Print

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

[eHalcyon]

I wonder if any players will hesitate to butcher, say, a Noble Brigand.  A Jester?  The Ambassador?  Maybe an entire Village?

[Witherweaver]

I wonder if any players will hesitate to butcher, say, a Noble Brigand.  A Jester?  The Ambassador?  Maybe an entire Village?

Or Princess, or Harem.

Or, of course, Scout.  No one wants to see that dude harmed.

[eHalcyon]

I wonder if any players will hesitate to butcher, say, a Noble Brigand.  A Jester?  The Ambassador?  Maybe an entire Village?

Or Princess, or Harem.

Or, of course, Scout.  No one wants to see that dude harmed.

Well, it's usually a bad idea to butcher the Princess.




Errr, not to say that it's a good idea to butcher your Harem either.  Respect the ladies!

[Mr Anderson]

I will hesitate to butcher Princess because she is a price card, you should want to keep them, otherwise, gain the Duchy. Harem is a victory card, so I will hesitate to butcher a Harem as well.

But I am German so I will not hesitate committing a genocide and butcher a whole village.

[Witherweaver]

Well, it's usually a bad idea to butcher the Princess.

Unless, of course, you're Sir Lancelot.

[joel88s]

I would be very surprised about that.
You make the decsions for your opponents. There's no reason why you can't make him use coin tokens.

Absolutely. Pretty much the only way I can think of to word the coin token rules to not allow a Possessed player to use them would be to specifically mention Possession in the rules, which just wouldn't happen.

Well, the rules often refer to interactions with specific cards from other sets (e.g. the Dark Ages booklet discusses about 19 ways Ambassador works with Ruins, Knights, etc.) Although I suppose you could argue those are just clarifications of principles inherent in the cards.

I see the logical consistency that Coin Tokens should be no different from Amb, Masq, etc. But this is an entirely new mechanic - those are all Cards, and as far I can tell there has never been a game action you could take that wasn't playing a card, or the result of it. So the designer can designate the location, availability or plane of existence of these coins however he wants, and could treat them as analogous to trashed cards, or VP, if he wanted. Presumably none of us has seen the rules yet.

Of course if Mr Anderson is correct that 515 has spoken on this, that settles that.

Goodbye. Mr Anderson.

[clb]

It looks like these coin-gainers are going to like Poor House. Actually, I said that backwards - PH like coins, since they are not in your hand, they don't count agaist you.

I guess, but are the coin tokens really any stronger than any other virtual money here, like Peddler for instance? I guess it's pretty nice that owning any coin tokens makes any PH turn a guaranteed $5, given that this is a considerable step up from the usual guaranteed $4.

I don't think coins offer anything over virtual coin in that situation other than the flexibility as already discussed. Perhaps being non-card based, so it doesn't take an action is helpful, since DC is terminal.
I was just pointing out an interaction, attempting to lure the conversation back from the grammar pit.

[DStu]

515

?

[Drab Emordnilap]

515

?

DXV

[joel88s]

I will hesitate to butcher Princess because she is a price card, you should want to keep them, otherwise, gain the Duchy. Harem is a victory card, so I will hesitate to butcher a Harem as well.

But I am German so I will not hesitate committing a genocide and butcher a whole village.

Harsh, dude - you are definitely the only one who can make that joke!!

Anyway, none of us have had any problem discarding and trashing all these characters for years. Butchering them is just the next step.

[joel88s]

515

?

DXV

Yeah those Roman numeral things just confuse me...

[Mr Anderson]

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/12483638#12483638

I looked up the source. (Regarding my post about coin tokens and Possession.)

[Witherweaver]

I would be very surprised about that.
You make the decsions for your opponents. There's no reason why you can't make him use coin tokens.

Yeah this seems extremely clear cut. 

And as my earlier post said (well, I kind of waffled I guess) it's not THAT onerous because you can always spend your Coins before I get to them.  Maybe one or two go to waste this way but if you're smart I should never get my hands on your tokens unless it's a calculated risk. It's unpleasant but man if Donald didn't warp the Possession rules to eliminate the Ambassador interaction then he sure won't do it for something as small as this.

I am quite sure Donald X confirmed that you can cash coin tokens when you possess another player.

And in my opinion, that is totally fine. You have to be careful and need to keep track of your opponent's deck, and you should not save the coin tokens when the Possession has to come.

Hm, Possessions interaction with coin-token cards is kind of interesting.  The possessor gains the cards, but the possessed player gains the coin tokens. I wonder if there will be Guilds cards where the token gaining happens at times other than when you play the action (i.e., when you buy cards).  There is no real harm in playing Baker during your Possession turn as you can just spend the coin tokens, so it's not as bad as the VP tokens.  But you would have to avoid a card that says "While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a coin token" or something to that effect.

[DStu]

I will hesitate to butcher Princess because she is a price card, you should want to keep them, otherwise, gain the Duchy. Harem is a victory card, so I will hesitate to butcher a Harem as well.

But I am German so I will not hesitate committing a genocide and butcher a whole village.

Harsh, dude - you are definitely the only one who can make that joke!!

Except there are lots of germans here

[joel88s]

I will hesitate to butcher Princess because she is a price card, you should want to keep them, otherwise, gain the Duchy. Harem is a victory card, so I will hesitate to butcher a Harem as well.

But I am German so I will not hesitate committing a genocide and butcher a whole village.

Harsh, dude - you are definitely the only one who can make that joke!!

Except there are lots of germans here

Good point, guess I meant "You are the only ones..." Or maybe "You are the only Ones..."

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/12483638#12483638

I looked up the source. (Regarding my post about coin tokens and Possession.)

Thank you. Mr Anderson.
That seems clear enough then!
And the list of reasons to hate Possession only grows...

[werothegreat]

Well, it's usually a bad idea to butcher the Princess.

Unless, of course, you're Sir Lancelot.

I'm not sure which version of King Arthur you read, but in my version, Lancelot used quite a different verb on the princess.

[WanderingWinder]

Well, it's usually a bad idea to butcher the Princess.

Unless, of course, you're Sir Lancelot.

I'm not sure which version of King Arthur you read, but in my version, Lancelot used quite a different verb on the princess.

This is the internet the modern era any time or any place, where any verb can be used to have sexual implications.

fake edit: inb4 someone edge cases this

real but lightning edit: I edge cased her! [/trolling]

[werothegreat]

I really don't want to know what "butcher" would be a euphemism for.

[Witherweaver]

Well, it's usually a bad idea to butcher the Princess.

Unless, of course, you're Sir Lancelot.

I'm not sure which version of King Arthur you read, but in my version, Lancelot used quite a different verb on the princess.

This version, of course:

Edit: Can start at around 2:40 if you're impatient.

[Fuu]

It seems like the 5th theme of this set (after bald people, etc.) is shaping up to be: nominally $4 cards that cost $5 because they use coin tokens (Remodel -> Butcher, hypothetical $4 Peddler -> Baker).

It could be a good yardstick for fan card designs that use coin tokens... E.g. a Feast-variant that gives +5 coin tokens, spend any number of tokens to gain a card of that cost?

[Titandrake]

I like that you can use Butcher as +2 coin tokens if you want to. It looks pretty strong just because of that alone. Remodel isn't bad, but it gets constrained very quickly and isn't good at Copper trashing without good $2 cards. Where Remodel would be a dead card because you have plenty of good cards you don't want to trash, Butcher can still give +$2. I think that ability to get pure money is going to be the key strength, and the variable-Remodel strength is more of a bonus.

Works very nicely with Dark Ages trash effects, but then again so do all the trash for benefits.

[soulnet]

Hm, Possessions interaction with coin-token cards is kind of interesting.  The possessor gains the cards, but the possessed player gains the coin tokens. I wonder if there will be Guilds cards where the token gaining happens at times other than when you play the action (i.e., when you buy cards).  There is no real harm in playing Baker during your Possession turn as you can just spend the coin tokens, so it's not as bad as the VP tokens.  But you would have to avoid a card that says "While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a coin token" or something to that effect.

Its not that new, same thing happened with VP chips.

[clb]

Hm, Possessions interaction with coin-token cards is kind of interesting.  The possessor gains the cards, but the possessed player gains the coin tokens. I wonder if there will be Guilds cards where the token gaining happens at times other than when you play the action (i.e., when you buy cards).  There is no real harm in playing Baker during your Possession turn as you can just spend the coin tokens, so it's not as bad as the VP tokens.  But you would have to avoid a card that says "While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a coin token" or something to that effect.

Its not that new, same thing happened with VP chips.

The nuance here is that if the possessing player wants access to those coins, he has to do it during that same possessed hand - he doesn't get to add them to his deck (like a gained card) or token pile (sans mat). It is sort of a half-step between VP chips, which he doesn't get, and cards, which he does get. Tokens, he doesn't get, but he can use.

[Witherweaver]

Hm, Possessions interaction with coin-token cards is kind of interesting.  The possessor gains the cards, but the possessed player gains the coin tokens. I wonder if there will be Guilds cards where the token gaining happens at times other than when you play the action (i.e., when you buy cards).  There is no real harm in playing Baker during your Possession turn as you can just spend the coin tokens, so it's not as bad as the VP tokens.  But you would have to avoid a card that says "While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a coin token" or something to that effect.

Its not that new, same thing happened with VP chips.

Right, my point was, the coin tokens are a vulnerability with Possession on the board.  You have to spend them or your opponent will spend them for you.  But they (or token-given cards, actually) could also be a protection if the token gaining happened at different times. (So that your opponent couldn't spend them while you're Possessed.)

Edit: I guess the real thing I'm thinking of is that if there were a card that would gain coin chips at the end of your turn, you may be able to manage a deck that can provide no coin when your opponent Possesses you (assume you trash all your treasure).  Of course, it would require some engine where you'd play enough to get 8 coin tokens at the end of your turn, and of course you played Outpost, then you buy a province during your Outpost turn. 

[werothegreat]

Hm, Possessions interaction with coin-token cards is kind of interesting.  The possessor gains the cards, but the possessed player gains the coin tokens. I wonder if there will be Guilds cards where the token gaining happens at times other than when you play the action (i.e., when you buy cards).  There is no real harm in playing Baker during your Possession turn as you can just spend the coin tokens, so it's not as bad as the VP tokens.  But you would have to avoid a card that says "While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a coin token" or something to that effect.

Its not that new, same thing happened with VP chips.

The nuance here is that if the possessing player wants access to those coins, he has to do it during that same possessed hand - he doesn't get to add them to his deck (like a gained card) or token pile (sans mat). It is sort of a half-step between VP chips, which he doesn't get, and cards, which he does get. Tokens, he doesn't get, but he can use.

Right.  So you just use all their hard-earned tokens.