Print

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

[pacovf]

Lose track rule is also involved with, say, inn getting reshuffled into your deck. You can't use watchtower to put inn on top of your deck afterwards (of course, you can choose not to shuffle the inn into your deck in the first place, since you get to choose the order "on gain" effects trigger). Maybe someone else can find a better example.

[Awaclus]

That isn't an example of the lose track rule, if I remember how it works correctly. However, I'm not sure I understand it correctly either, so I can't explain it to you. I think I've just memorized what interactions work and which don't...

Let's nitpick a bit, shouldn't it be, though? The lose track rule applies when card A attempts to move card B from location X to location Y, but card B isn't in location X. Playing a card means moving it to the play area and doing what it says on the card. Whenever you Throne a Madman, the first time you play it, you return it to the Supply and everything works just fine. Then, Throne expects it to be in play but it isn't there, so it loses track of it, so it isn't moved to the play area. Then you get the +actions, but can't return it to the Supply again, because it's already there.

[pacovf]

That isn't an example of the lose track rule, if I remember how it works correctly. However, I'm not sure I understand it correctly either, so I can't explain it to you. I think I've just memorized what interactions work and which don't...

Let's nitpick a bit, shouldn't it be, though? The lose track rule applies when card A attempts to move card B from location X to location Y, but card B isn't in location X. Playing a card means moving it to the play area and doing what it says on the card. Whenever you Throne a Madman, the first time you play it, you return it to the Supply and everything works just fine. Then, Throne expects it to be in play but it isn't there, so it loses track of it, so it isn't moved to the play area. Then you get the +actions, but can't return it to the Supply again, because it's already there.

Let's nitpick even more: you can only move a card from location X to location Y if X and Y are different locations, so throne room doesn't try to move cards to the play area when it plays the card for the second time, since the card should already be there. However, I agree that madman still fails to return to the supply on second play, since it's already there.

[mail-mi]

That isn't an example of the lose track rule, if I remember how it works correctly. However, I'm not sure I understand it correctly either, so I can't explain it to you. I think I've just memorized what interactions work and which don't...

Let's nitpick a bit, shouldn't it be, though? The lose track rule applies when card A attempts to move card B from location X to location Y, but card B isn't in location X. Playing a card means moving it to the play area and doing what it says on the card. Whenever you Throne a Madman, the first time you play it, you return it to the Supply and everything works just fine. Then, Throne expects it to be in play but it isn't there, so it loses track of it, so it isn't moved to the play area. Then you get the +actions, but can't return it to the Supply again, because it's already there.

Let's nitpick even more: you can only move a card from location X to location Y if X and Y are different locations, so throne room doesn't try to move cards to the play area when it plays the card for the second time, since the card should already be there. However, I agree that madman still fails to return to the supply on second play, since it's already there.

Let's nitpick just a bit more: Madman never returns to the supply, it returns to the Madman pile. Madman can never return to the supply because it wasn't in the supply in the first place.

[2.71828.....]

That isn't an example of the lose track rule, if I remember how it works correctly. However, I'm not sure I understand it correctly either, so I can't explain it to you. I think I've just memorized what interactions work and which don't...

Let's nitpick a bit, shouldn't it be, though? The lose track rule applies when card A attempts to move card B from location X to location Y, but card B isn't in location X. Playing a card means moving it to the play area and doing what it says on the card. Whenever you Throne a Madman, the first time you play it, you return it to the Supply and everything works just fine. Then, Throne expects it to be in play but it isn't there, so it loses track of it, so it isn't moved to the play area. Then you get the +actions, but can't return it to the Supply again, because it's already there.

Let's nitpick even more: you can only move a card from location X to location Y if X and Y are different locations, so throne room doesn't try to move cards to the play area when it plays the card for the second time, since the card should already be there. However, I agree that madman still fails to return to the supply on second play, since it's already there.

Let's nitpick just a bit more: Madman never returns to the supply, it returns to the Madman pile. Madman can never return to the supply because it wasn't in the supply in the first place.

Let's nitpick just a tiny bit more:  why are we discussing Dominion in the Random Stuff thread?

[silverspawn]

That isn't an example of the lose track rule, if I remember how it works correctly. However, I'm not sure I understand it correctly either, so I can't explain it to you. I think I've just memorized what interactions work and which don't...

Let's nitpick a bit, shouldn't it be, though? The lose track rule applies when card A attempts to move card B from location X to location Y, but card B isn't in location X. Playing a card means moving it to the play area and doing what it says on the card. Whenever you Throne a Madman, the first time you play it, you return it to the Supply and everything works just fine. Then, Throne expects it to be in play but it isn't there, so it loses track of it, so it isn't moved to the play area. Then you get the +actions, but can't return it to the Supply again, because it's already there.

Let's nitpick even more: you can only move a card from location X to location Y if X and Y are different locations, so throne room doesn't try to move cards to the play area when it plays the card for the second time, since the card should already be there. However, I agree that madman still fails to return to the supply on second play, since it's already there.

Let's nitpick just a bit more: Madman never returns to the supply, it returns to the Madman pile. Madman can never return to the supply because it wasn't in the supply in the first place.

Let's nitpick just a tiny bit more:  why are we discussing Dominion in the Random Stuff thread?

well i felt that asking about the lost track rule out of nowhere was pretty random and therefore justified.

[2.71828.....]

Let's talk about something more interesting, AKA anything else. Oh, how about this?

I just watched this.  It was amazing.

[Awaclus]

Let's nitpick even more: you can only move a card from location X to location Y if X and Y are different locations, so throne room doesn't try to move cards to the play area when it plays the card for the second time, since the card should already be there. However, I agree that madman still fails to return to the supply on second play, since it's already there.

Throne Room always tries to move cards to the play area, but it just always fails. Normally, it fails because the card is already there, but in Madman's case, it fails because of the lose track rule. Or does Throne Room know that the attempt would be pointless anyway since X = Y, therefore it gives up without even trying to put it into play, even when X != Y?

[Awaclus]

On another note, I decided, on a whim, to read Finnegans Wake, and the following sentence just came up:

"Whatif she be in flags or flitters, reekierags or sundyechosies, with a mint of mines or beggar a pinnyweight."

[Kuildeous]

After finally watching the final episode of the incredibly long 7 seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I have moved on to other geekgasm shows that I missed the first time around. I have started watching the new Battlestar Galactica.

I have to say that the first few episodes are quite engaging and enjoyable. They're really laying thick the war-is-hell theme what with all the helpless people getting killed.

Also, it surprised me that they revealed the hidden Cylon so early. I was expecting one of those mysterious whodunit subplots where the big reveal is a plot twist. Nope, here is the Cylon at the end of episode 2 (or was it 3?). Since I was used to the unknown-traitor subplot, I found this to be a bit jarring at first but refreshing. Not every story needs to have artificial drama tacked on with a mysterious saboteur. And seeing how the story is progressing on the planet, I can see why it was necessary to have the Cylon's identity be revealed. Besides, it adds a different artificial drama when the audience knows who the Cylon is while the cast doesn't.

Thanks to signatures on here with the BSG game, I knew a couple of characters are mains, but that's not a huge spoiler. And just because they're important early on doesn't mean they can't die or be Cyloned or whatever.

Looking forward to finishing this one.

[Lekkit]

I was disappointed with the lack of Buffy related stuff in the last post...

[Witherweaver]

After finally watching the final episode of the incredibly long 7 seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I have moved on to other geekgasm shows that I missed the first time around. I have started watching the new Battlestar Galactica.

I have to say that the first few episodes are quite engaging and enjoyable. They're really laying thick the war-is-hell theme what with all the helpless people getting killed.

Also, it surprised me that they revealed the hidden Cylon so early. I was expecting one of those mysterious whodunit subplots where the big reveal is a plot twist. Nope, here is the Cylon at the end of episode 2 (or was it 3?). Since I was used to the unknown-traitor subplot, I found this to be a bit jarring at first but refreshing. Not every story needs to have artificial drama tacked on with a mysterious saboteur. And seeing how the story is progressing on the planet, I can see why it was necessary to have the Cylon's identity be revealed. Besides, it adds a different artificial drama when the audience knows who the Cylon is while the cast doesn't.

Thanks to signatures on here with the BSG game, I knew a couple of characters are mains, but that's not a huge spoiler. And just because they're important early on doesn't mean they can't die or be Cyloned or whatever.

Looking forward to finishing this one.

I watched it all over Christmas time last year.  I thought it was fantastic.  Some people don't like the direction the fourth and fifth season went, but I was happy with everything.

[Kuildeous]

I was disappointed with the lack of Buffy related stuff in the last post...

I'm all Buffyed out. I could start up Angel now that I'm done with Buffy, but I'm so tired of that show now. This wouldn't have happened if I followed it on a weekly basis rather than watch the episodes in a marathon. At approximately 22 episodes per season, that's a shit-ton of episodes to get through.

And while I love Whedon's writing style, it did get a bit tedious when it seemed like every character on the show spoke with the same whimsy. I did not see so much of this in his later works like Dollhouse and the Avengers, but I could even pick up a little bit of that redundancy in Firefly. Since Angel aired around the same time as Buffy, I fear I'm going to get saturated with even more Whedonisms, and I just need a break. BSG is considerably different in mood and style, and I'm basking in that difference right now.

However, being late to the Buffy party, it was interesting to see some of the same actors in other Whedon projects, notably Echo and Mal. But that's not too surprising. Directors have their favorite actors. Raimi and Burton come to mind quite easily.

[LastFootnote]

That isn't an example of the lose track rule, if I remember how it works correctly. However, I'm not sure I understand it correctly either, so I can't explain it to you. I think I've just memorized what interactions work and which don't...

Let's nitpick a bit, shouldn't it be, though? The lose track rule applies when card A attempts to move card B from location X to location Y, but card B isn't in location X. Playing a card means moving it to the play area and doing what it says on the card. Whenever you Throne a Madman, the first time you play it, you return it to the Supply and everything works just fine. Then, Throne expects it to be in play but it isn't there, so it loses track of it, so it isn't moved to the play area. Then you get the +actions, but can't return it to the Supply again, because it's already there.

Let's nitpick even more: you can only move a card from location X to location Y if X and Y are different locations, so throne room doesn't try to move cards to the play area when it plays the card for the second time, since the card should already be there. However, I agree that madman still fails to return to the supply on second play, since it's already there.

All this talk of X and Y made me want to check serebii.net for Pokémon news. The Pokémon of the Week is Golduck! Woo!

[GeoLib]

Just finished Breaking Bad. Wow, what a crazy show. Extremely well done IMO. And Bryan Cranston is an amazing actor.

[pingpongsam]

Orphan Black

[Witherweaver]

Orphan Black

Yes! Just started it about a week ago, am on Season 2 now.

[Teproc]

Rectify. It's first season was better than Breaking Bad's last.

These shows have nothing in common though, so bear in mind that what I just said basically means nothing. But it's really good.

[ashersky]

I was disappointed with the lack of Buffy related stuff in the last post...

I'm all Buffyed out. I could start up Angel now that I'm done with Buffy, but I'm so tired of that show now. This wouldn't have happened if I followed it on a weekly basis rather than watch the episodes in a marathon. At approximately 22 episodes per season, that's a shit-ton of episodes to get through.

And while I love Whedon's writing style, it did get a bit tedious when it seemed like every character on the show spoke with the same whimsy. I did not see so much of this in his later works like Dollhouse and the Avengers, but I could even pick up a little bit of that redundancy in Firefly. Since Angel aired around the same time as Buffy, I fear I'm going to get saturated with even more Whedonisms, and I just need a break. BSG is considerably different in mood and style, and I'm basking in that difference right now.

However, being late to the Buffy party, it was interesting to see some of the same actors in other Whedon projects, notably Echo and Mal. But that's not too surprising. Directors have their favorite actors. Raimi and Burton come to mind quite easily.

It was good to watch Angel in tandem with Buffy at the appropriate seasons.

I'm in the minority, in that I ended up preferring Angel to Buffy overall.  Probably because I preferred the Angel characters over Buffy's.

[ashersky]

As for shows to watch -- I feel like Justified doesn't get enough love.  That is a great show.

[enfynet]

I need to stop playing GTA V before bed. I'm pretty sure Trevor is giving me nightmares.

[Witherweaver]

Anyone for Fargo?  I've only seen episodes here and there, but it looks good.  My roommate watches Justified, and it looks good but I have to go back and start from the beginning.

Also, The Leftovers---I'm liking it a lot so far.

[Kuildeous]

It was good to watch Angel in tandem with Buffy at the appropriate seasons.

I'm in the minority, in that I ended up preferring Angel to Buffy overall.  Probably because I preferred the Angel characters over Buffy's.

I got the feeling while watching Buffy that they occasionally referred to events happening in Angel, so I missed out on that.

I'm kind of turned off by the notion of watching Angel, because he seems to me like what Edward from Twilight wants to be. I'm sure it's a silly reason. A break will do me good.

[ashersky]

It was good to watch Angel in tandem with Buffy at the appropriate seasons.

I'm in the minority, in that I ended up preferring Angel to Buffy overall.  Probably because I preferred the Angel characters over Buffy's.

I got the feeling while watching Buffy that they occasionally referred to events happening in Angel, so I missed out on that.

I'm kind of turned off by the notion of watching Angel, because he seems to me like what Edward from Twilight wants to be. I'm sure it's a silly reason. A break will do me good.

Angel always felt like the more modern show -- probably because it started later.  There were a lot of Serenity cameos in Angel, too.

[KingZog3]

I need to stop playing GTA V before bed. I'm pretty sure Trevor is giving me nightmares.

7 dollars?!

I said something nice! Not expensive, nice. You don't want to be a greedy cow do ya?