Relic becomes action-treasure too, doesn't it? :)
Relic becomes action-treasure too, doesn't it? :)
Relic isn't an action card, so it's not affected by Enchantress.
Highway and Goons are also pretty neat counters.
Does Noble Brigand still work against this (since it's effect triggers when-played)?
Do you still get token bonuses?
Well, you can play another Goons afterwards.Highway and Goons are also pretty neat counters.
Losing the +Buy on Goons still hurts, though.
Ooooh this is super cool. I take it this doesn't affect duration effects from cards played on previous turns, but it would affect anything Princed?
If you Royal Carriage an Action affected by this attack, do you get +1 Card / +1 Action again, or the original effect?
If you Royal Carriage an Action affected by this attack, do you get +1 Card / +1 Action again, or the original effect?
Wow! This is easily the most intriguing card in the set so far for me: a genuinely novel yet simple attack I'm having to think about quite carefully.Minion, if you want to get rid of your hand, then not reacting is better.
Is this the first attack Moat can counter better if you don't React? (-8
Minion, if you want to get rid of your hand, then not reacting is better.Well, yes. Or any discard attack if you've got dross + draw_to_N.
Ooooh this is super cool. I take it this doesn't affect duration effects from cards played on previous turns, but it would affect anything Princed?
Correct. It affects the first Action card you play in a turn, one way or the other. If you played no cards in your Action phase, it could even affect a Crown played in your Buy phase, come to think of it.
Gosh. A reason to play Venture before your basic treasures, rather than as an afterthought. You don't want to draw Crown dead.Simmilar thing with counterfiet, if you want to double a treasure.
Gosh. A reason to play Venture before your basic treasures, rather than as an afterthought.Counterfeit already gave you that reason.
Ooooh this is super cool. I take it this doesn't affect duration effects from cards played on previous turns, but it would affect anything Princed?
Correct. It affects the first Action card you play in a turn, one way or the other. If you played no cards in your Action phase, it could even affect a Crown played in your Buy phase, come to think of it.
If you started with the Crown in your hand, then it's always better to play it in your action phase. Edge case that.
Of course it can happen if you hit it with Venture.
Ooooh this is super cool. I take it this doesn't affect duration effects from cards played on previous turns, but it would affect anything Princed?
Correct. It affects the first Action card you play in a turn, one way or the other. If you played no cards in your Action phase, it could even affect a Crown played in your Buy phase, come to think of it.
If you started with the Crown in your hand, then it's always better to play it in your action phase. Edge case that.
Of course it can happen if you hit it with Venture.
A preview posted before I woke up!? Land sakes!In my case, it was posted before I went to bed, so that worked out well for me too!
Read the post 3 posts before this.Gosh. A reason to play Venture before your basic treasures, rather than as an afterthought.Counterfeit already gave you that reason.
You know, the weirdest thing happened. You'd never be able to imagine it. It was a cross-post!Read the post 3 posts before this.Gosh. A reason to play Venture before your basic treasures, rather than as an afterthought.Counterfeit already gave you that reason.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Huh, I'm not sure. I guess it only matters if you want to play Band of Misfits as a card that has Adventures tokens on its pile.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Huh, I'm not sure. I guess it only matters if you want to play Band of Misfits as a card that has Adventures tokens on its pile.
Matters for below-the-line stuff.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Huh, I'm not sure. I guess it only matters if you want to play Band of Misfits as a card that has Adventures tokens on its pile.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
My guess would be that you play the thing you select with BoM, and then that Action's text gets replaced by +1 Action, +1 Card. That's going by the 'you never played BoM, you played that other thing instead' explanation of how BoM works.
the Master had sent him down this highway with strict orders to squash anyone approaching.
Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
But there are very few circumstances in which it's right to react to Enchantress with a Moat. Village, Moat and no other actions is the first that comes to mind.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
My guess would be that you play the thing you select with BoM, and then that Action's text gets replaced by +1 Action, +1 Card. That's going by the 'you never played BoM, you played that other thing instead' explanation of how BoM works.
The "you never played BoM" rule has been changed as a result of rules questions around getting token bonuses. The current rule is that you DID play BoM, as well as the card that it plays... so it counts for 2 cards played for Conspirator.
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Thinking of the on-play effect of Noble Brigand as being categorically distinct from that of every other card makes less sense to me...
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
My guess would be that you play the thing you select with BoM, and then that Action's text gets replaced by +1 Action, +1 Card. That's going by the 'you never played BoM, you played that other thing instead' explanation of how BoM works.
The "you never played BoM" rule has been changed as a result of rules questions around getting token bonuses. The current rule is that you DID play BoM, as well as the card that it plays... so it counts for 2 cards played for Conspirator.
The "you never played BoM" rule has been changed as a result of rules questions around getting token bonuses. The current rule is that you DID play BoM, as well as the card that it plays... so it counts for 2 cards played for Conspirator.
Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
Can you explain why you think it wouldn't? Keep in mind that Noble Brigand is one of those cards, like Nomad Camp and Envoy, whose wording is not completely technically correct. But it's on-play effect is intended t be exactly the same like every other card.
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Thinking of the on-play effect of Noble Brigand as being categorically distinct from that of every other card makes less sense to me...
It makes a lot of sense to me, since it's worded differently than every other card.
And why wouldn't the wording of Noble Brigand be technically correct? It does exactly what it says, it just does so with a different timing than other cards.
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Thinking of the on-play effect of Noble Brigand as being categorically distinct from that of every other card makes less sense to me...
It makes a lot of sense to me, since it's worded differently than every other card.
And wyh wouldn't the wording of Noble Brigand be technically correct? It does exayctly what it says, it just does so with adiffernet timing than other cards.
Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
Can you explain why you think it wouldn't? Keep in mind that Noble Brigand is one of those cards, like Nomad Camp and Envoy, whose wording is not completely technically correct. But it's on-play effect is intended t be exactly the same like every other card.
Just like on special Treasures (including Relic!), "when you play this" on Noble Brigand is timed just like any other play ability. It's not timed like when-play abilities like Reactions or Urchin.
"Instructions" on Enchantress clearly means the play ability, since it talks about the instructions you follow when you play the card.
Noble Brigand's card text is really weird now that I think about it. It says do something when it is played, but it was already played by the time that instruction is reached. In theory, you can argue that Noble Brigand does nothing on play because you can't activate the when-played trigger when the card is already in play.
Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
Can you explain why you think it wouldn't? Keep in mind that Noble Brigand is one of those cards, like Nomad Camp and Envoy, whose wording is not completely technically correct. But it's on-play effect is intended t be exactly the same like every other card.
Just like on special Treasures (including Relic!), "when you play this" on Noble Brigand is timed just like any other play ability. It's not timed like when-play abilities like Reactions or Urchin.
"Instructions" on Enchantress clearly means the play ability, since it talks about the instructions you follow when you play the card.
Where is this stated in the rules, or by Donald?
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Thinking of the on-play effect of Noble Brigand as being categorically distinct from that of every other card makes less sense to me...
It makes a lot of sense to me, since it's worded differently than every other card.
And why wouldn't the wording of Noble Brigand be technically correct? It does exactly what it says, it just does so with a different timing than other cards.
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Thinking of the on-play effect of Noble Brigand as being categorically distinct from that of every other card makes less sense to me...
It makes a lot of sense to me, since it's worded differently than every other card.
And why wouldn't the wording of Noble Brigand be technically correct? It does exactly what it says, it just does so with a different timing than other cards.
The wording is incorrect because it does NOT have a different timing than other cards. All action cards have an implicit "when you play this" not written on them; Noble Brigand basically reads "when you play this, when you buy or play this, each other player..."
The problem is that the "instructions" of a card aren't defined anywhere. To me, it makes the most sense to consider it anything on the card that isn't conditiopned by some "when...".
Thinking of the on-play effect of Noble Brigand as being categorically distinct from that of every other card makes less sense to me...
It makes a lot of sense to me, since it's worded differently than every other card.
And why wouldn't the wording of Noble Brigand be technically correct? It does exactly what it says, it just does so with a different timing than other cards.
The wording is incorrect because it does NOT have a different timing than other cards. All action cards have an implicit "when you play this" not written on them; Noble Brigand basically reads "when you play this, when you buy or play this, each other player..."
I think the issue is rather you projecting this "When you play this..." onto other cards, instead of just executing all instructions with non specified timings when a card is played.
Elestan, do you have a BGG account, or should somebody else cross-post this over there?
Like Action–Treasure, the concept of "attack that prevents opponents from using their Action cards" has floated around the fan cards forums a lot and always been dismissed for brokenness or making the game unfun. I'm glad Donald found a way to make the idea work.
it's not, you need to play that TR/whatever first, so it doesn't double anything.
The wording is incorrect because it does NOT have a different timing than other cards. All action cards have an implicit "when you play this" not written on them; Noble Brigand basically reads "when you play this, when you buy or play this, each other player..."
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
The wording is incorrect because it does NOT have a different timing than other cards. All action cards have an implicit "when you play this" not written on them; Noble Brigand basically reads "when you play this, when you buy or play this, each other player..."
No, because on Noble Brigand the "when you play this" is not implicit.
It's basically, "When you play this, each other player... <dividing line> When you buy this, each other player..."
Just like Smithy is, "When you play this, +3 Cards."
Alternatively, you can drop "when you play this" from both.
the Master had sent him down this highway with strict orders to squash anyone approaching.Because you have to play Highway to get Prince of Giants? XD That's fantastic.
I'm guessing Enchantress affects the first Action opponents play on each of their turns? So if they take extra turns, the first Action they play on each of them becomes a cantrip?
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
I'm guessing Enchantress affects the first Action opponents play on each of their turns? So if they take extra turns, the first Action they play on each of them becomes a cantrip?
Correct.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Huh, I'm not sure. I guess it only matters if you want to play Band of Misfits as a card that has Adventures tokens on its pile.
Matters for below-the-line stuff.
Right, of course. Good call.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?
Huh, I'm not sure. I guess it only matters if you want to play Band of Misfits as a card that has Adventures tokens on its pile.
Matters for below-the-line stuff.
Right, of course. Good call.
I see a problem with the German translation of BoM. It says: "Choose an action card from the supply which costs less than this Band of Misfits. Perform the chosen card, as if you had played it. As long this Band of Misfits is in play, it counts as the chosen card."
The first sentence is missing in the Englisch original. It seems that Enchantress would prevent German BoM to choose a card, while it does not do this with the English BoM.
Yeah, Noble Brigand should probably have a dividing line. Although even if it did, Enchantress would still turn Noble Brigand into "+1 Card and +1 Action".I guess just sticking "When you buy this, play it immediately" under a line was considered and rejected for some reason?
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
Can you clarify on Noble Brigand?
Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
Because it's exactly the same as all the other cards that have an implicit "when-played" (i.e. all the cards).
Yeah, Noble Brigand should probably have a dividing line. Although even if it did, Enchantress would still turn Noble Brigand into "+1 Card and +1 Action".I guess just sticking "When you buy this, play it immediately" under a line was considered and rejected for some reason?
Yeah, Noble Brigand should probably have a dividing line. Although even if it did, Enchantress would still turn Noble Brigand into "+1 Card and +1 Action".I guess just sticking "When you buy this, play it immediately" under a line was considered and rejected for some reason?
A question that's just occurred to me...
Is it grouped as "...the first time each other player [plays an Action card on their turn], they.." or "...the first time [each other player plays an Action card] on their turn, they.."?
In other words, if I play Outpost (or Mission/Possession/etc.) does the Enchantress affect both the turns I take before your next turn, or just the first of them?
I'm guessing Enchantress affects the first Action opponents play on each of their turns? So if they take extra turns, the first Action they play on each of them becomes a cantrip?
Correct.
Thanks. I searched for "Outpost", "Possession" etc. before asking. Just my luck the previous question didn't mention any specific cards. D'oh!
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
Can you clarify on Noble Brigand?
If you look back at this post...Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
Because it's exactly the same as all the other cards that have an implicit "when-played" (i.e. all the cards).
...you'll see that Donald X voted it up. I think that counts as a clarification on Noble Brigand.
So now I would think that Enchantress doesn't replace anything and just adds +1 card, +1 action to every card's effect. That doesn't seem likely though.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
Can you clarify on Noble Brigand?
If you look back at this post...Can someone explain why Noble Brigand's when-played effect gets replaced though?
Because it's exactly the same as all the other cards that have an implicit "when-played" (i.e. all the cards).
...you'll see that Donald X voted it up. I think that counts as a clarification on Noble Brigand.
So now I would think that Enchantress doesn't replace anything and just adds +1 card, +1 action to every card's effect. That doesn't seem likely though.
What will happen, if I react to Enchantress with a Caravan Guard? Is Caravan Guards effect resolves, before Enchantress' effect comes into play or after?
Oh sorry, I did not read this ... Thank you.What will happen, if I react to Enchantress with a Caravan Guard? Is Caravan Guards effect resolves, before Enchantress' effect comes into play or after?
It says the first time someone plays an action on their turn.
Can you clarify on Noble Brigand?Noble Brigand says "when you play" because the text wouldn't fit on the card otherwise. It is functionally identical to "ability, dividing line, when you buy this ability."
I see a problem with the German translation of BoM. It says: "Choose an action card from the supply which costs less than this Band of Misfits. Perform the chosen card, as if you had played it. As long this Band of Misfits is in play, it counts as the chosen card."
The first sentence is missing in the Englisch original. It seems that Enchantress would prevent German BoM to choose a card, while it does not do this with the English BoM.
I guess just sticking "When you buy this, play it immediately" under a line was considered and rejected for some reason?Having an effect when you buy a card works fine. Playing a card when you buy it means you played it (putting it into play) before gaining it, and may not even gain it. It's really wonky.
I guess just sticking "When you buy this, play it immediately" under a line was considered and rejected for some reason?Having an effect when you buy a card works fine. Playing a card when you buy it means you played it (putting it into play) before gaining it, and may not even gain it. It's really wonky.
There was a lot of discussion of, could Noble Brigand be when-gain; Jester is an example of that being problematic. There was a version of Noble Brigand at one point that said, "when you gain this during your turn, play it." That gets rid of issues with e.g. Saboteur but leaves Jester.
It looks to me like the wording of Enchantress would mean it would nullify everything on the first action played by other players, not just the on-play part.Ah, Love! could thou and I with Fate conspire
It would be clearer if it said "Until your next turn, the first time another player plays an action card on their turn, they get +1 Card, +1 Action, instead of its on-play instructions." or "instead of its usual on-play effect."
It looks to me like the wording of Enchantress would mean it would nullify everything on the first action played by other players, not just the on-play part.
It would be clearer if it said "Until your next turn, the first time another player plays an action card on their turn, they get +1 Card, +1 Action, instead of its on-play instructions." or "instead of its usual on-play effect."
This can really hurt chains that hoped to start off with a single Village.
I hereby require that the new Online version change the affected card's art to a pig.I would also use a "squeal" sound effect on mouse-over so you are reminded of the effect when you choose your first action card to play.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
And what if you then call a Royal Carriage?
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
And what if you then call a Royal Carriage?
Well, it isn't any "card until it leaves play" because that instruction was voided, but it's not the first time an Action was played this turn, so the cantrip instruction is gone, so I'd assumed that if you RC an E'd BoM, you'd get to emulate a card.
Just some rules clarification: If you play BoM as your first action, do you get choose whether Enchantress's on-play effect (changing to cantrip) or BoM's on-play effect resolves first?As of my latest rulings on Band of Misfits, you would not pick a card, you would just get +1 Card +1 Action.
And what if you then call a Royal Carriage?
Well, it isn't any "card until it leaves play" because that instruction was voided, but it's not the first time an Action was played this turn, so the cantrip instruction is gone, so I'd assumed that if you RC an E'd BoM, you'd get to emulate a card.
Since RC says "Play the action again" as opposed to "Do the stuff you did again," and Enchantress says "The first time you play an action, do this other stuff instead" as opposed to "Pretend the card says this other stuff," then I'd concur with werothegreat.
Not to start a long esoteric discussion about this (really!), but I wonder about the timing of this.
It seems to have a when-play timing: "the first time each other player plays an Action..." seems to mean "when a player plays an Action for the first time". That's the same as Reactions and Urchin, which means before you resolve the played card. But in this case the effect is actually to do something instead of resolving the card. Obviously the intent is not to shift that to earlier so that an Enchanted Attack card is played for "+1 Card, +1 Action" before the other players React.
So as far as I can see, this is actually Dominion's first when-resolve ability. First you play the card, then any Reactions or other potential when-play abilities happen (Urchin could have except I don't think it's possible to have it in play when you play your first Action card), and then you resolve "+1 Card, +1 Action" instead of resolving the card.
Sorry, why before other players React? This is correct, right? : I play a Witch as my first Action, and a lot of when-play stuff happens. I played an Attack, so someone can reveal Moat, Horse Traders, etc. I played a first-Action, so Enchantress kicks in. I don't see how it matters whether those happen simultaneously or not, but if not there is maybe some resolution order. I then go on to resolve the card and indeed it does +1 Card, +1 Action.
Sorry, why before other players React? This is correct, right? : I play a Witch as my first Action, and a lot of when-play stuff happens. I played an Attack, so someone can reveal Moat, Horse Traders, etc. I played a first-Action, so Enchantress kicks in. I don't see how it matters whether those happen simultaneously or not, but if not there is maybe some resolution order. I then go on to resolve the card and indeed it does +1 Card, +1 Action.
Edit: I guess it seems to me the timing should be when-Play, as you say. Enchantress says 'the first time each other player plays an Action card', which seems equivalent to 'When another player plays an Action card, if that was the first Action card of their turn, then...'. I'm not sure why it matters that the effect is to do something different than the normal resolving.
Sorry, why before other players React? This is correct, right? : I play a Witch as my first Action, and a lot of when-play stuff happens. I played an Attack, so someone can reveal Moat, Horse Traders, etc. I played a first-Action, so Enchantress kicks in. I don't see how it matters whether those happen simultaneously or not, but if not there is maybe some resolution order. I then go on to resolve the card and indeed it does +1 Card, +1 Action.
Yes, they would be simultaneous, which means we do them in player order. So first you would do Enchantress (+1 Card, +1 Action), then the others would React (and then you wouldn't resolve the actual played card). That timing doesn't seem like the intended one.
But if you mean that when Enchantress kicks in on when-play, it makes you later do +1 Card +1 Action, then yes... that works too, and I thought about it. It would mean that Enchantress, on when-play, sets up an ability to happen when you actually resolve the card a little later (after any Attacks). But that explanation seems unnecessarily complex: First I play Enchantress, setting up a when-play ability for your first Action card. Then that when-play ability sets up a when-resolve ability, and that when-resolve ability is to make you do +1 Card +1 Action. In the end the result is the same as saying that Enchantress sets up a when-resolve ability from the start, I think.
Sorry, why before other players React? This is correct, right? : I play a Witch as my first Action, and a lot of when-play stuff happens. I played an Attack, so someone can reveal Moat, Horse Traders, etc. I played a first-Action, so Enchantress kicks in. I don't see how it matters whether those happen simultaneously or not, but if not there is maybe some resolution order. I then go on to resolve the card and indeed it does +1 Card, +1 Action.
Edit: I guess it seems to me the timing should be when-Play, as you say. Enchantress says 'the first time each other player plays an Action card', which seems equivalent to 'When another player plays an Action card, if that was the first Action card of their turn, then...'. I'm not sure why it matters that the effect is to do something different than the normal resolving.
That does bring up an interesting (and maybe obvious? and maybe already discussed?) point, though. Since Enchantress effectively changes the text of the first-played action, but not the type, it's quite possible that the card played becomes a cantrip attack, and other players may still react to it however they wish, which can be quite advantageous to the Enchantress-ing player.
This makes me realize that, if you put the +1 card token on BoM, you get to draw the card before choosing which card you want BoM to be, right?
This is my first preview set, so I'm just wondering if the colours are washed out intentionally - this card looks closer to a Treasure than the vibrant orange we usually have on Durations...
This is my first preview set, so I'm just wondering if the colours are washed out intentionally - this card looks closer to a Treasure than the vibrant orange we usually have on Durations...
Donald mentioned an issue with the image compression for these preview images.
I hereby require that the new Online version change the affected card's art to a pig.I would also use a "squeal" sound effect on mouse-over so you are reminded of the effect when you choose your first action card to play.
Fortunately, multiple Enchantress attacks do not stack.
I only just realized, while it was mentioned earlier, that it would effect Crown during your buy phase, that's nuts!
The +Action still counts for Diadem, right?
Maybe I'm crazy but does anyone else think that ruins might be a counter for enchantress?
Maybe I'm crazy but does anyone else think that ruins might be a counter for enchantress?Well, I wouldn't voluntarily gain Ruinses to counter Enchantress; most of the time you have a dud hand and no Enchantress is played. That sucks.
Fortunately, multiple Enchantress attacks do not stack.
I don't think this has been mentioned. If you Throne Enchantress, it seems to give the other players +2 cards +2 actions for their first action card! Then you draw 4 cards.
Fortunately, multiple Enchantress attacks do not stack.
I guess you're responding to me. Saying that it doesn't "stack" is very different from saying that it gives a huge benefit to the other players. I just read that as "it has no further effect".
Throned Enchantress sets up two future effects that will each modify what resolving the first action card per turn (by an affected player) will actually do. When a player plays his first action, both future effects simultaneously try to make that modification. They are applied one after the other (you can pick an order, but it doesn't matter). The first one changes the resolution to "+1 Card, +1 Action"; the second one changes it to that again.
Forget if this has been asked yet - does the Enchantress effect apply to extra turns other players take, such as via Outpost? Or just to the very first Action they play after you play Enchantress?
Forget if this has been asked yet - does the Enchantress effect apply to extra turns other players take, such as via Outpost? Or just to the very first Action they play after you play Enchantress?
Extra turns are also "their turns", so it applies. (I think it has been asked here.)
I'm guessing Enchantress affects the first Action opponents play on each of their turns? So if they take extra turns, the first Action they play on each of them becomes a cantrip?
Correct.
Forget if this has been asked yet - does the Enchantress effect apply to extra turns other players take, such as via Outpost? Or just to the very first Action they play after you play Enchantress?
Extra turns are also "their turns", so it applies. (I think it has been asked here.)I'm guessing Enchantress affects the first Action opponents play on each of their turns? So if they take extra turns, the first Action they play on each of them becomes a cantrip?
Correct.
So, Enchantress looks like a sui-generis attack with a really oddball effect, but I just realized it's really just part of the Spy/Rabble family: it makes you miss using one of your good cards this shuffle.
I feel like the White Witch when she realized Aslan was really just a big cat under all that hair.
So, which Actions are totally immune to Enchantress? Highway, Groundskeeper, Great Hall—any I'm missing?
So, which Actions are totally immune to Enchantress? Highway, Groundskeeper, Great Hall—any I'm missing?
Page.
So, which Actions are totally immune to Enchantress? Highway, Groundskeeper, Great Hall—any I'm missing?
Page.
Conspirator -- not immune, but in general I think Enchantress would help a deck with Conspirator more than it would hurt.
So, which Actions are totally immune to Enchantress? Highway, Groundskeeper, Great Hall—any I'm missing?
Moat is totally immune to Enchantress, not only in trivial the sense that it confers immunity, but that if you have a Moat in hand you want to be Enchanted, because that gives you the choice between +2 Cards and +1 Card, +1 Action.
Moat is totally immune to Enchantress, not only in trivial the sense that it confers immunity, but that if you have a Moat in hand you want to be Enchanted, because that gives you the choice between +2 Cards and +1 Card, +1 Action.
Not necessarily. If your hand is Village and Moat, then without enchantress, you could have a Laboratory if you want.
Enchantress makes Rebuild slightly worse.
Moat is totally immune to Enchantress, not only in trivial the sense that it confers immunity, but that if you have a Moat in hand you want to be Enchanted, because that gives you the choice between +2 Cards and +1 Card, +1 Action.
Not necessarily. If your hand is Village and Moat, then without enchantress, you could have a Laboratory if you want.
I think he is just saying that your opponent play Enchantress improves your position if you have Moat in hand because you can chose to reveal or not based on your hand.