Print

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

[math]

There was an extensive discussion on this topic on another thread (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7882.25), but we failed to come to a satisfactory conclusion.  When you play Procession on Band of Misfits and choose Fortress, do you trash it or put it into your hand?

The issue here is that Fortress has an effect that occurs when you trash it, while Band of Misfits has an effect that occurs when it leaves play.  My understanding would say that a card it trashed when it hits the trash pile, at which point it has already left play.  However, this contradicts the FAQ (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Band_of_Misfits), which says you put it into your hand.

Can anyone explain this?

[GendoIkari]

There was an extensive discussion on this topic on another thread (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7882.25), but we failed to come to a satisfactory conclusion.  When you play Procession on Band of Misfits and choose Fortress, do you trash it or put it into your hand?

The issue here is that Fortress has an effect that occurs when you trash it, while Band of Misfits has an effect that occurs when it leaves play.  My understanding would say that a card it trashed when it hits the trash pile, at which point it has already left play.  However, this contradicts the FAQ (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Band_of_Misfits), which says you put it into your hand.

Can anyone explain this?

That thread specifically quoted the actual rulebook... (Note that the FAQ on the Wiki there is just a quote from the rulebook).

For example, if you use Procession to play Band of Misfits twice and choose Fortress the first time, you will automatically replay it as Fortress, then trash the Band of Misfits, return it to your hand (it is a Fortress when it's trashed, and Fortress has a when-trashed ability that returns it to your hand), and gain an Action card costing exactly $6 ($1 more than Band of Misfits, which has left play and so is no longer copying Fortress).

It goes back into your hand (note that you still trash it... after you trash it, it goes back into your hand. So the answer to your question is "both"). The fact is that you did trash a trash a Fortress. You had a Fortress, and then you trashed it. The fact that it changed into a different card as part of being trashed is irrelevant. You did indeed trash a Fortress, and Fortress does something when it gets trashed. So the Fortress goes back into your hand... it so happens that it's not a Fortress anymore, but that doesn't matter.

It sounds like you are thinking of trashing as a process... as in "pick up a card from in play. Then move it to the trash pile. Now, the card is "trashed." But that's not how it works. There is no time at all between the card leaving play, and the card being in the trash, despite that in real life, you're forced to take actual time to physically do it. Rather, trashing is a one-time, instantaneous act. The card is trashed the very second you say "I'm trashing this card." At that exact moment, it's been trashed, it left play, and it is in the trash pile. All at once.

[qmech]

The card is trashed the very second you say "I'm trashing this card." At that exact moment, it's been trashed, it left play, and it is in the trash pile. All at once.

Dominion: violating relativity since 2008.

[Davio]

Maybe it's possible with quantum physics?

[michaeljb]

When you gain a Nomad Camp, it never actually visits your discard pille like other gains would. It's like Nomad Camp doesn't have an on-gain effect like Border Village, its gaining rule is just different.

So maybe Fortress works that way with trashing. For most cards, trashing means moving that card to the trash pile, and then maybe doing something else (Cultist, Hunting Grounds, etc); but for Fortress, trashing means putting it into your hand.

Fortress doesn't need to visit the trash pile when trashed just like Nomad Camp doesn't need to visit the discard pile when gained.

edit: and the official FAQ for Fortress says "you take it from the trash and put it into your hand." So much for my theory

[math]

Besides, Nomad Camp actually does visit your discard pile for a moment before you put it on your deck.

[AJD]

Besides, Nomad Camp actually does visit your discard pile for a moment before you put it on your deck.

Not so.

[math]

When you gain a card and topdeck it with Watchtower, does it ever visit your discard pile?

[AJD]

When you gain a card and topdeck it with Watchtower, does it ever visit your discard pile?

Yes.

[math]

That is because Watchtower has an on-gain effect, so you gain the card first, and then resolve Watchtower.  Am I correct about this?

[michaeljb]

That is because Watchtower has an on-gain effect, so you gain the card first, and then resolve Watchtower.  Am I correct about this?

Yes, but Nomad Camp is special.

http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Nomad_Camp

When you gain this card, it goes on top of your deck rather that into your discard pile.

[math]

The problem is that this wording (interpreted strictly) conflicts with other on-gain effects.

Armory says "Gain a card, putting it on top of your deck."  This indicates that the card is gained directly to the top of your deck.

Watchtower says, "When you gain a card, you may reveal this to put it on your deck." This indicates that the card is gained to your discard pile, and then you resolve the on-gain effect and put it on top of your deck.

Nomad Camp follows Watchtower's wording, not Armory's.  If I understand this correctly, this would mean that you gain Nomad Camp to your discard pile, then resolve the on-gain effect and put it on your deck.  If it said, "When you gain this card, gain it to the top of your deck", then you would put it directly on your deck.

Basically, when the FAQ and the text on the card contradict, I trust the text on the card.

[WanderingWinder]

Watchtower is different from NC and Armory, which are the same, because it triggers 'when you gain a card', which means that the card must already be gained before you trigger. If it were phrased 'when you would gain', a la trader, then it would never go to the discard.
Incidentally, I believe Goko had that trader thing wrong last I checked.
Also incidentally, one of the FAQ entries on Trader says "When you gain" without the "would" as should be there.

Not incidentally, FAQs are not entirely trustworthy.

[math]

I guess I just don't understand why NC is the same as Armory, because NC's effect triggers when you gain it, which means that the card must already be gained before it triggers.

[Kirian]

If you kill a blue dog, then cast Resurrection on it, you can still walk it. (Fortress)

If you cast Polymorph on a black dog to make it blue, kill the blue dog, then cast Resurrection on it, it will be a black dog again, which you can take for a walk.  (BOM + Fortress)

[math]

I have no idea how any of that applies to the conversation.

[Jeebus]

I guess I just don't understand why NC is the same as Armory, because NC's effect triggers when you gain it, which means that the card must already be gained before it triggers.

Because the card text isn't entirely accurate on NC. http://boardgamegeek.com/article/8163839#8163839

[Jeebus]

The issue here is that Fortress has an effect that occurs when you trash it, while Band of Misfits has an effect that occurs when it leaves play.  My understanding would say that a card it trashed when it hits the trash pile, at which point it has already left play.  However, this contradicts the FAQ (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Band_of_Misfits), which says you put it into your hand.

GendoIkari already did a nice job of explaining it. I also see that you wrote this in the other thread:

The thing is, for me "leave play" happens before Trashing.
Leaving play happens as soon as a card is moved from the play area (I think). At this point the destination may be unknown and the destination may even change. Suppose a card has the reaction "when you would trash a card, put it in your hand" then the card would leave play first, but never actually hit the trash, like Trader's reaction causes the originally gained card to never be in your discard pile.

As GendoIkari said, there is no time in the game when a card has left one place and is on the way to another place. So Trader triggers before you even start moving the card you would have gained.

[Davio]

I guess I just don't understand why NC is the same as Armory, because NC's effect triggers when you gain it, which means that the card must already be gained before it triggers.

Because the card text isn't entirely accurate on NC. http://boardgamegeek.com/article/8163839#8163839

So for instance if you play Mine, the Gold you gained is gained directly to your hand.
Watchtower can react because you gained a card (it doesn't specify the discard pile, that's just the default destination), but this doesn't cause lose-track?

I mean, as your opponent can't look at your hand, you could topdeck or trash another Gold that was already in your hand. This doesn't make any practical sense since you have at least two Golds in your hand which are pretty much interchangeable. We're treading on highly theoretical ground here.

If you topdeck a bunch of cards, let's say you have Royal Seal in play, gain a Cache (resolve Cache first) and 2 Coppers and topdeck them with Royal Seal, so the order on top of your deck is (bottom -> top): Copper, Copper, Cache. At this point the rule is that Watchtower has lost track of cards underneath your top card and can no longer trash the Coppers even though you know exactly where they are.

Should the same logic apply to cards gained to your hand or is there no lose-track for your hand and if so, why not?

[Jeebus]

So for instance if you play Mine, the Gold you gained is gained directly to your hand.
Watchtower can react because you gained a card (it doesn't specify the discard pile, that's just the default destination), but this doesn't cause lose-track?

I mean, as your opponent can't look at your hand, you could topdeck or trash another Gold that was already in your hand. This doesn't make any practical sense since you have at least two Golds in your hand which are pretty much interchangeable. We're treading on highly theoretical ground here.

If you topdeck a bunch of cards, let's say you have Royal Seal in play, gain a Cache (resolve Cache first) and 2 Coppers and topdeck them with Royal Seal, so the order on top of your deck is (bottom -> top): Copper, Copper, Cache. At this point the rule is that Watchtower has lost track of cards underneath your top card and can no longer trash the Coppers even though you know exactly where they are.

Should the same logic apply to cards gained to your hand or is there no lose-track for your hand and if so, why not?

I might not be exactly understanding the basis for your question, but I'll try to answer. There's nothing special about your hand when it comes to lose-track. A card is always gained directly to either your discard, your deck or your hand. Watchtower or Royal Seal triggers when you gain a card, so can now move the gained card. Of course they can't if they lose track of it, which happens either if the card isn't where it was gained to, or if it's been covered by another card. In your Cache example, the Coppers were covered. In your Mine example, the Gold is where it was gained to (in your hand), and it wasn't covered, so no lose-track. A card in your hand can't be covered by another card. As you say, players can't know which Gold it was, but it doesn't matter. It's not the same as the card being covered anyway.

[Davio]

My question was really simple: Why is a card that's covered on your deck or discard pile considered lost track of, but a card in your hand isn't?

It was more a design decision thing than an actual rules question to be honest.

[ftl]

Because when a card gets covered up in your deck or discard pile, you might literally lose track of where it is. When you put a card in your hand you don't lose track of it, because you're looking at it the whole time.

[GendoIkari]

Because when a card gets covered up in your deck or discard pile, you might literally lose track of where it is. When you put a card in your hand you don't lose track of it, because you're looking at it the whole time.

I think that's a fair answer. It's worth noting though that Davio has seemingly brought up another accountability issue I hadn't heard about before, though. You can gain a card (like Curse from Torturer, or Gold from Mine) into hand, THEN reveal a Watchtower from your hand and say you want to top-deck that card. Are you required to reveal the card before you top-deck it in order to prove that you are top-decking the right one?

Of course, this is only a theoretical question; in practice you simply reveal the Watchtower upon "would gain", and then gain it directly to your deck.

[Davio]

Yes, GendoIkari, but theoretical rules questions are the most fun!

Accountability was why I asked it in the first place.
You know which card in your hand is what, but your opponent doesn't (barring Menagerie, etc...).

Revealing Watchtower is done after the card has been gained, that was said by Donald in the thread on BGG that was mentioned. So the card is in your hand, you reveal WT, put a mystery card on top of your deck, there's nothing stopping you. In practice, it should only be one card and you can just show it to your opponent if he asks.

All the rules say is this:

If a gained card is going
somewhere other than to your discard pile, such as a card gained with
Mine (from Dominion), you can still use Watchtower to trash it or put
it on your deck.

So no help there. My point derives from this:
- Your draw pile is an ordered collection, the positions of the cards are important and you can only draw from the top (or Pearl Diver)
- Your discard pile is an ordered collection as well, you can not look through it and once something is covered, it's lost track of
- The trash pile is an unordered collection, you can look through it, the positions of the cards don't matter. There is no losing track of cards that end up in the trash, other than the fact they're not in their original place anymore
- Your hand is I would think it's an unordered collection, meaning you can sort it to your own liking, but for Watchtower it might be important to consider it an ordered collection. So if you gain a card to the edge of your hand and move it to the top of your deck it's still the same card.

[Jeebus]

- Your hand is I would think it's an unordered collection, meaning you can sort it to your own liking, but for Watchtower it might be important to consider it an ordered collection. So if you gain a card to the edge of your hand and move it to the top of your deck it's still the same card.

Your hand can't be an ordered collection. First of all, the rules don't say that you can't change positions of the cards in your hand, so you can, because that's how every card game works. Bohnanza has to specifically tell you that you can't. Second, you're not required to let other players know which cards you choose to discard or put back on your deck, after you've drawn and/or revealed some cards. Let's say you reveal your hand for a Cutpurse attack, and then you discard cards for a Militia attack, and then a player has a Mountebank in hand. You're not required to show whether you're discarding the Curse you revealed, letting the Mountebank player know whether he can hit you.

The answer to this question is that you show it (not saying "reveal" since that has a specific meaning) upon topdecking it with Watchtower. That's the only way to make it accountable. It's kind of like the Tunnel reveal-several-cards-from-discard question. With regards to game state, it has no consequence (so on Goko, the question is meaningless). And with regards to practical play, I guess you can technically be a dick and put it in your hand, shuffle your cards around, and put some card on your deck without showing it. But then, why did you do that, instead of just topdecking it directly or showing the card that you topdeck? The only reason is to dodge accountability.