Print

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

[Awaclus]

It could give you a bonus both turns. Something like +2 cards now and next turn, and also it attacks when you play it.

It could make all other players discard their Duration cards, so it could be used as an answer to Lighthouse!

No, wait...

[Warfreak2]

Duration cards stay out as a reminder - you get the duration effect even if they aren't in play (edge case: "while this is in play" clause, that's only Lighthouse which is immune anyway), e.g. because of Procession. An attack that discards Duration cards would actually be a subtle trap; it helps the opponents play them again sooner.

[Witherweaver]

I guess you'd have to make some choices with the rules on how you want them to work, but I don't think it would be a nightmare. 

With moat:

1) Opponent plays attack-duration card during his turn.
2) You reveal Moat; the on-play effect of the card does not effect you.
3) Either:
3a) When you discard Moat while the attack-duration is in effect, set Moat aside and discard Moat when the attack-duration card is discarded during your opponent's cleanup phase.  You are protected against the duration-attack effect during your opponent's next turn.  If you revealed Moat against multiple attacks, leave it out until the last attack-duration is discarded (this should only matter in a weird case of Outpost where they played attacks during the first and second turn and you somehow discarded Moat form some effect in the middle somewhere).  You can not "reveal" Moat for other attacks while it is set-aside (as it is not in your hand).
3b) Play as normal, getting affected by the duration-attack effect as normal.
4) You can't "reveal" Moat against the duration-attack effect of the card on the future turn.

To me (3a) and (3b) seem a tossup.  I would go for (3b) for simplicity, but (3a) would make Moat better, which it probably needs.

For Lighthouse I don't think there should be any change:

1) You play a lighthouse
2) Opponent plays an attack-duration card; you are not effected
3) Your next turn, you discard lighthouse during cleanup
4) Opponent's next turn; you are effected by the duration-attack part because lighthouse is no longer in play. (Unless you played a second Lighthouse). 

[AJD]

Neither of your two proposals about Moat are correct. The rules are unambiguous about how Duration–Attacks would interact with Moat.

1. Opponent plays Duration–Attack during his turn.
2. You reveal Moat; the this-turn effect of the Attack does not affect you.
3. Later, you play your turn, discarding the Moat.
4. The next-turn effect of the Attack also doesn't affect you, because you revealed Moat when it was played.

The problem is remembering, when (4) comes comes around, who revealed a Moat back at (2). But there's no other way to interpret the cards and rules.

Lighthouse is a little more ambiguous: Moat says "you are unaffected by that Attack", which clearly includes any future effects, but Lighthouse says "when another player plays an Attack card, it doesn't affect you", which might mean that effects of an Attack card that take place at times other than when it's played aren't blocked, but could also be interpreted the same way Moat is.

[Witherweaver]

I see your point there, it does say "you are unaffected by that Attack," so it would hold for the next turn as well.  I was proposing the Moat should stick around as long as the duration does, like you do with Throne Room and King's Court.

I would think Lighthouse would be the latter one.

EDIT: I don't remember the wording of duration cards with other cards.  Is it "if you play a duration card with another card" type of language?  That would not encompass Moat as is (since it is not played), but it feels like this should be changed for cards that are still "doing stuff" when the duration card is doing stuff.

EDIT: I found the wording from the rulebook:

If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that
other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing
anything. For example if you play Throne Room on Merchant
Ship, both cards stay in play until the Clean-up phase of your next
turn. The Throne Room stays in play to remind you that you are
getting the effect of Merchant Ship twice on that next turn.

I think "modify" was put there for the hypothetical Enchant card.  I would say Moat counts as modifying, though (or at least in the same spirit) so the rules aren't clear here. 

[AJD]

EDIT: I found the wording from the rulebook:

If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that
other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing
anything. For example if you play Throne Room on Merchant
Ship, both cards stay in play until the Clean-up phase of your next
turn. The Throne Room stays in play to remind you that you are
getting the effect of Merchant Ship twice on that next turn.

I think "modify" was put there for the hypothetical Enchant card.  I would say Moat counts as modifying, though (or at least in the same spirit) so the rules aren't clear here.

Moat never enters anybody's play area, though, and certainly not that of the person who played the Duration, so it can't "stay in your play area" in any case.

[Witherweaver]

Sure, which is why I'd say the rule should be reworded.  Things that do things with duration cards are supposed to stay out until they're done doing those things for tracking purposes: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/456393/throne-room-duration-cards/page/1, when Donald chimes in about Throne-Throne-Duration and the rest.

[Warfreak2]

I thought the "modify" bit referred to Throne Room, Kings Court and Procession. "If you play or modify a Duration card with another card" = "If you play a Duration card, or modify a Duration card with another card".

[Witherweaver]

I'm pretty sure he put "modify" in to include more general cases, because he may have wanted to make the "Enchant" card work eventually.  In fact he exactly says that:

I talk about "modifying" as a general term for this, rather than say "Throning," because at one point I thought someday I might do stuff like "play an action, increasing numbers in its text by 2" (which has horrible problems but they're not the point now okay), and that kind of thing works the same way, it has to stay out to track what was modified.

Edit: So apparently (upon reading that post until the end), Donald changed his mind about things playing things playing Durations to only the card that immediately played the duration card stays out.  I guess that's how it's implemented online, though I never bothered to check. 

[WanderingWinder]

Moat doesn't modify the attack, it modifies what it does to YOU. This is probably clearer in a 4 player game, where obviously the moat only applies to one of the attacked players. It also seems weird to me that I should have to leave my card with that duration, as usually I get to keep it in my hand so I can play it, defend against other attacks, etc.

[Witherweaver]

The moat's ability is still active when the next turn of the duration comes around, though.  The wording of the rule book doesn't make that clear, but the discussion about tracking things indicates that's what one would want to have happen if it could be made to work out.

It probably couldn't, though.  The only way to handle the tracking thing would be to withhold setting aside Moat until it would leave your hand (since you should be able to reveal it again or play it during your turn), which is what I was saying in the earlier post. But then you have to keep track of when you would discard it, which isn't all that better.  Probably better to scrap the idea of setting it aside at all and just remember that you're immune to the attack. 

So, yeah, this is all probably why Attack-Duration cards don't exist.

[LastFootnote]

It's all too confusing to justify a card that attacks on the next turn, which I believe was the original point.

You could still do an Action — Attack — Duration card, though. Perhaps a card that stole and set aside Treasure cards from other players, then put one of those set-aside cards into your hand at the start of your next turn.

[florrat]

Sure, which is why I'd say the rule should be reworded.  Things that do things with duration cards are supposed to stay out until they're done doing those things for tracking purposes: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/456393/throne-room-duration-cards/page/1, when Donald chimes in about Throne-Throne-Duration and the rest.

Please don't like to threads with outdated answers. The rules Donald states over there are outdated and are wrong (see the last post in that thread).