cards in your deck, hand, or discard for some reason can also be Schemed this turn.

[GendoIkari]

Puzzle question:

Which Duration(s) you played this (not the previous) turn can get put on your deck with a Scheme you also played this turn?

an Outpost played during an outpost-turn.

I'm pretty sure that, for reasons which don't make sense to me, Outpost is not cleaned up till the next turn even if you do play it on an Outpost turn.

However, Haven played when you don't have any other cards in your deck, hand, or discard for some reason can also be Schemed this turn.

This is correct. Output stays out because it's still causing you to draw 3 instead of 5.

Another question... if tricky wording for Durations weren't needed, how much weaker would Scheme be? Aside from KC-SCheme going away, because that's just one particular combo... but if Scheme couldn't topdeck itself, I'd think that would make it a lot worse.

[Puddleglumm]

I think "leaves play" triggers after the clean-up phase is complete, so I would think you could topdeck a Treasure.
Isn't there a BoM-Scheme ruling somewhere which is similar?

? Scheme's effect has nothing to do with Scheme being in play. You could Procession it and still return 2 cards to the top of your deck.

I'm curious, does anyone know if DXV has ever commented on why Herbalist and Scheme are worded differently? Since the intended effect is the same - put an action or treasure you played this turn on top of your deck - I would assume this is one of those cards he would go back and change the wording on to match scheme if he could.

Herbalist has the simpler, better wording. Scheme is worded like is due to Action–Duration cards. If there were Treasure–Duration cards, Herbalist would need a crazy wording, too.

Hmm. Actually I was thinking more of why scheme is something that happens when you play it, vs herbalist being something that happens when you discard it. And of course it's obvious to me now, it's so it can work on itself, as well as get multiplied by throne room and kings court.

No, I think LastFootnote's answer is real the answer to your question. "So it can work on itself [and] get multiplied by Throne Room" wasn't Donald X.'s priority. Making it work with Durations was the priority, and making it do its thing when you play it was the simplest way for that to happen.

I thought the "make it work with durations" part of scheme is the "name a card ... if you discard it" wordiness. Couldn't scheme say "When you discard this from play, you may choose an action card you played this turn. If you discard it from play this turn, put it on your deck." and still work just fine with durations?

[SirPeebles]

Puzzle question:

Which Duration(s) you played this (not the previous) turn can get put on your deck with a Scheme you also played this turn?

an Outpost played during an outpost-turn.

I'm pretty sure that, for reasons which don't make sense to me, Outpost is not cleaned up till the next turn even if you do play it on an Outpost turn.

However, Haven played when you don't have any other cards in your deck, hand, or discard for some reason can also be Schemed this turn.

This is correct. Output stays out because it's still causing you to draw 3 instead of 5.

Another question... if tricky wording for Durations weren't needed, how much weaker would Scheme be? Aside from KC-SCheme going away, because that's just one particular combo... but if Scheme couldn't topdeck itself, I'd think that would make it a lot worse.

It would be a less impressive Bane.  Still a pretty good one though.

[DG]

I came across an example the other day where the talisman buy/gain order in Goko was important. If you buy a herald with talisman in play, you should be able to resolve the on buy effects in chosen order to gain the copy of the herald first and then put that herald onto the draw deck using overpay. I doubt that is ever going to get a fix in Goko.