* Do you ever not shuffle in all Actions in your discard pile?
* When is the best time to gain an Inn?
* How does it compare to Lost City?
* Who wants to spend a weekend in that picture?
* Overall, is it an inn-teresting card? *winks obnoxiously*
(pun intended)
Starting questions:
* Do you ever not shuffle in all Actions in your discard pile?
* When is the best time to gain an Inn?
* How does it compare to Lost City?
* Who wants to spend a weekend in that picture?
* Overall, is it an inn-teresting card? *winks obnoxiously*
Overall, I think it's a super innteresting card. It's (I'm pretty sure) the only village-sifter, and I think that's a neat concept.Depends on if you count Hamlet, although Inn is obviously a better sifter in exchange for the lack of flexibility that Hamlet offers.
How much would Inn cost if it didn't have the when-gain ability?
Overall, I think it's a super innteresting card. It's (I'm pretty sure) the only village-sifter, and I think that's a neat concept.Depends on if you count Hamlet, although Inn is obviously a better sifter in exchange for the lack of flexibility that Hamlet offers.
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
So it sifts 1 card. Warehouse sifts 3, Inn sifts 2. They all reduce handsize, and they all let you switch out some number of cards for others. What exactly is your definition of a sifter?
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
So it sifts 1 card. Warehouse sifts 3, Inn sifts 2. They all reduce handsize, and they all let you switch out some number of cards for others. What exactly is your definition of a sifter?
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
So it sifts 1 card. Warehouse sifts 3, Inn sifts 2. They all reduce handsize, and they all let you switch out some number of cards for others. What exactly is your definition of a sifter?
It's still a useful comparison to make, though: Hamlet sifts one card compared to Necropolis or Shanty-Town-that-you-never-intend-to-trigger.
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
So it sifts 1 card. Warehouse sifts 3, Inn sifts 2. They all reduce handsize, and they all let you switch out some number of cards for others. What exactly is your definition of a sifter?
A sifter that sifts one card is not a very good sifter. Additionally, Hamlet is really more of a discard-for-benefit card, especially since the discard is optional.
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
So it sifts 1 card. Warehouse sifts 3, Inn sifts 2. They all reduce handsize, and they all let you switch out some number of cards for others. What exactly is your definition of a sifter?
A sifter that sifts one card is not a very good sifter. Additionally, Hamlet is really more of a discard-for-benefit card, especially since the discard is optional.
Well I never said the sifting was good. Trade Route isn't an exceptionally good trasher, but it's still a trasher. Hamlet is also a discard-for-benefit card, but cards can be multiple things. Obviously you don't buy Hamlet just for the sifting effect, but it's still there (provided you actually use one of the discard options). You're still discarding bad cards in favor of keeping good cards, and if that's not sifting then I don't know what is. Obviously Hamlet doesn't improve the cards in your hand relative to not having the Hamlet at all, but it does improve the quality of the cards in your hand relative to other disappearing villages, such as Necropolis or Festival.
Hamlet is not a sifter, it only draws 1 card.
So it sifts 1 card. Warehouse sifts 3, Inn sifts 2. They all reduce handsize, and they all let you switch out some number of cards for others. What exactly is your definition of a sifter?
A sifter that sifts one card is not a very good sifter. Additionally, Hamlet is really more of a discard-for-benefit card, especially since the discard is optional.
Well I never said the sifting was good. Trade Route isn't an exceptionally good trasher, but it's still a trasher. Hamlet is also a discard-for-benefit card, but cards can be multiple things. Obviously you don't buy Hamlet just for the sifting effect, but it's still there (provided you actually use one of the discard options). You're still discarding bad cards in favor of keeping good cards, and if that's not sifting then I don't know what is. Obviously Hamlet doesn't improve the cards in your hand relative to not having the Hamlet at all, but it does improve the quality of the cards in your hand relative to other disappearing villages, such as Necropolis or Festival.
It's just a poorly defined term, let's stop fussing over it.
What is with the fixation on semantics around here? Call it whatever you want, it does the same thing regardless. Relative to cards like Festival and Necropolis it absolutely has a sifting effect on top of being a disappearing village. Why does it matter if that's the reason I bought it? Maybe I bought Trade Route for the +Buy, that doesn't mean it's not a trasher. Don't agree with my terminology? Well who really cares, it's not like "Sifter" is a card type. Saying Potion works well with sifters is still fine. Someone who reads "This card works well with trashers" and automatically thinks that card works well with every single trasher is probably still a pretty low-level player.
As to Secret Chamber, I wouldn't really call it a sifter because it doesn't draw cards and consequently can't improve the quality of the rest of your hand upon playing it. I'd consider Vault a sifter, but I don't really care if there's a community consensus on it. It's just a poorly defined term, let's stop fussing over it.
Sifting: Any effect that replaces one or more cards from your hand with the same number of cards from your deck. The replaced cards cannot go back to your deck.
This wouldn't include Hamlet (because the drawing and the discarding are not related to each other), but neither would it include Cartographer. Is Cartographer considered a sifter?
Of course, this raises the question of how to split different effects granted by the same card (e.g., you could argue about whether Embassy is a sifter, with this definition).
Under your categorization, would Scout be considered a sifter? Sure, the VP cards it draws aren't discarded until cleanup, but putting them into your hand does improve the quality of your deck, just as if you had discarded them with Cartographer, Warehouse, etc.
Also, if Scout is a sifter, then Survivors, Oracle, and possibly Vagrant should also be considered as such.
Would Navigator be a sifter? Or Scavenger?
(This post is not intended as a Scout joke, btw).
Under your categorization, would Scout be considered a sifter? Sure, the VP cards it draws aren't discarded until cleanup, but putting them into your hand does improve the quality of your deck, just as if you had discarded them with Cartographer, Warehouse, etc.
Also, if Scout is a sifter, then Survivors, Oracle, and possibly Vagrant should also be considered as such.
Would Navigator be a sifter? Or Scavenger?
(This post is not intended as a Scout joke, btw).
Loan is an anti-sifter. You see your good treasures and actions less often (thanks to discarding).
It's hard to define a Sifter in a clear way that excludes both card draw and digging. I like Jomini's description, but it seems to include diggers, no?
It's hard to define a Sifter in a clear way that excludes both card draw and digging. I like Jomini's description, but it seems to include diggers, no?
Loan is an anti-sifter. You see your good treasures and actions less often (thanks to discarding).
Nonsense.
It's hard to define a Sifter in a clear way that excludes both card draw and digging. I like Jomini's description, but it seems to include diggers, no?
Just to be clear, Loan's primary use is as a trasher, the anti-sifting is a penalty that keeps Loan from being mispriced.It's hard to define a Sifter in a clear way that excludes both card draw and digging. I like Jomini's description, but it seems to include diggers, no?
Diggers tend to be sifters, I think.
It's weird to call Loan an anti-sifter though.
It doesn't really matter what it has relative to cards like Festival and Necropolis.
It doesn't really matter what it has relative to cards like Festival and Necropolis.
How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is. Why does a word only apply to a card if that's why you buy it? I'm not going to buy Hamlet just for the sifting, but if I'm trying to decide if I should buy a Hamlet or a Festival, then the additional sifting effect that you get with Hamlet that you don't get with Festival very well could influence that decision. Does that make it a "sifter"? Well I would say so, but I don't really care because that's just semantics and not really useful for strategic discussions. But to say it has no sifting properties is just incorrect.
How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is.
Loan is an anti-sifter. You see your good treasures and actions less often (thanks to discarding).
Nonsense.
Bullocks.
Great, now we've settled that.
It doesn't really matter what it has relative to cards like Festival and Necropolis.
How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is. Why does a word only apply to a card if that's why you buy it? I'm not going to buy Hamlet just for the sifting, but if I'm trying to decide if I should buy a Hamlet or a Festival, then the additional sifting effect that you get with Hamlet that you don't get with Festival very well could influence that decision. Does that make it a "sifter"? Well I would say so, but I don't really care because that's just semantics and not really useful for strategic discussions. But to say it has no sifting properties is just incorrect.
Hamlet has no sifting properties. The fact that other cards are worse than nothing for the purpose of sifting doesn't mean that a card that is exactly as good as nothing is a sifter. Saying that it is, is as good as saying that it produces virtual coin (after all, it does produce more virtual coin than Storyteller and Poor House in the situations where those cards give you negative coins), or that it increases the costs of all cards (after all, it does increase the costs of all cards more than Highway does).
It doesn't really matter what it has relative to cards like Festival and Necropolis.
How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is. Why does a word only apply to a card if that's why you buy it? I'm not going to buy Hamlet just for the sifting, but if I'm trying to decide if I should buy a Hamlet or a Festival, then the additional sifting effect that you get with Hamlet that you don't get with Festival very well could influence that decision. Does that make it a "sifter"? Well I would say so, but I don't really care because that's just semantics and not really useful for strategic discussions. But to say it has no sifting properties is just incorrect.
Hamlet has no sifting properties. The fact that other cards are worse than nothing for the purpose of sifting doesn't mean that a card that is exactly as good as nothing is a sifter. Saying that it is, is as good as saying that it produces virtual coin (after all, it does produce more virtual coin than Storyteller and Poor House in the situations where those cards give you negative coins), or that it increases the costs of all cards (after all, it does increase the costs of all cards more than Highway does).
And I would think it worth mentioning that Hamlet leaves you with more virtual coin than cards that spend coins in the event that you were comparing the two. I wouldn't say it gives you "virtual coin" because that actually has a well-established meaning, but then again I'd say Poor House technically gives "virtual coin" even if it nets you $0, so maybe the technical terms have the potential to be misleading. You say Hamlet gives no sifting? Alright, well then Festival gives negative sifting and it's still a comparison worth making.
How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is.
That's what sifting is, but that's not what Hamlet does. You are not switching out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card. You don't discard for that card; you get it either way. You are discarding that card for either +1 action or +1 buy, which is discard-for-benefit, or not discarding it at all.
It doesn't really matter what it has relative to cards like Festival and Necropolis.
How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is. Why does a word only apply to a card if that's why you buy it? I'm not going to buy Hamlet just for the sifting, but if I'm trying to decide if I should buy a Hamlet or a Festival, then the additional sifting effect that you get with Hamlet that you don't get with Festival very well could influence that decision. Does that make it a "sifter"? Well I would say so, but I don't really care because that's just semantics and not really useful for strategic discussions. But to say it has no sifting properties is just incorrect.
Hamlet has no sifting properties. The fact that other cards are worse than nothing for the purpose of sifting doesn't mean that a card that is exactly as good as nothing is a sifter. Saying that it is, is as good as saying that it produces virtual coin (after all, it does produce more virtual coin than Storyteller and Poor House in the situations where those cards give you negative coins), or that it increases the costs of all cards (after all, it does increase the costs of all cards more than Highway does).
And I would think it worth mentioning that Hamlet leaves you with more virtual coin than cards that spend coins in the event that you were comparing the two. I wouldn't say it gives you "virtual coin" because that actually has a well-established meaning, but then again I'd say Poor House technically gives "virtual coin" even if it nets you $0, so maybe the technical terms have the potential to be misleading. You say Hamlet gives no sifting? Alright, well then Festival gives negative sifting and it's still a comparison worth making.
That doesn't make sense at all. Hamlet does not sift any more than Festival does. Are you just ignoring my posts?How does it not matter? If someone asked me what advantages Hamlet has over Festival, I would absolutely mention that Hamlet allows you to switch out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card on your deck if you want, while still getting either the village or +Buy effect that Festival gives you. That's what sifting is.
That's what sifting is, but that's not what Hamlet does. You are not switching out the worst of your other 4 cards for the next card. You don't discard for that card; you get it either way. You are discarding that card for either +1 action or +1 buy, which is discard-for-benefit, or not discarding it at all.
I don't really think it matters what you're discarding the card for. If you actually do discard for the extra action, then it's no different from if you had gotten the +Action for free and discarded for the extra card instead. I'm more concerned with the actual effect than the exact text on the card.