Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2  All

Author Topic: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply  (Read 7533 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« on: June 11, 2013, 06:33:29 am »
0

Card A
Some Cost, Action
Some effect. Gain a card B.
Each opponent may reveal his hand. If he does, something good for him (likely drawing a new, smaller hand).


Card B
0*$, Treasure-Victory
2$
1 VP

When you reveal this, put it back on the card B pile.

Edited Rules: "When you reveal this" triggers as soon as you resolve a card that tells you to "reveal" card B.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 12:20:31 pm by Asper »
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2013, 08:40:57 am »
+1

Cards that disappear when you reveal them sound very complicated - for example, if I play Cutpurse and you reveal a hand with no Copper, can I make you discard Card B, or has it already returned to the Card B pile? If I play Rebuild and hit Card B, is it trashed or returned to the pile? If I play Harvest or Tribute, revealing Card B, is it counted as a unique card, or returned first?

Lose-track will come into effect, but in situations it was never intended to. I think more rules are necessary; define "reveal" as "move to the 'reveal zone', then move back to its original location unless instructed otherwise" (as it appears to be implemented on Goko), in the same way trash means "move to the trash pile", and then resolve on-reveal when the card reaches the 'reveal zone'.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 08:45:44 am by Warfreak2 »
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2013, 12:16:01 pm »
0

<<Edited for better reading/wording.>>

Rule wording:
1. Card B is "revealed" when you resolve the part of a card that tells you to "reveal" any cards and this makes you reveal Card B.
That's the only rule needed for clarification.

The other rules follows from that and other rules allready known:
2. All cards that would move it lose track (Lose-track rule)
3. All cards that care what or how many cards where revealed, count card B, as it was revealed (Just like cards trashed with WT on gain still trigger Hagglers effect).

So:
1.
Rebuild doesn't make me "reveal" card B (by definition), it trashes it.
- Confused it with Remodel, see Edit below.

2.
Cutpurse (which by the way can't make you discard anything but Copper) will make me reveal my hand. This causes me to return Card B to its pile and nothing else. If i reveal Card B for Bureaucrat, it goes to its pile. I would put it on my deck then, but i can't. Same goes for Thief, who can't trash it. The same way Spy can't make me discard or top-deck card B after revealing it.
Edit: Rebuild makes you reveal the card, then return it to it's pile. It's never trashed, so it's like with Remodel on an empty hand - you gain nothing.

3.
Harvest and Tribute count revealed cards, and the card was revealed, so of course card B counts. Same goes for Noble Brigand. If i reveal Card B, it goes to it's pile, and i won't gain a Copper. If the second card happens to be a Silver/Gold, the Brigand player may steal that.

Honestly i don't see the problem. Everything but the (simple) definition follows from things we know. And the definition comes down to "If the wording is īreveal`, it's reveal, if not, it's not". In my opinion disappearing "on-reveal" cards are even more simple than those who don't, as they do not enter and exit a "reveal zone" all the time. They are lost track of, and that's it.
Also the idea that lose-track would not be "intended" to happen somewhere seems implausible to me. It's a rule that exists because something unintended happens. And some cards, like Procession, make heavy use of this "unintended" rule - so why not Card B?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 01:19:16 pm by Asper »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2013, 12:59:02 pm »
+1

Rebuild doesn't make me "reveal" card B (by definition), it trashes it.

False.  Rebuild has you name a card, then reveal cards until you reveal a Victory card that is not the named card.  Card B is thus the last card you reveal due to Rebuild.

Logically, the sequence of events should be thus:

Play Rebuild, name [not card B].
Rebuild reveals X non-victory cards, then Card B.
Card B has been revealed, so it is returned to the pile.
Rebuild instructs you to trash Card B, but it has been returned.  Lose Track rule kicks in.
Rebuild instructs you to "gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than it".

The question at this point is whether Rebuild will let you gain anything.  What does "it" refer to?  If "it" is the trashed card, then Rebuild won't let you gain anything because nothing was trashed.  However, I think it refers to "the Victory card [that was revealed]" and so it still works; you return Card B and then gain a Victory card costing up to $3.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2013, 01:08:38 pm »
0

Rebuild doesn't make me "reveal" card B (by definition), it trashes it.

False.  Rebuild has you name a card, then reveal cards until you reveal a Victory card that is not the named card.  Card B is thus the last card you reveal due to Rebuild.

Logically, the sequence of events should be thus:

Play Rebuild, name [not card B].
Rebuild reveals X non-victory cards, then Card B.
Card B has been revealed, so it is returned to the pile.
Rebuild instructs you to trash Card B, but it has been returned.  Lose Track rule kicks in.
Rebuild instructs you to "gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than it".

The question at this point is whether Rebuild will let you gain anything.  What does "it" refer to?  If "it" is the trashed card, then Rebuild won't let you gain anything because nothing was trashed.  However, I think it refers to "the Victory card [that was revealed]" and so it still works; you return Card B and then gain a Victory card costing up to $3.

Ah crap, i confused Rebuild with Remodel. I'd say you can't gain a card, as it should work the same as playing Remodel with an empty hand.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 01:18:29 pm by Asper »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #5 on: June 11, 2013, 01:32:39 pm »
+1

Rebuild doesn't make me "reveal" card B (by definition), it trashes it.

False.  Rebuild has you name a card, then reveal cards until you reveal a Victory card that is not the named card.  Card B is thus the last card you reveal due to Rebuild.

Logically, the sequence of events should be thus:

Play Rebuild, name [not card B].
Rebuild reveals X non-victory cards, then Card B.
Card B has been revealed, so it is returned to the pile.
Rebuild instructs you to trash Card B, but it has been returned.  Lose Track rule kicks in.
Rebuild instructs you to "gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than it".

The question at this point is whether Rebuild will let you gain anything.  What does "it" refer to?  If "it" is the trashed card, then Rebuild won't let you gain anything because nothing was trashed.  However, I think it refers to "the Victory card [that was revealed]" and so it still works; you return Card B and then gain a Victory card costing up to $3.

Ah crap, i confused Rebuild with Remodel. I'd say you can't gain a card, as it should work the same as playing Remodel with an empty hand.

It isn't.  The wording on the two cards is different.  Remodel specifically refers to "the trashed card", so if there is no card trashed then you can't gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.  Rebuild does not refer to "the trashed card"; it only says "it".  In the context of the sentence, I believe that "it" is the Victory card that was revealed.  Rebuild goes on to tell you to trash that card and gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than that card, and IMO the second instruction is not dependent on the first.  So you fail to trash it but still have to gain a card anyway.
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #6 on: June 11, 2013, 02:46:12 pm »
+1

Cutpurse (which by the way can't make you discard anything but Copper)
Sorry, I typed Cutpurse for some reason instead of Pillage.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #7 on: June 11, 2013, 03:13:46 pm »
0

Rebuild doesn't make me "reveal" card B (by definition), it trashes it.

False.  Rebuild has you name a card, then reveal cards until you reveal a Victory card that is not the named card.  Card B is thus the last card you reveal due to Rebuild.

Logically, the sequence of events should be thus:

Play Rebuild, name [not card B].
Rebuild reveals X non-victory cards, then Card B.
Card B has been revealed, so it is returned to the pile.
Rebuild instructs you to trash Card B, but it has been returned.  Lose Track rule kicks in.
Rebuild instructs you to "gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than it".

The question at this point is whether Rebuild will let you gain anything.  What does "it" refer to?  If "it" is the trashed card, then Rebuild won't let you gain anything because nothing was trashed.  However, I think it refers to "the Victory card [that was revealed]" and so it still works; you return Card B and then gain a Victory card costing up to $3.

Ah crap, i confused Rebuild with Remodel. I'd say you can't gain a card, as it should work the same as playing Remodel with an empty hand.

It isn't.  The wording on the two cards is different.  Remodel specifically refers to "the trashed card", so if there is no card trashed then you can't gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.  Rebuild does not refer to "the trashed card"; it only says "it".  In the context of the sentence, I believe that "it" is the Victory card that was revealed.  Rebuild goes on to tell you to trash that card and gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than that card, and IMO the second instruction is not dependent on the first.  So you fail to trash it but still have to gain a card anyway.

So you were asking a rethorical question before? I admit i actually assume you know the ruling for such edge cases better than me. In any case, they are not something that arises newly with Card B, so they can't be held against the card, as was tried.

Cutpurse (which by the way can't make you discard anything but Copper)
Sorry, I typed Cutpurse for some reason instead of Pillage.

For Pillage it goes like this:
1. If i have 5 or more cards in hand, i reveal it. Otherwise, the attack doesn't hit me.
2. If one or more of the revealed cards is a Card B, they are returned to their pile.
3. The opponent picks one of the remaining cards for you to discard.
4. You discard the card and now have at least one card less in hand. You may even have lost all of them.

The reason would be that the condition (how many cards do i have) is checked before i reveal my hand. It's not checked afterwards. So going for Card B wouldn't be a very clever idea on a Pillage board...
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 03:16:25 pm by Asper »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #8 on: June 11, 2013, 03:19:50 pm »
+1

So you were asking a rethorical question before? I admit i actually assume you know the ruling for such edge cases better than me. In any case, they are not something that arises newly with Card B, so they can't be held against the card, as was tried.

Not entirely.  The wording on Remodel IS different from Rebuild.  That is fact.  The wording on Remodel is such that it prevents you from gaining a card if you do not first trash a card.  That is also fact.  The question is about how the wording on Rebuild affects things.  Because there is no official card that can create a scenario like Card B does, there is no official ruling.  It is therefore up for debate.  I answer my own question by suggesting that Rebuild should still let you gain, and that is based on my interpretation of the text on the card.  But because there is no official ruling, it is up for discussion.  My second post was just pointing out that Remodel is not an appropriate comparison because the two cards do not actually match in how they are phrased, even though they are both effectively "trash a card, gain a card costing more".
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2013, 05:37:40 pm »
0

So you were asking a rethorical question before? I admit i actually assume you know the ruling for such edge cases better than me. In any case, they are not something that arises newly with Card B, so they can't be held against the card, as was tried.

Not entirely.  The wording on Remodel IS different from Rebuild.  That is fact.  The wording on Remodel is such that it prevents you from gaining a card if you do not first trash a card.  That is also fact.  The question is about how the wording on Rebuild affects things.  Because there is no official card that can create a scenario like Card B does, there is no official ruling.  It is therefore up for debate.  I answer my own question by suggesting that Rebuild should still let you gain, and that is based on my interpretation of the text on the card.  But because there is no official ruling, it is up for discussion.  My second post was just pointing out that Remodel is not an appropriate comparison because the two cards do not actually match in how they are phrased, even though they are both effectively "trash a card, gain a card costing more".

I agree that the wordings of Rebuild and Remodel do not match. I do not agree that Card B/Rebuil causes a new kind of behaviour. Processions wording is very close to Rebuilds. As with Rebuild/Card B, the Processioned card might not get trashed. Therefore what goes for Procession/Madman goes for Rebuild/Card B.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 07:06:43 am by Asper »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #10 on: June 11, 2013, 06:22:30 pm »
+1

So you were asking a rethorical question before? I admit i actually assume you know the ruling for such edge cases better than me. In any case, they are not something that arises newly with Card B, so they can't be held against the card, as was tried.

Not entirely.  The wording on Remodel IS different from Rebuild.  That is fact.  The wording on Remodel is such that it prevents you from gaining a card if you do not first trash a card.  That is also fact.  The question is about how the wording on Rebuild affects things.  Because there is no official card that can create a scenario like Card B does, there is no official ruling.  It is therefore up for debate.  I answer my own question by suggesting that Rebuild should still let you gain, and that is based on my interpretation of the text on the card.  But because there is no official ruling, it is up for discussion.  My second post was just pointing out that Remodel is not an appropriate comparison because the two cards do not actually match in how they are phrased, even though they are both effectively "trash a card, gain a card costing more".

I agree that the wordings of Rebuild and Remodel do not match. I do not agree that Card B/Rebuil causes a new kind of behaviour. Processions wording is very close to Rebuilds. As with Rebuild/Card B, the Processioned card might not get trashed. Therefore what goes for Procession/Feast goes for Rebuild/Card B.

Well, that favours my interpretation of gaining without trashing.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2013, 07:13:00 am »
0

Well, that favours my interpretation of gaining without trashing.

Changed it to Procession/Madman to complete the analogy.

As said before, i don't doubt you know many cards and their wordings better than me. One of the reasons is that i use german cards to play and don't have the exact wordings in my head.

What i said was that, whatever interaction Card B causes, it's nothing new. Warfreak2s argument was that Card B may cause such new interactions and therefore would confuse players, and my point is just that that's not true.

I don't actually care which card brings up the "same" problem, as long as there is one.
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #12 on: June 12, 2013, 07:45:38 am »
+1

My point was that there are a lot of Dominion cards that ask you to reveal things, all of which assume that the thing you revealed will still be where it was afterwards. It's not so much that the interactions would be complicated, complicated is fine, but you have to decide on what the timing for "when you reveal" is, and then think through all of the interactions with those cards to make sure it doesn't create any way-too-powerful combos. A lot of cards sound fine in isolation, but then you remember that they have to coexist with everything else while not breaking the game. I think it's unlikely this card would produce a game-breaking combo, but its interactions would be unusual enough that I can't say for sure without going through a comprehensive list of every card that says "reveal".
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #13 on: June 12, 2013, 09:59:56 am »
0

My point was that there are a lot of Dominion cards that ask you to reveal things, all of which assume that the thing you revealed will still be where it was afterwards. It's not so much that the interactions would be complicated, complicated is fine, but you have to decide on what the timing for "when you reveal" is, and then think through all of the interactions with those cards to make sure it doesn't create any way-too-powerful combos. A lot of cards sound fine in isolation, but then you remember that they have to coexist with everything else while not breaking the game. I think it's unlikely this card would produce a game-breaking combo, but its interactions would be unusual enough that I can't say for sure without going through a comprehensive list of every card that says "reveal".

The thing why i'm pretty sure it won't create such a combo is that, other than the card you presented in your thread, this on-reveal effect will usually be negative. If any combination would make the effect go extreme, it would make it extremely bad (as with Pillage). The good thing about that is that you can very easily avoid such interactions by simply not going for Card B. Some cards are horrible on some kingdoms, that's how Dominion is. So unless you find some combination that profits from removing cards from your deck, i wouldn't say it could break the game. Considering Card B is worth one VP, it's even less likely.

Edit: On-reveal happens when you reveal the card. You reveal it, everything else stops, you put it back, you go on. I don't think the timing is that difficult. Btw. i'm looking through the cards right now to make a list.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 10:04:48 am by Asper »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #14 on: June 12, 2013, 10:51:51 am »
0

Card interactions of Card B:


Played by opponent:
Bureaucrat (makes you lose CB if you revealed it, loses track)
Spy (makes you lose CB if revealed, loses track)
Thief (same, can't steal it as it isn't trashed and Thief mentions "trashed cards")
Saboteur (makes you lose all Card Bs it hits before the first 3$+, loses track)
Tribute (makes you lose CB but gets a nice bonus for revealing it, loses track. Two CBs are revealed cards with the same name.)
Cutpurse (if you reveal your hand, all CBs are gone)
Pirate Ship (removes CB, loses track of it and produces no coin tokens for them as it only cares about trashed cards)
Rabble (removes all CBs it hits, loses track)
Fortune Teller (removes CB and stops there as CB is a Victory Card, loses track)
Oracle (removes, loses track)
Noble Brigand (removes CB, but counts it as a revealed Tresure, loses track)
Knights (remove CB, loses track)
Rogue (removes CB, loses track)

For most top-deck attacks it turns out CB keeps them from putting annoying VP cards on your deck, but at the downside, you lose a nice 1 VP card/Silver. Some attacks get a bit stronger, some a bit weaker. Saboteur, Tribute and Cutpurse are the big winners here, but Bureaucrat, Spy and Noble Brigand also don't mind it.


Played by yourself:
Adventurer (makes you lose your CBs, but counts them as revealed Treasures. If you reveal two Card Bs, both are removed and you put no card in your hand as they are lost track of. Becomes awful.)
Shanty Town (makes you lose CB)
Wishing Well (makes you lose CB, loses track)
Scout (becomes even more terrible, loses track)
Ambassador (you may reveal CB and return it to the pile, but can't return other ones as CB is not in the supply. No one gains CB.)
Apothecary (removes CB, loses track)
Golem (removes Card Bs it hits, loses track, bad.)
Scrying Pool (removes opponents CBs and your own. Counts as a revealed card that is not an action and stops the reveal-chain. You don't put it in your hand and opponents don't discard/top-deck it as it's lost track of)
Loan (removes CB, but stops when it's revealed. You can't trash or discard it as it's lost track of, also pretty bad.)
Mint (You may reveal CB, which makes you lose it. You can't gain a copy as it's not in the supply)
Venture (stops as CB is revealed. CB can't be played as it's lost track of, awful)
Farming Village (removes CB if it hits it, stops there and loses track so you don't get it in hand)
Harvest (removes CBs but counts them for bonus, loses track)
Crossroads (removes CB but counts it, loses track)
Vagrant (removes CB, loses track)
Sage (removes CB when hit, loses track)
Ironmonger (removes Cb, but counts it and gets the bonus, loses track)
Wandring Minstrel (removes CB, loses track)
Rebuild (Removes CB. If CB is not the named card, you gain a card costing up to 3$ without trashing CB - see eHalcyons statements for this)
Mystic (removes CB, loses track)
Doctor (removes CB, loses track)
Herald (removes CB, loses track)
Journeyman (removes CBs but counts them, loses track)

Most of those cards get much worse when you play them in your Card-B-kingdom. Scrying Pool is even worse for you than for your opponents, assuming about the same deck. Adventurer, Venture, Golem, Farming Village, Apothecary, Scout and Loan also don't like Card B a bit.


Interesting:
Possession (no direct interaction, but allows nasty things like Rebuild with "Card B" said to remove all of them from your deck. Such shenanigans require the opponent to go for Card B in the first place, as said before.)
Menagerie (as you reveal your hand, all CBs leave. If CB was the only card you had multiple of, you draw 3 cards, as Menagerie doesn't care about the cards revealed, but the cards "in your hand". I admit this one's a bit tougher...)
Hunting Party (Tough, like Menagerie. If you have CB in hand, it gets removed as you reveal it. If you then reveal CB from your deck, it isn't "a duplicate of one in your hand" and so Hunting Party stops to reveal cards. You don't put it in your hand, though, as it returns to its pile. Hunting Party is awful with Card B...)
Pillage (counts the size of your hand before reveal. If, by revealing your cards, you lose CBs, the opponent still picks one to discard. One might argue if the Pillager might chose a revealed CB.)
Envoy (removes CB when it's revealed. As with Pillage the opponent still picks one of the remaining cards. You might even argue that "one of them" relates to the revealed cards and so he could chose a revealed Card B)
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 10:20:29 am by Asper »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #15 on: June 14, 2013, 05:54:02 am »
+1

I like the idea of "on reveal", but it seems more conducive to a positive effect. Something simple like "when this card is revealed, you may gain a Silver", or "you may trash a card from your hand". Drawing cards gets really confusing, as do things that move the card when you reveal it.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 05:56:47 am by NoMoreFun »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2013, 06:12:11 am »
+1

Actually thinking about it, if you trash a Cultist, Rats or Overgrown Estate with an on reveal trasher, you can still end up with confusing drawing.

You could still do "you may trash a Treasure" though.
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #17 on: June 14, 2013, 06:49:03 am »
+1

The "confusing drawing" part already exists on the official cards, when Lookout trashes an Overgrown Estate.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #18 on: June 14, 2013, 10:40:54 am »
0

I like the idea of "on reveal", but it seems more conducive to a positive effect. Something simple like "when this card is revealed, you may gain a Silver", or "you may trash a card from your hand". Drawing cards gets really confusing, as do things that move the card when you reveal it.

A positive effect will make the card another Tunnel. All cards that "reveal until X" (which are the "strongest" revealers) will have the same interaction with the card as with Tunnel. Honestly i don't like that, because it's allready there. A negative "on-reveal" changes the value of some cards, and that's more like it. Spy, Thief, Bureaucrat and Pirate Ship will be capable of stealing your VPs, while strong cards like Hunting Party and Golem suddenly are liabilities. A positive effect changes nothing. That's why i'm in for a negative effect to nerf a strong card.

Also names:


Archive
4$, Action
+ 1 Action
Draw cards until you have 6 cards in hand. Gain a Cryptograph. Each other player may reveal his hand. If he does, he discards his hand and draws as many cards as he discarded.

Cryptograph
0*, Treasure - Victory
2$
1 VP

When you reveal this, put it back on the Cryptograph pile.
(This is not in the supply)
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 10:44:32 am by Asper »
Logged

Gveoniz

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +263
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #19 on: June 14, 2013, 11:19:06 am »
+1

I like the idea of "on reveal", but it seems more conducive to a positive effect. Something simple like "when this card is revealed, you may gain a Silver", or "you may trash a card from your hand". Drawing cards gets really confusing, as do things that move the card when you reveal it.

What about coin tokens? I am sure such thing have been mentioned in those guilds speculation though.

edit: or even VP token?

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #20 on: June 14, 2013, 07:35:27 pm »
+2

The "confusing drawing" part already exists on the official cards, when Lookout trashes an Overgrown Estate.

True, but you're already looking at a specific number of cards. What would you do with "reveal until" cards; would you keep revealing cards until the condition is met, then draw under them, or would you stop revealing, draw the cards, then go back to revealing things. While you can say that "reveal the top 4 cards of your deck" reveals all 4 at once, with precedents in things like Militia and Chapel, the indefinite sized reveals are another matter.

Also, if you are revealing your hand, and then draw a "when reveal" card after revealing a first such card in your hand, does it activate as part of the same reveal? What about if you reveal your hand to show no copper to a cutpurse, then draw a copper?

It's pretty confusing all around.

Another confusing thing is gaining to the top of deck though. This is possible with watchtower, as are activating When trash effects that could cause trouble.

I guess you could say that when you reveal cards, they go to "reveal space", so when you reveal your "hand" with no copper to a cutpurse, for that moment while you're revealing, your "hand" is technically empty so any cards you draw or gain into your hand aren't revealed. Same goes for your top deck. It does seem logical that you'd need to complete your reveal action for indefinite sized reveals before you activate your when reveal effects; you are revealing a set number of cards, you just don't know what that number is yet.

When reveal coin tokens is a good idea, and probably the least confusing. I'm really disappointed that there's no non attack interactions for coin tokens. It's finally a simple way of getting money to spend when it isn't your turn, and it's unexplored space. Of course, it's probably broken with something like Hunting Party (while a when reveal trash, Remodel or Silver gain may very well not be).
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #21 on: June 15, 2013, 06:49:34 am »
+1

The "reveal zone", as Goko implements it, seems to be the way forward.

"When you reveal this, take a coin token" does sound OK until you mention Hunting Party. Hunting Party can reveal every card in the deck multiple times per turn, since each reveals your whole hand and then most of your deck.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

Gveoniz

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • Respect: +263
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #22 on: June 15, 2013, 10:00:46 am »
+1

The "reveal zone", as Goko implements it, seems to be the way forward.

"When you reveal this, take a coin token" does sound OK until you mention Hunting Party. Hunting Party can reveal every card in the deck multiple times per turn, since each reveals your whole hand and then most of your deck.

return it on reveal? as originally mentioned by OP. that way it is not too crazy unless you play the card gainer crazy amount of time per turn, which is also happen too if you do that on normal token taker.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5344
    • View Profile
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #23 on: June 15, 2013, 11:24:00 am »
0

The "reveal zone", as Goko implements it, seems to be the way forward.

"When you reveal this, take a coin token" does sound OK until you mention Hunting Party. Hunting Party can reveal every card in the deck multiple times per turn, since each reveals your whole hand and then most of your deck.

Menagerie with one of them in hand becomes a Coin token cantrip like Baker, but for 3$ and with possibly more than one coin and possibly more cards. I also wouldn't mind Golem and Adventurer.


It also makes Scout better.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 12:16:32 pm by Asper »
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: An "on-reveal"-card that is not in the supply
« Reply #24 on: June 15, 2013, 12:38:25 pm »
+1

Two-card combos, when connected, are allowed to be >= individual $5 cards; for example, Village+Smithy is equal to two Laboratories. The point is that you have to connect them.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.12 seconds with 20 queries.