Why is this obviously fair? Equal turns is only a variant, and the point of Dominion is to end the game while leading, not just to lead the game without ending it. If neither player can end the game with a win, a tie seems fairest to me.
(Compare e.g. to chess: If neither player can win, it's a tie, even if one player has a clear material advantage.)
I agree with this. Dominion has never been about getting the most points, but about being able to end the game while ahead. If you can't end the game (while maintaining your lead), you can't declare a win.
It seems to me like Donald agrees as well:
I think people in a stalemated game, for whatever game, tend to realize it, and have ways to cope with the situation. Try "looks like a draw," see what it gets you.
Not "try telling your opponent that you think you win because you have more points than him at the moment, see what it gets you."
Yeah, I realized my construction was likely wrong. On the other hand, if one player always has more points than the other--both are earning 12 points/turn, but the score after B's turn is still 10 points in A's favor--do we still feel this is a draw?
I do. I still think Chess is a good analogy. If you have a King and a Bishop, and your opponent has only a King, then you cannot claim victory, despite the fact that you will always have more pieces than your opponent. You have failed to meet the actual objective of the game. In Dominion, there is no victory unless a game-end condition is met.
Being able to end the game, at least to me (and I know I'm not alone), is a part of the skill of Dominion, as important as being able to gain victory points every turn.