Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: silverspawn on July 19, 2014, 01:26:03 pm
-
so, i have this card named Believer that allows you to put an action card from the play area into your hand and play them again if you have actions left. the original wording was simply:
Choose an Action card you have in Play. Put it into your hand [...]
that causes tracking problems with duration cards though; i target a wharf, i play it again, now i have +4 cards next turn instead of +2, but no card is there to remind me of that. for a while i thought that was okay, because procession does it too, but it still irks me.
so, now I'm searching for possibilities to avoid this. ideas I (and Showdown35) have come up with
[...] if it's not a duration card [...]
clean, but now you also can't target duration cards that kicked in from last turn, which sucks
[...] if it's not a duration card which you played this turn [...]
this works, but I don't want to reference cards that aren't either in my expansion or in the base game. duration cards are in seaside.
[...] if its effect doesn't influence your next turn [...]
sort of works, but what if you play TR - TR - Wharf - Believer, can you target the TR's now? I'd say yes, but it's debatable, which is bad.
[...] if it would normally be discarded during your next Cleanup phase [...]
sort of works, but what about treasury?
none of these is really satisfying. anyone has an idea for a better wording?
-
The game state is unaffected by its effects that it has not had yet.
I think that this is the best effect, but I'm not sure if it's possible to word in a better way. It allows you to return a Duration card that you played this turn, but doesn't make the Duration have its duration effect twice, which is cool IMO. It doesn't work well with Scheme, but that's not a huge downside.
-
Procession isn't as bad. If you Procession a duration, the Procession stays in play to remind you that you get two of something, and it's not too tough to remember what it was. But that doesn't happen with this card. You end up with the Duration card in play next turn, which is not as unusual as a Procession in play, so it's easier to forget that it was played more than once.
My question for you is, what is the design goal for this card? As it is right now, it fills about the same niche as Throne Room by letting you play an action twice. Unless there are other pieces that are missing, this is weaker because it requires you have TWO extra actions (one to play Believer, one to play the card that you take back) and it is a bit more flexible (you can split up the two plays instead of getting them back to back).
From a gameplay perspective, is that flexibility really worth using up two more actions than TR? I can't think of any common situations off the top of my head. Menagerie, maybe? Eh.
From a design perspective, is the subtle difference from TR enough to warrant clunky wording and high potential for confusion?
-
Procession isn't as bad. If you Procession a duration, the Procession stays in play to remind you that you get two of something, and it's not too tough to remember what it was. But that doesn't happen with this card. You end up with the Duration card in play next turn, which is not as unusual as a Procession in play, so it's easier to forget that it was played more than once.
My question for you is, what is the design goal for this card? As it is right now, it fills about the same niche as Throne Room by letting you play an action twice. Unless there are other pieces that are missing, this is weaker because it requires you have TWO extra actions (one to play Believer, one to play the card that you take back) and it is a bit more flexible (you can split up the two plays instead of getting them back to back).
From a gameplay perspective, is that flexibility really worth using up two more actions than TR? I can't think of any common situations off the top of my head. Menagerie, maybe? Eh.
From a design perspective, is the subtle difference from TR enough to warrant clunky wording and high potential for confusion?
that's the kind of stuff you should post here (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11313.0). i mean, i haven't even specified how the card works, how much it costs, what it can do, i was just asking about the wording
but alright, the idea of believer was to be a weak throne room variant for 2$, with more flexibility because you can also topdeck the card (I didn't mention that here, because it doesn't matter for the wording issue), and it also has an on-buy effect. but man, it is strong. so strong you would never guess it just by looking at it, it may be the strongest 2$ in the game. and it's also my personal favorite, I love it, it's complex but incredibly powerful, so yea, it is absolutely worth any issues it might have.
and procession can be even worse, if you play a procession chain, like procession - procession - wharf - wharf - procession - wharf - wharf. now you have +16 cards next turn and not even a single card to remind you of that.
The game state is unaffected by its effects that it has not had yet.
that's neat. i'm not worried about sheme, my only concern with that wording is that it'll look confusing to newer players. still, it's worth considering, maybe i'll do it
-
Ah, well, I think all that is relevant to finding the right wording. I'll think about it!
-
Unfortunately, I don't think such a wording exists. Scheme already bends over backwards in order to make sure you don't lose track of Duration cards. An effect that specifically removes a card from play so that it can be played again the same turn seems like more trouble than it's worth.
-
Unfortunately, I don't think such a wording exists. Scheme already bends over backwards in order to make sure you don't lose track of Duration cards. An effect that specifically removes a card from play so that it can be played again the same turn seems like more trouble than it's worth.
well i can always fall back on
if it's not a duration card which you played this turn
i would be referencing another expansion, which would suck, but even that would be worth it.
-
Personal preference would be to allow it to work as expected with Durations; if you take Wharf back into hand, you'll still get +2 from it next turn. If you play it again, you'll get another +2 from it next turn on top of the original +2. Yes, it requires memory and tracking; so does Pawn. I could see it being a minor annoyance, but one that simply doesn't come up enough to worry that much about. I mean, there's no official way to track how many times you played Possession last turn either. You just have to remember; and in that case, you have to track both how many total turns you should get, and how many you've already taken.
-
Personal preference would be to allow it to work as expected with Durations; if you take Wharf back into hand, you'll still get +2 from it next turn. If you play it again, you'll get another +2 from it next turn on top of the original +2. Yes, it requires memory and tracking; so does Pawn. I could see it being a minor annoyance, but one that simply doesn't come up enough to worry that much about. I mean, there's no official way to track how many times you played Possession last turn either. You just have to remember; and in that case, you have to track both how many total turns you should get, and how many you've already taken.
thanks for saying that. i agree; there are lots of things that you have to track yourself, band of misfits is another one, or pretty much any card that lets you choose vanilla boni. leaving it as it is isn't out of question. still, if an elegant wording exists that makes it trackable, i'd rather change it.
-
Personal preference would be to allow it to work as expected with Durations; if you take Wharf back into hand, you'll still get +2 from it next turn. If you play it again, you'll get another +2 from it next turn on top of the original +2. Yes, it requires memory and tracking; so does Pawn. I could see it being a minor annoyance, but one that simply doesn't come up enough to worry that much about. I mean, there's no official way to track how many times you played Possession last turn either. You just have to remember; and in that case, you have to track both how many total turns you should get, and how many you've already taken.
thanks for saying that. i agree; there are lots of things that you have to track yourself, band of misfits is another one, or pretty much any card that lets you choose vanilla boni. leaving it as it is isn't out of question. still, if an elegant wording exists that makes it trackable, i'd rather change it.
The mention of BoM raises another possibility - could Believer be a Band of Misfits that copies an Action card you already have in play instead? It'll give you about 95% of the same effect but there's already been plenty of work done on getting the wording and underlying rules right.
-
The mention of BoM raises another possibility - could Believer be a Band of Misfits that copies an Action card you already have in play instead? It'll give you about 95% of the same effect but there's already been plenty of work done on getting the wording and underlying rules right.
unfortunately not, because that would skyrocket the powerlevel, since you need one less action. and you'd have to make a choose one clause for the topdecking
-
The mention of BoM raises another possibility - could Believer be a Band of Misfits that copies an Action card you already have in play instead? It'll give you about 95% of the same effect but there's already been plenty of work done on getting the wording and underlying rules right.
unfortunately not, because that would skyrocket the powerlevel, since you need one less action. and you'd have to make a choose one clause for the topdecking
Maybe you could use that as direction for the wording. Rather than being a card that lets you take another card from play back into hand, maybe Believer could be BoM-esque in that it becomes another card. But in this case, it becomes a card that was already played, with the original copy getting returned to your hand. The key thing then is that Believer would remain in play if it is used on a duration, which can serve as a reminder.
So I play Fishing Village, then Believer, selecting FV. Believer becomes the FV that was previously played, and the actual FV goes into my hand. Then I play the original FV. In clean up, both Believer and FV remain in play. Make sense?
Not sure if it helps or hurts with clarity, nor if there is a clean and simple wording to encapsulate this concept. But it's an idea for a direction.
-
it's the same problem, you change the card drastically. let's say you play FW - Believer - ( FW )
original believer: you now have +1 action, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
band of misfits believer: you now have +2 actions, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
swap believer: you now have +3 actions, +3$ and... don't know how much for the next turn
it's different. it can't afford to be stronger though.
-
it's the same problem, you change the card drastically. let's say you play FW - Believer - ( FW )
original believer: you now have +1 action, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
band of misfits believer: you now have +2 actions, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
swap believer: you now have +3 actions, +3$ and... don't know how much for the next turn
it's different. it can't afford to be stronger though.
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play original Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play swap Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
I suppose you're thinking of the "swap" play as a free play, but I'm not. In my concept, it still takes up an action to perform the swap, so it works out the same.
-
it's the same problem, you change the card drastically. let's say you play FW - Believer - ( FW )
original believer: you now have +1 action, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
band of misfits believer: you now have +2 actions, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
swap believer: you now have +3 actions, +3$ and... don't know how much for the next turn
it's different. it can't afford to be stronger though.
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play original Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play swap Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
I suppose you're thinking of the "swap" play as a free play, but I'm not. In my concept, it still takes up an action to perform the swap, so it works out the same.
Right.
"Choose an action card you have in play. Put it in your hand or on top of your deck. This is that card until it leaves play."
I could see this causing some confusion, but the intent is that playing Believer does NOT give you the effects of the card you choose, like playing BoM does. All it does is return that card to hand or deck, and it stays out as if it were the original card, so that if you use it on a Duration card, it would stay out at the end of that turn.
-
it's the same problem, you change the card drastically. let's say you play FV - Believer - ( FV )
original believer: you now have +1 action, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
band of misfits believer: you now have +2 actions, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
swap believer: you now have +3 actions, +3$ and... don't know how much for the next turn
it's different. it can't afford to be stronger though.
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play original Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play swap Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
I suppose you're thinking of the "swap" play as a free play, but I'm not. In my concept, it still takes up an action to perform the swap, so it works out the same.
ah, i get it. What i originally thought was that believer also has the FV effect when it comes into play, but what you're suggesting is that it just does the swap, it doesn't imitate FV and swap.
okay, so that's certainly interesting. you have solved the tracking problem without altering the powerlevel too much (a slight nerf is fine). I see two problems though.
one, your new believer is now FV until it leaves play, so it stays outside, but it doesn't actually do anything, right? the duration effect is from the old FV. so you have a card that's just there, stays in play until your next turn but doesn't do anything. hm.
second, it's now less clean with throne room. you throne a swap-believer, you target a FV, now FV moves into your hand and Believer is FV until it leaves play, but now it enters play again and you target a wharf. it's now... wharf or fv? neither? both? I'd say it's wharf, but then you don't have anything reminding you of the FV. that's acceptable though, you need TR/KC/Pr + Believer + Duration card for that to happen, that's not going to be all that often. you could abuse it though; throne a believer, target a wharf, then target a hamlet; now believer is being discarded at the end of your turn, despite being used on a duration card.
I think I like this version best, even with the problems. gotta think about it some more.
-
it's the same problem, you change the card drastically. let's say you play FW - Believer - ( FW )
original believer: you now have +1 action, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
band of misfits believer: you now have +2 actions, +2$ and +2$, +2 actions for the next turn
swap believer: you now have +3 actions, +3$ and... don't know how much for the next turn
it's different. it can't afford to be stronger though.
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play original Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
Play FV: 2 actions, $1; +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play swap Believer: 1 action, $1, +1 action and +$1 next turn
Play FV again: 2 actions, $2,; +2 actions and +$2 next turn
I suppose you're thinking of the "swap" play as a free play, but I'm not. In my concept, it still takes up an action to perform the swap, so it works out the same.
ah, i get it. What i originally thought was that believer also has the FW effect when it comes into play, but what you're suggesting is that it just does the swap, it doesn't imitate FW and swap.
okay, so that's certainly interesting. you have solved the tracking problem without altering the powerlevel too much (a slight nerf is fine). I see two problems though.
one, your new believer is now FW until it leaves play, so it stays outside, but it doesn't actually do anything, right? the duration effect is from the old FW. so you have a card that's just there, stays in play until your next turn but doesn't do anything. hm.
second, it's now less clean with throne room. you throne a swap-believer, you target a FW, now FW moves into your hand and Believer is FW until it leaves play, but now it enters play again and you target a wharf. it's now... wharf or fw? neither? both? I'd say it's wharf, but then you don't have anything reminding you of the FW. that's acceptable though, you need TR/KC/Pr + Believer + Duration card for that to happen, that's not going to be all that often. you could abuse it though; throne a believer, target a wharf, then target a hamlet; now believer is being discarded at the end of your turn, despite being used on a duration card.
I think I like this version best, even with the problems. gotta think about it some more.
I think this issue would cause confusion for players who aren't the kind of people who sit around discussing weird edge cases on F.DS. all day long (Hard to believe, I know, but there are people like that). The thing is, when targeting a non-Duration card (which is almost every time you play the card), the "swap" does nothing. It would cause some interactions with Horn of Plenty too, but that's it. So I'd think that the average player would look at "this is that card until it leaves play" and then just be like "huh, what? What's does that mean; why is that there?"
Granted, "Trash this. If you do..." has the same issue on a smaller scale; lots of players might ask "wait, so is the trashing mandatory or not? If it's mandatory, then why does it say 'if you do'?"
-
good point. I somehow don't feel like it's that bad, but I can't really explain why. maybe because if I read it, i'd probably go "oh yea, so it can matter what kind of cards are in play, got it."
it also matters for urchin. and, uh, believer? if it's a fw now, doesn't that mean it can now be targeted by another believer? I'm just realizing that now, but it's really bad. damn, it almost sounded like the perfect solution. you could do something like "that was never a believer" or "that doesn't have the name believer printed on it", but that's just kind of awful.
too bad. still, good idea.
-
As I said, it's an idea and a direction. There may be a way to make it work still. Or maybe not. Worth thinking about though.
Aside: you keep writing FW. You mean FV, right?
-
Is there a good reason to go out of your way to prevent them from targeting another believer? I mean, I get that you would have the option to just repeatedly take believer in hand over and over again forever, but so? You can do that currently with Moat or Trader or Secret Chamber.
-
Is there a good reason to go out of your way to prevent them from targeting another believer? I mean, I get that you would have the option to just repeatedly take believer in hand over and over again forever, but so? You can do that currently with Moat or Trader or Secret Chamber.
You can't even do it forever, each one uses an action.
-
Aside: you keep writing FW. You mean FV, right?
Report to moderator Logged
oups. yea.
Is there a good reason to go out of your way to prevent them from targeting another believer?
yes. imagine a hand with 2KC, a believer and a woodcutter.
I play KC -> KC. now i have a woodcutter and a believer in my hand, and i can play 3 action cards three times.
now I play
Woodcutter -> make $ and +buys
Believer -> take KC, Woodcutter and Believer back in hand
KC -> I can now play 3 action cards three times again
I now have a woodcutter and a believer in my hand, i can play 3 action cards three times, and i have generated money
repeat 500 times
empty the supply
-
Now that I think about it, there's another possible fix. You could do: "When you buy this or when it comes into play, choose an Action card you have in play, putting it into your hand or on top of your deck. This is that card until it leaves play"
that way making it unthroneable, you can allow targeting other believers, therefore the latest problem is obsolete, and you also solved the "I'm now 2 cards problem," and it's probably shorter. and it's still really strong with TR, because TR generates lots of actions. it could probably afford to be not quite as ridiculous in every tr game
maybe I'll do that. just to make sure it even works: a card doesn't enter play twice if you throne it, right?
-
Thats a good question. I am of the oppinion that it does enter play twice, but it's debatable.
I think there is another issue though. If I use Believer on a FV I played last turn, I esentially reset the FV, since I just played the Believer, and it is now a FV, it will stay in play under duration rules. I understand that's debatable too, but its certainly not clear either way. I'm pretty sure the intention is to NOT be able to reset a duration, and i cant think of how to use the "swap" wording and also make it clear that if you swap a duration, it inherits the play state of the card.
I'm starting to think it best to stick with the original wording. If you use it on a duration, just leave the believer in play to remind you, and you just have to remember (if you use the on buy effect on a duration, you can't leave the believer in play, but too bad, just write it down, use a token, whatever)
-
Aside: you keep writing FW. You mean FV, right?
Report to moderator Logged
oups. yea.
Is there a good reason to go out of your way to prevent them from targeting another believer?
yes. imagine a hand with 2KC, a believer and a woodcutter.
I play KC -> KC. now i have a woodcutter and a believer in my hand, and i can play 3 action cards three times.
now I play
Woodcutter -> make $ and +buys
Believer -> take KC, Woodcutter and Believer back in hand
KC -> I can now play 3 action cards three times again
I now have a woodcutter and a believer in my hand, i can play 3 action cards three times, and i have generated money
repeat 500 times
empty the supply
Clearly the problem here is that Woodcutter is just broken.
But yeah, I hadn't thought of that. Too bad; because without King's Court, there wouldn't be any issue.
-
Now that I think about it, there's another possible fix. You could do: "When you buy this or when it comes into play, choose an Action card you have in play, putting it into your hand or on top of your deck. This is that card until it leaves play"
that way making it unthroneable, you can allow targeting other believers, therefore the latest problem is obsolete, and you also solved the "I'm now 2 cards problem," and it's probably shorter. and it's still really strong with TR, because TR generates lots of actions. it could probably afford to be not quite as ridiculous in every tr game
maybe I'll do that. just to make sure it even works: a card doesn't enter play twice if you throne it, right?
Ha, I thought of that wording right after reading your explanation of why it's broken with KC. But I don't like it... "when it comes into play" is just kind of weird, and would require extra thought from players to figure out when it counts as coming into play, and what exactly that means, etc.
As a general rule for all fan cards, I think it's bad to use any game terminology that hasn't been used on official cards. Same reason it's never good to have a card that refers to the "worth" or "value" of a treasure card.
-
I'm starting to think it best to stick with the original wording. If you use it on a duration, just leave the believer in play to remind you, and you just have to remember (if you use the on buy effect on a duration, you can't leave the believer in play, but too bad, just write it down, use a token, whatever)
I agree with the stick with the original wording part, but you can't "just leave the believer in play to remind you". By the rules, Believer should be in your discard pile; which will matter if you need to shuffle.
-
Is there a particular reason why we can't use "-1 action"? It's a pretty well-defined concept. It changes the way the card works somewhat, but I don't think it's broken. Something like
Believer
$2 Action
-1 action
Play an action card you already have in play
Ok. No. I don't like this anymore, but I'm posting it anyway in case it inspires something better from someone else
-
I'm starting to think it best to stick with the original wording. If you use it on a duration, just leave the believer in play to remind you, and you just have to remember (if you use the on buy effect on a duration, you can't leave the believer in play, but too bad, just write it down, use a token, whatever)
I agree with the stick with the original wording part, but you can't "just leave the believer in play to remind you". By the rules, Believer should be in your discard pile; which will matter if you need to shuffle.
Actually, you can "just leave the Believer in play to remind you,"... in fact, you are supposed to!
Here's a quote from the Seaside Rule Sheet:
"If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing anything."
The rules go on to give the Throne Room + Merchant Ship example, stating that the TR stays in play until your next clean-up ("The Throne Room stays in play to remind you that you are getting the effect of Merchant Ship twice on that next turn.")
I would say that if you use Believer to put a Fishing Village back in your hand, then you are "modifying" the FV, and the rules allow you to keep the Believer in play to remind you that you get the FV effect on your next turn, even though the FV is no longer in play (or in play a second time).
-
Is there a particular reason why we can't use "-1 action"? It's a pretty well-defined concept. It changes the way the card works somewhat, but I don't think it's broken. Something like
Believer
$2 Action
-1 action
Play an action card you already have in play
Ok. No. I don't like this anymore, but I'm posting it anyway in case it inspires something better from someone else
i'm definitely not doing -1 action, sorry :P
-
I don't even know exactly how the reminder system works. if you throne a wharf, both stay outside. if you throne a throne that thrones a wharf and a hamlet, the second throne stays outside. but doesn't that mean that if you procession a procession that processions two wharfs, no card stays outside? but doesn't every procession chain leave at least one card outside? I don't know if i've ever seen a lot of cards being drawn without any card outside.
"If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing anything."
that seems pretty clear. except the "also" doesn't apply here. but still, it seems plausible that even with the original wording, believer has to stay outside. kinda nice.
-
I'm starting to think it best to stick with the original wording. If you use it on a duration, just leave the believer in play to remind you, and you just have to remember (if you use the on buy effect on a duration, you can't leave the believer in play, but too bad, just write it down, use a token, whatever)
I agree with the stick with the original wording part, but you can't "just leave the believer in play to remind you". By the rules, Believer should be in your discard pile; which will matter if you need to shuffle.
Actually, you can "just leave the Believer in play to remind you,"... in fact, you are supposed to!
Here's a quote from the Seaside Rule Sheet:
"If you play or modify a Duration card with another card, that other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing anything."
The rules go on to give the Throne Room + Merchant Ship example, stating that the TR stays in play until your next clean-up ("The Throne Room stays in play to remind you that you are getting the effect of Merchant Ship twice on that next turn.")
I would say that if you use Believer to put a Fishing Village back in your hand, then you are "modifying" the FV, and the rules allow you to keep the Believer in play to remind you that you get the FV effect on your next turn, even though the FV is no longer in play (or in play a second time).
I'm sure about that at all... Throne Room modifies Fishing Village in that it causes it to be played twice, instead of once. If "return to your hand" counts as modification the same way, then how do you define "that other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing anything"... it returned the FV to your hand, it's not doing anything anymore. It has no effect on what will happen on your next turn at all. Playing the FV a second time affects your next turn, but playing the Believer doesn't at all.
-
I'm sure about that at all... Throne Room modifies Fishing Village in that it causes it to be played twice, instead of once. If "return to your hand" counts as modification the same way, then how do you define "that other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing anything"... it returned the FV to your hand, it's not doing anything anymore. It has no effect on what will happen on your next turn at all. Playing the FV a second time affects your next turn, but playing the Believer doesn't at all.
I'm saying that if you play the Believer on a FV that you played this turn, the Believer would stay in play because it modified the FV in such a way that a reminder is warrented. Technically the Throne Room isn't "doing anything" except serving as a reminder. The Believer would serve as a reminder until your next turn when the FV that it returned to your hand has finished it's effect.
Yes, the word "also" is out of place because the FV would no longer be "also" in play, but when seaside was made, there were no published cards that could remove a duration from play, but as we see with Procession, even though it trashes the Duration card, Procession "also" stays in play.
If you want to argue that TR and Procession are "doing something" because they are the means of actually playing the duration card, then why would the rule even include "or modify"? It seems clear to me that if any card you play "modifies" a duration card in play such that you'll need a reminder for the next turns effect, then that card stays in play until that next turn effect happens, then it's discarded during that cleanup.
EDIT: re-reading the previous comment, I think I should clear up that I'm saying the Believer would stay in play only if you use it to return a Duration that you played this turn! If you are returning a Duration that's already been in play since your last turn and already had its next turn effect, the Believer would not be "doing anything" and would be discarded as normal during cleanup. I'm hoping that was the only disagreement.
-
I'm sure about that at all... Throne Room modifies Fishing Village in that it causes it to be played twice, instead of once. If "return to your hand" counts as modification the same way, then how do you define "that other card also stays in your play area until it is no longer doing anything"... it returned the FV to your hand, it's not doing anything anymore. It has no effect on what will happen on your next turn at all. Playing the FV a second time affects your next turn, but playing the Believer doesn't at all.
I'm saying that if you play the Believer on a FV that you played this turn, the Believer would stay in play because it modified the FV in such a way that a reminder is warrented. Technically the Throne Room isn't "doing anything" except serving as a reminder. The Believer would serve as a reminder until your next turn when the FV that it returned to your hand has finished it's effect.
Yes, the word "also" is out of place because the FV would no longer be "also" in play, but when seaside was made, there were no published cards that could remove a duration from play, but as we see with Procession, even though it trashes the Duration card, Procession "also" stays in play.
If you want to argue that TR and Procession are "doing something" because they are the means of actually playing the duration card, then why would the rule even include "or modify"? It seems clear to me that if any card you play "modifies" a duration card in play such that you'll need a reminder for the next turns effect, then that card stays in play until that next turn effect happens, then it's discarded during that cleanup.
I suppose that makes sense.... basically you're defining "doing something" to include "reminding you that there's a Duration effect." Certainly that's a valid argument. But I don't think it's a given or obvious that that's correct either. Because with Throne Room, playing Fishing Village with Throne Room changes your next turn compared to playing Fishing Village by itself. So it's fair to say that the Throne Room is doing something to your next turn (even if it technically did it this turn; not next). But here, playing Believer has no effect on your next turn at all.
So I guess it's something that can simply be clarified in a FAQ; though I believe you could clarify it to say either thing and both would be within the letter (and probably spirit) of the rules. Who knows what Donald was thinking of when he wrote "or modify"... since nothing in the game actually can modify another card. Actually... if you want to get super rules-lawyery... Say I play a Fishing Village, then a Bridge. That Bridge clearly modified the Fishing Village; it reduced its cost. But no one would argue it stays in play, even though it most certainly modified a Duration card. So either "or modify" was intended for some other cards that never got published; or it was intended for the Throne Room effect, where "modifying" means "causing it to be played more than once."
*Edit* Actually, I forgot about the "until it's done doing stuff" part. So even though Bridge modified the Fishing Village, there's no valid argument to say that it's still doing stuff at the end of your turn, so of course it gets cleaned up. So that was a bad example.
-
Is there a particular reason why we can't use "-1 action"? It's a pretty well-defined concept. It changes the way the card works somewhat, but I don't think it's broken. Something like
Believer
$2 Action
-1 action
Play an action card you already have in play
Ok. No. I don't like this anymore, but I'm posting it anyway in case it inspires something better from someone else
i'm definitely not doing -1 action, sorry :P
Wait, it could also be like:
Believer
$2 Action
Choose an Action card you have in play.
You may spend an action to play it again.
If you don't, put it on top of your deck.