Print

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

[jackelfrink]

I don't think this is a good card. You generally want to get rid of your Copper, and if you can clean your deck while junking your opponent, that's even better. This card is like a reverse Ambassador. Obviously it gets better against trim decks, but by that time your own deck contains so much junk that you've lost the game no matter what.

Well, not necessarily 'junking' as the treasure goes into your hand increasing your buying power. Like Beggar.

But it still wouldn't work for reasons LastFootnote and SirPeebles pointed out.

[eHalcyon]

I don't think this is a good card. You generally want to get rid of your Copper, and if you can clean your deck while junking your opponent, that's even better. This card is like a reverse Ambassador. Obviously it gets better against trim decks, but by that time your own deck contains so much junk that you've lost the game no matter what.

Well, not necessarily 'junking' as the treasure goes into your hand increasing your buying power. Like Beggar.

But it still wouldn't work for reasons LastFootnote and SirPeebles pointed out.

It is still junking, even though you get some benefit.  Beggar junks you too.

[Watno]

How about "Do one of the following: Gain a foo or gain a bar.

Because it says you need to do one, you cant purposefully choose the empty pile.

That's no different from choosing to gain a Curse from Torturer when the Curse pile is empty.

It is. Torturer doesn't require you do actually do one of the options, it lets you choose one and then you try doing it.
My wording specifies you actually need to do one.

[scott_pilgrim]

How about "Do one of the following: Gain a foo or gain a bar.

Because it says you need to do one, you cant purposefully choose the empty pile.

That's no different from choosing to gain a Curse from Torturer when the Curse pile is empty.

It is. Torturer doesn't require you do actually do one of the options, it lets you choose one and then you try doing it.
My wording specifies you actually need to do one.

I suppose that's reasonable.

This makes me wonder, if I trash Hunting Grounds when the Duchies are out, am I forced to gain three Estates?  It neither specifies "do one of the following:" nor does it say "choose one:".  If I am indeed forced to gain three Estates, then the "Do one of the following:" clause in the hypothetical would be unnecessary; we could just say "Gain a foo or gain a bar".  If I am not forced to gain three Estates, that means that by default, a "Choose one:" clause is implied for "or" statements, which means it could be eliminated from a lot of existing cards (Steward, Minion, Count, etc.).

[eHalcyon]

The wiki lists in the official FAQ

- If this is trashed, you either gain a Duchy or 3 Estates, your choice.
- If you choose the 3 Estates and there are not 3 left, just gain as many as you can.

The second point suggests that you can choose Estates even when there are none, and that should logically apply to Duchy as well.

The wiki also has "other rules clarifications" which says:

"If you trash Hunting Grounds and the Duchy pile is empty, you can still choose Duchy (and gain nothing)."

There is no source on that, but presumably it's from some clarification that Donald X. made at some point.  I don't know.

[Asper]

How about "Do one of the following: Gain a foo or gain a bar.

Because it says you need to do one, you cant purposefully choose the empty pile.

That's no different from choosing to gain a Curse from Torturer when the Curse pile is empty.

It is. Torturer doesn't require you do actually do one of the options, it lets you choose one and then you try doing it.
My wording specifies you actually need to do one.

Dominion instructions are not logical formulas. "Gain a Curse or discard two cards" as a dominion instruction can be followed if i try gaining a curse and fail, while the logical statement "You gain a curse or discard two cards" would be false.That's because dominion instructions are always divided in 1)try and 2)if possible, do. You try using logic instead of sequential instructions for your reasoning, but Dominion as a game lacks any ability to deal with that. There is no mechanic in the entire game that is capable of deciding whether something will happen before it was tried to do it.

So "Do one of the following: A or B" is the same as "Do A or do B", just split in two sentences. Dominion never knows whether you can do something before you try.

Edit: Nice example i learned from the rules section is that you'll never discard an Outpost, even when it's played during an Outpost turn. While it's pretty obvious you can't have that second Outpost turn (and so Outpost won't have any actual effect next turn), Outpost will still try giving you that turn and therefore stay in play.

[BadAssMutha]

Name either a Foo or a Bar in the supply. Gain it.

[eHalcyon]

Name either a Foo or a Bar in the supply. Gain it.

Name it, you say?  I shall call him Squishy and he shall be mine, and he shall be my Squishy.

[Awaclus]

Name either a Foo or a Bar in the supply. Gain it.

Name it, you say?  I shall call him Squishy and he shall be mine

The card doesn't say he becomes Mine.

[Davio]

Gain a Foo or a Bar. The card you choose must have at least one copy left in the supply.

The wording of the second sentence is a bit awkward, but what it boils down to is that you do as much as you can and if neither has a copy left the card just fizzles and you gain neither.

[pst]

It repeat my point. All of you who propose different "solutions" to this "problem", more complicated than just "gain a Foo or a Bar", do you believe that you can avoid gaining a card with for instance Workshop if a pile is depleted? Oh, "gain a card costing up to $4"? I choose a Hamlet, and since there are no Hamlets left I don't get anything!

It doesn't work that way. You gain no card only if there are no cards costing up to $4. Similarly, with "gain a Foo or a Bar" you gain no card only if there are no Foo or Bar cards.

[Awaclus]

It repeat my point. All of you who propose different "solutions" to this "problem", more complicated than just "gain a Foo or a Bar", do you believe that you can avoid gaining a card with for instance Workshop if a pile is depleted? Oh, "gain a card costing up to $4"? I choose a Hamlet, and since there are no Hamlets left I don't get anything!

It doesn't work that way. You gain no card only if there are no cards costing up to $4. Similarly, with "gain a Foo or a Bar" you gain no card only if there are no Foo or Bar cards.

But Tournament works that way.

Though, what about Spy? If there was a card that said "You can't discard this from your deck", could you choose to make them discard it anyway?

[Tables]

It repeat my point. All of you who propose different "solutions" to this "problem", more complicated than just "gain a Foo or a Bar", do you believe that you can avoid gaining a card with for instance Workshop if a pile is depleted? Oh, "gain a card costing up to $4"? I choose a Hamlet, and since there are no Hamlets left I don't get anything!

It doesn't work that way. You gain no card only if there are no cards costing up to $4. Similarly, with "gain a Foo or a Bar" you gain no card only if there are no Foo or Bar cards.

As Awac says, this wording fails based on the rulings (in the rulebook of Cornucopia) of Tournament. Tournament simply says "Gain a Duchy or Prize (from the prize pile)" and you're allowed to choose Duchy instead of a prize, if the Duchy pile is empty.

On a side note... do you think this is really the right way that "Gain an X or a Y" should work, compared to something like "Gain an X costing less than $c"? I think it's a very odd rule, when you actually do this comparison. I suppose the reasoning is that "Gain an X or Y" gives you an implied step where you first choose an X or Y, and then gain it, while "Gain an X costing less than $c" is one single step? I don't even know if this really makes sense. It's all a bit odd.

[Davio]

Knowing Dominion, it's probably something like:

Gain X or Y

• Name a card which is named either X or Y
• Choose that card
• Pick that card
• Attempt to gain a copy of that card
• Gain a copy of that card

I probably missed some steps.

Anyway, Torturer lets you choose to gain a Curse when they're gone.
I think (not sure) Count lets you pick Duchy when they're gone (even though you'll probably pick +$3 in that case). And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

So the choice comes before knowing whether you can actually complete the action. Even if you know you can't, you can still pick it.

With Workshop, the choice is indeed a 1-step move and therefore you can't pick to gain a card that's not there. Gain X or Y uses lazy evaluation, it only evaluates "gain X" or "gain Y" when you actually get there. So I don't think this is weird, you only have to think about it a bit.

Still, Gain a Foo or a Bar where you HAVE to take one is a bit awkward.
I don't know what Foo or Bar are, but maybe you can solve this by grouping them into a subtype?
Let's say Foo and Bar are of type Action - Jackson.

You could say: Gain a Jackson.

In that case you have to take whichever is available.
I'm pretty sure Squire makes you take a Spy when trashed if the Goons have run out.

[Drab Emordnilap]

"Gain a Foo or Bar" lets you pick an empty pile, because first you're making an either/or choice, and then resolving it -- see Tournament or Hunting Grounds. It's effectively "Gain a Foo, or gain a Bar".

"Gain a card named Foo or Bar" is different -- the instruction is "Gain a card", and so you can't try to gain a Bar specifically if there are none left and there are Foos -- see Workshop, Smugglers, et al.

[pst]

But Tournament works that way.

True. I was wrong. Because of that misfortunate precedent something more has to be written.

I don't like that Tournament works that way, though, and think that Tournament should have been phrased as "gain a Prize or gain a Duchy" to have the indented effect. Not being a native English speaker I may go out on a limb here, but I'd like referential transparency so that "A or B" and "C" means the same here when C is a category with A and B.

But because of Tournament "gain A or B" should be treated as "gain A, or gain B" instead. (And then there's nothing odd anymore.)

Back to the original question, how about "gain a Foo or a Bar from a pile that isn't empty"?

[GendoIkari]

"Gain a Foo or Bar" lets you pick an empty pile, because first you're making an either/or choice, and then resolving it -- see Tournament or Hunting Grounds. It's effectively "Gain a Foo, or gain a Bar".

"Gain a card named Foo or Bar" is different -- the instruction is "Gain a card", and so you can't try to gain a Bar specifically if there are none left and there are Foos -- see Workshop, Smugglers, et al.

Well said. I wasn't quite getting why Workshop worked until you said this. (I remember Donald explained the same thing a long time ago). So yeah, "Gain a card named Foo or Bar" will work. "Named Foo or Bar" isn't giving you a choice of what to do, it's just providing the stipulations/requirements around the "gain a card" instruction.

[SirPeebles]

And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

Count is OP when the Copper pile is empty.

[GendoIkari]

And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

Count is OP when the Copper pile is empty.

And, it even provides a built-in way to drain that Copper pile to get it there! Self-synergy!

[ashersky]

And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

Count is OP when the Copper pile is empty.

And, it even provides a built-in way to drain that Copper pile to get it there! Self-synergy!

That's why both Count and Counting House cost 5.  Too much synergy otherwise.

[Asper]

And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

Count is OP when the Copper pile is empty.

And, it even provides a built-in way to drain that Copper pile to get it there! Self-synergy!

That's why both Count and Counting House cost 5.  Too much synergy otherwise.

Someone make Count House for the Very Bad card ideas thread...

[AJD]

And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

Count is OP when the Copper pile is empty.

And, it even provides a built-in way to drain that Copper pile to get it there! Self-synergy!

That's why both Count and Counting House cost 5.  Too much synergy otherwise.

Someone make Count House for the Very Bad card ideas thread...

Count House
$5: Victory
Worth 1 VP per Count you have?

[Awaclus]

And I think you can choose "gain a Copper" and not get one if the pile is empty.

Count is OP when the Copper pile is empty.

And, it even provides a built-in way to drain that Copper pile to get it there! Self-synergy!

That's why both Count and Counting House cost 5.  Too much synergy otherwise.

Someone make Count House for the Very Bad card ideas thread...

Count House
$5: Victory
Worth 1 VP per Count you have?

Worth 1 VP per card with "Count" in its name, except Counterfeit.

[Wrclass]

"You may gain a Foo. If not, gain a Bar. If not, gain a Foo"

You have to gain either a Foo or Bar unless both piles are empty

[Drab Emordnilap]

"You may gain a Foo. If not, gain a Bar. If not, gain a Foo"

You have to gain either a Foo or Bar unless both piles are empty

The problem with this is mainly that it looks ridiculous in English, not that it doesn't function in Dominionlish.

"Gain a card named Foo or Bar" works the same way and reads better.