Print

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

[Jerk of All trades]

I'm curious if Sir Vander can be trashed multiple times in one play to gain multiple golds?

Like if I king's courted  Sir vander and trashed multiple Knights, Or if you were in a 4 player game and 2 opponents trashed Knights.

I'm assuming it just gets trashed once, and then you "lose track" and cannot trash a second time.

[LastFootnote]

I'm assuming it just gets trashed once, and then you "lose track" and cannot trash a second time.

You are correct.

[pst]

I'm assuming it just gets trashed once, and then you "lose track" and cannot trash a second time.

I don't think the lose-track rule really applies. It is an ability of Sir Vander that puts him in the trash, so he would expect himself to be there! Isn't it instead just simply that you can't trash cards that are already in the trash?

Compare some bolded quotes from the FAQ:

So even if you can't trash Feast (because it's already trashed), you gain a card.

...

When Throne Roomed in a turn when you're Possessed (with Possession), if trashed the first time, Mining Village is set aside (per the Possession rules). Although Throne Room has lost track of it, it can now be trashed since it's not already in Trash. But Mining Village has now lost track of itself. It tries to trash itself from play, but since it's not in play the second time, it can't trash itself

[flies]

this seems to be a unique situation.  is there any other way to trash the same card multiple times - besides knights?  If not, then Vander's on-trash-benefit is the only case where this ruling makes a difference.  The rulebook says this:

"Trash” – when a player trashes a card, he places it in the Trash pile, not his Discard pile.

It's not obvious that you can't trash a card in the trash.  If you can play a card that's in play, why can't you trash a card that's in the trash?

[Jimmmmm]

this seems to be a unique situation.  is there any other way to trash the same card multiple times - besides knights?  If not, then Vander's on-trash-benefit is the only case where this ruling makes a difference.  The rulebook says this:

"Trash” – when a player trashes a card, he places it in the Trash pile, not his Discard pile.

It's not obvious that you can't trash a card in the trash.  If you can play a card that's in play, why can't you trash a card that's in the trash?

You can try to trash Mining Village multiple times with TR/KC, but you only get the bonus once because you only succeed once.

[flies]

Mining Village says "If you do", though I suppose the Vander's "when you trash this" seems to amount to the same thing.  The parallel to mining village seems pretty clear; you can't trash a card that's already been trashed, though, again, I'm not entirely clear why.  I mean, a bunch of Dominion card rulings seem to amount to, "benefit the player less."

[Warfreak2]

I think it would be a lot more counterintuitive if you could trash cards that are in the trash.

[SirPeebles]

I think it would be a lot more counterintuitive if you could trash cards that are in the trash.

Why is that?  It seems odd and counterintuitive to me that you cannot trash something just because it is already in the trash.

[SCSN]

I think it would be a lot more counterintuitive if you could trash cards that are in the trash.

Why is that?  It seems odd and counterintuitive to me that you cannot trash something just because it is already in the trash.

I agree. I find the whole lose-track business very confusing and really unnecessary. It's both more practical and intuitive to let cards have knowledge of everything that you know yourself about their locations (after all it's me who's playing the cards and executing their instructions, it isn't the cards playing themselves lol).

And it would also be easier if "play" would mean "move the card to the play area, regardless of where it currently is, then execute its instructions". So with Throning a Mining Village you can play it, trash it, move it back to play, play it again, trash it again. It would make it a bit stronger but certainly not overpowered or anything, as TR and KC aren't quite in every game...

[Warfreak2]

If your cat brings in a dead bird, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

[SirPeebles]

If your cat brings in a dead bird, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

Eww.  Putting the dead bird into the trash is likely to only make my kitchen smell worse.

[Warfreak2]

The trash can outside, obviously... why, where were you going to put it? Surely not in the pile of cards at the end of the table...

[Awaclus]

If your cat brings in a dead bird, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

Well, the room isn't further freshened, but you still can do that.

[SirPeebles]

The trash can outside, obviously... why, where were you going to put it? Surely not in the pile of cards at the end of the table...

I would put the dead bird outside, but not in a trash can.  That feels disrespectful, does not encourage the natural decomposition of the body, and would likely attract other critters to the trash can.

[flies]

I find the whole lose-track business very confusing and really unnecessary. It's both more practical and intuitive to let cards have knowledge of everything that you know yourself about their locations (after all it's me who's playing the cards and executing their instructions, it isn't the cards playing themselves lol).

So, in the scheme/hermit case, you'd trash the hermit.  In the spoils/counterfeit case, you'd trash the spoils.  Is that the interpretation that makes the most sense to you?  It does seem rather more straightforward to me...

It would be nice to have a wiki article on "lose track of" rules.  Is there a clear (and preferably exhaustive) exposition of this issue anywhere?

[GendoIkari]

If your cat brings in a dead bird, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

Well, the room isn't further freshened, but you still can do that.

Yes, but the analogy shouldn't be removing it and then throwing it away again. The card doesn't say "trash this. Unless it's already in the trash, in which case remove it from the trash and trash it again."

Put it this way... at 7:00, your wife asks you to please throw the pizza box from dinner in the trash. But you actually already did that at 6:00, she just didn't know that. So what do you do? Nothing. You don't throw it away again. And if anyone asks "did you throw away the pizza box at 7?" you say "no, I didn't, because it was already thrown away at 6:00." Simply put, to "trash" something, whether in Dominion or in real life, means to move it to the trash can/pile. If it was already there, you cannot "move" it there.

[SirPeebles]

If your cat brings in a dead bird, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

Well, the room isn't further freshened, but you still can do that.

Yes, but the analogy shouldn't be removing it and then throwing it away again. The card doesn't say "trash this. Unless it's already in the trash, in which case remove it from the trash and trash it again."

Put it this way... at 7:00, your wife asks you to please throw the pizza box from dinner in the trash. But you actually already did that at 6:00, she just didn't know that. So what do you do? Nothing. You don't throw it away again. And if anyone asks "did you throw away the pizza box at 7?" you say "no, I didn't, because it was already thrown away at 6:00." Simply put, to "trash" something, whether in Dominion or in real life, means to move it to the trash can/pile. If it was already there, you cannot "move" it there.

Why can't you just move it from the trash to the trash?

Why can you play a card which is already in play?

[ftl]

Well, based on current rulings, I'd understand it as -

to trash something, you move it from somewhere outside the trash to the trash. You can't do that if it's already in the trash, because, well, it's already there.

To play something, you follow the instructions on it. You can do that regardless of where it is.

It's like, if you throne room a mining village, and trash it when you play it the first time, it stays in the trash when you play it the second time. Playing a card doesn't require moving it anywhere, but trashing it does. I think.

[SCSN]

I find the whole lose-track business very confusing and really unnecessary. It's both more practical and intuitive to let cards have knowledge of everything that you know yourself about their locations (after all it's me who's playing the cards and executing their instructions, it isn't the cards playing themselves lol).

So, in the scheme/hermit case, you'd trash the hermit.  In the spoils/counterfeit case, you'd trash the spoils.  Is that the interpretation that makes the most sense to you?  It does seem rather more straightforward to me...

Yes.

[GendoIkari]

If your cat brings in a dead bird, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

Well, the room isn't further freshened, but you still can do that.

Yes, but the analogy shouldn't be removing it and then throwing it away again. The card doesn't say "trash this. Unless it's already in the trash, in which case remove it from the trash and trash it again."

Put it this way... at 7:00, your wife asks you to please throw the pizza box from dinner in the trash. But you actually already did that at 6:00, she just didn't know that. So what do you do? Nothing. You don't throw it away again. And if anyone asks "did you throw away the pizza box at 7?" you say "no, I didn't, because it was already thrown away at 6:00." Simply put, to "trash" something, whether in Dominion or in real life, means to move it to the trash can/pile. If it was already there, you cannot "move" it there.

Why can't you just move it from the trash to the trash?

Why can you play a card which is already in play?

Because that's not moving it... It never moves. Just like my example, you would never claim to have trashed the pizza box the second time. Same with the dominion card. Playing a card is different. Moving a card to the in play area is just one thing that happens to happen when you play the card, it's not the definition of playing the card. Playing a card means to do all the things it has written on it. Trashing the card means to throw it away. You simply don't ever throw things away that are currently in the trash.

[werothegreat]

I find the whole lose-track business very confusing and really unnecessary. It's both more practical and intuitive to let cards have knowledge of everything that you know yourself about their locations (after all it's me who's playing the cards and executing their instructions, it isn't the cards playing themselves lol).

So, in the scheme/hermit case, you'd trash the hermit.  In the spoils/counterfeit case, you'd trash the spoils.  Is that the interpretation that makes the most sense to you?  It does seem rather more straightforward to me...

Yes.

It is not more straightforward.  Without the Lost Track rule, there would be times where you would need to dig through your discard pile or the top of your deck trying to find the card you now have not lost track of, and that's just messy.  Once card A is removed from the place card B put it through a power other than card B, card B is no longer able to do anything to card A.

[michaeljb]

I find the whole lose-track business very confusing and really unnecessary. It's both more practical and intuitive to let cards have knowledge of everything that you know yourself about their locations (after all it's me who's playing the cards and executing their instructions, it isn't the cards playing themselves lol).

So, in the scheme/hermit case, you'd trash the hermit.  In the spoils/counterfeit case, you'd trash the spoils.  Is that the interpretation that makes the most sense to you?  It does seem rather more straightforward to me...

Yes.

It is not more straightforward.  Without the Lost Track rule, there would be times where you would need to dig through your discard pile or the top of your deck trying to find the card you now have not lost track of, and that's just messy.  Once card A is removed from the place card B put it through a power other than card B, card B is no longer able to do anything to card A.

(emphasis mine from me)

The Lose Track rule could just apply to situations where you, the player, have literally lost track of the card. In the Scheme/Hermit case, you know where the Hermit is even though it was on top of your deck for a moment; in the Counterfeit/Spoils case, you know the Spoils is on top of the Spoils pile, but in the Inn/Watchtower case, you may have already shuffled in Inn and actually lost track of it (and so you could not top-deck or trash the Inn via WT's reaction).

--

It's like, if you throne room a mining village, and trash it when you play it the first time, it stays in the trash when you play it the second time. Playing a card doesn't require moving it anywhere, but trashing it does. I think.

But even if you don't trash the Mining Village either time, it still ends up in play. Therefore the instruction "Play an Action card" must really mean "Move the Action card to your play area. Follow the instructions on the card."

So the TR/MV case:

Code: [Select]

Play TR
- Move TR to play area
- Follow its instructions:
  - "Choose an Action card in your hand"
    - Choose MV
  - "Play it twice."
    - Play it (the chosen MV)
      - Move MV to play area
      - Follow instructions on MV
        - +1 Card, +2 Actions
        - choose to trash MV
          - move MV to trash (found MV in play area)
        - +$2 ("if you do" satisfied)
    - Play it a second time
      - Move MV to play area (Lost Track; MV not in play where TR expected it)
      - Follow instructions on MV
        - +1 Card, +2 Actions
        - choose to trash MV
          - move MV to trash (Lost Track; MV not in play where MV expected it)
        - nothing more ("if you do" was not satisfied)

(do we need a Rules Philosophy subforum? I'm sure we already have plenty of threads to fill it up )

(edit: squashed a double post)

edit: fixed this

That "not in hand" should be "not in play" where TR expected it, right?

[Warfreak2]

But even if you don't trash the Mining Village either time, it still ends up in play. Therefore the instruction "Play an Action card" must really mean "Move the Action card to your play area. Follow the instructions on the card."

And that is exactly why it's possible to play a card which is already in play. Follow the instructions in order, doing what you can (just like if the instructions were on a card):
1) Move it to the play area. (Can't, it's not in my hand, so lose-track applies)
2) Follow the instructions on the card. (Sure thing, boss!)
Thus, you successfully played the card.

[Polk5440]

So the TR/MV case:

Code: [Select]

Play TR
- Move TR to play area
- Follow its instructions:
  - "Choose an Action card in your hand"
    - Choose MV
  - "Play it twice."
    - Play it (the chosen MV)
      - Move MV to play area
      - Follow instructions on MV
        - +1 Card, +2 Actions
        - choose to trash MV
          - move MV to trash (found MV in play area)
        - +$2 ("if you do" satisfied)
    - Play it a second time
      - Move MV to play area (Lost Track; MV ***not in hand*** where TR expected it)
      - Follow instructions on MV
        - +1 Card, +2 Actions
        - choose to trash MV
          - move MV to trash (Lost Track; MV not in play where MV expected it)
        - nothing more ("if you do" was not satisfied)


That "not in hand" should be "not in play" where TR expected it, right?

This is the part I don't get. Why does TR expect MV to be anywhere? You're playing the cards and following the instructions. "Play it twice" is an instruction for me to follow. I know where MV is. There it is, in the trash! TR says play "it" (the card I just trashed) again. I can do that!

But I guess I can't?

It would make more sense to me if there was a rule that you couldn't look through the trash like you can't look through the discard pile. Then "lose track" makes more sense. I can't go rummaging through the trash to retrieve it to play again (unless a card tells me I can). It would probably smell bad.

But you can look through the trash at anytime. And that's confusing.

Maybe the rule should just be this: you can't play cards from the trash (unless a card says otherwise). That would be so much easier than trying to reason by "lose track."

[Witherweaver]

If your cat brings in a dead Blue Dog, you can improve the smell in your kitchen by throwing the carcass into the trash. Sadly, you cannot freshen the room further by removing it so that you can throw it back again.

Fixed that for you