The option that you implicitly advocate is the lazy one (which is thankfully not the case here): a designer not caring about unclear stuff and updating the rules.
None of the 2E cards combo differently with other cards because of the changes they received
Or if they do, it's extremely marginal. That is not the case with 1E and 2E Cellar on a board with Way of the Chameleon.
I'd like to play with the errata and 2E versions, but I'm never going to be keeping a mental list of cards which changed +cards to draw cards, because it has no functional change except with Way of the Chameleon. Throne Room I remember because even though the functional change doesn't usually matter, it's always there. I also don't feel like looking up a list of those cards every time I play.
The key difference here is that knowing the errata isn't what causes you to choose it. It's remembering the errata.
In my view the problem is that people could play a game with Chameleon and Storyteller where it was a great combo, then play another game with another physical set or play online, and it's completely different. If you're not attentive to that, it has consequences for you, and why would you ever be attentive to that? It could be that the players in the game have different prior experiences; some expect it to work one way, some another way.
As always long arguments about these things may gain some tiny amount from actually having the rulebook.
It looks at the cost of the last-gained card as it stands at the time you're buying Wayfarer, not what it cost at the time that card was gained. So, it's actually quite simple. When you decide to buy Wayfarer, you say "What was the last card gained this turn, if any?" you identify that card (or answer "no card has been gained", in which case you stop there and treat it like a normal $6 Action card), then you ask "How much would it cost to buy that card right now?" (one slight weirdness here - it might not even be possible to buy that card if the pile is empty, but of course the price you'd pay if it were available is still defined), and then that's the cost of Wayfarer
Nonetheless, I suspect ignoring it will be the correct play quite often. Coven is a silver for most of the game; if other 5$s are sufficiently strong you should win with them even on a clock and with -10VP.Combines well with other Cursers though. A Coven+Witch is probably a lot better than Witch+Witch.
If Menagerie is not in a Menagerie recommended set then I'll eat a Menagerie.
Livery is proof that we will never see a card that increases the cost of things, as otherwise it could gain the entire Horse pile.
I wonder if AlphaZero can learn Dominion.
It learned chess and go by just self play, the only imput was rules.
The question is whether randomness and hidden informatin is limit for AlphaZero?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaZero
I have not read the paper, it would take me a lot of time to understand that...
The input to the neural network is an N X N (MT + L) image stack that represents state
using a concatenation of T sets of M planes of size N X N
I hope you continue to for many years, because it's a wonderful game! I've noticed in other threads that people have gotten into small debates with you about which cards are good vs which ones suck. I also noticed in this thread that you said everyone was giving you crap. I worry that this forum might end up upsetting you if you're mostly used to talking about Dominion with family and friends. Please remember that people on this forum are highly opinionated, and they don't shy away from disagreement or honest critique. It's not because they are all jerks, it's because they are interested in honest analysis, playing the game at the highest level they can, and thinking about fan cards as a game designer would. Even Donald X, the guy who made the game, spends hours and hours designing, testing, and tweaking cards until they are perfect. It takes a lot of work and a desire to get honest feedback about your cards, and even then, sometimes an idea just doesn't work for him in the end and has to be thrown out.My favorite thing about villain is that if you have five of them each other player discards their whole handI'm not trying to be mean, but, do you think that could ever realistically happen? At that point you would've spent like a hundred coins and could have easily ended the game already
Might Rainbow be workable if it said "when an opponent plays an Attack card, you may play this as a copy of that attack card"? It would still probably have issues, but it might at least be coherent in terms of rules.That's a good thought. It might have to have a lot of Caravan Guard-esque exceptions listed in parentheses. It would probably also need the Band of Misfits/Overlord clause: "this is that card until it leaves play"
I won't lie, I was proofreading my serious reply when I finally caught the joke.I should probably switch my pic but... I love the Farmland so much... So I'm kinda tornFarmland is weak. There‘s absolutely no reason to pick such a weak card as avatar.
Part of the reason I made cards with the curse type is to make powerful cards cheap. Cursed coin is one that you can open with if you get 5/2. Also when you remodel it at the end of the game you can get a kings court.
I should probably switch my pic but... I love the Farmland so much... So I'm kinda tornI thought ehunt was replying to himself at first.He used to make money. He used to be able to buy so many nice thingsForest - you find the old Woodcutter in the forest, but he's old and depressed so he's not as goodwhat a downer. he's been discontinued. he was taught to tie his identity to his profession.
Lol, me. I'm the one who said itWho said you're paying a high price?The cleanest way to do a -vp card is to have it give each other player vp tokens when it's gained. This also gets rid of the fact the drawback doesn't do anything if it's easy to trash the card.It also makes it so that you definitely aren't going to be trashing that card you just paid such a high price for. Depending on OP's goal, that may be more or less preferable.
Even if we agree to avoid the Curse type, is it really so confusing to print "-1VP" on a card? We already have Poor House with its "-$1"
Though, I was exaggerating a little.I don't really understand your point, I'll still remodel the crap out the thing if I want but I still suffer the -vp with the token versionThat giving my opponents each a VP chip is worse than giving myself a Curse (or some pseudo-curse card) which I may be able to trash later, so it just depends on what OP is going for. I'm saying it's a totally legit solution to the problem, OP would just have to decide what kind of experience they're going for. Either they want it to be possible (but difficult) to get rid of the penalty, or they don't.
I never said the -1vp was confusing. We already have Curse with -1vpHaha right, so we agree then. My bad, I thought that when you said the simplest solution was to give everyone else a VP, that you were saying that printing "-1VP" would be too confusing
He used to make money. He used to be able to buy so many nice thingsForest - you find the old Woodcutter in the forest, but he's old and depressed so he's not as good
what a downer. he's been discontinued. he was taught to tie his identity to his profession.
Hero says "Gain a Treasure".Fair enough. You've changed my mind.
There's no real reason to have the curse type on cards other than to confuse people.OR to trigger off of cards that refer to the Curse type. Maybe it's not a good reason, but it is a real reason.
The cleanest way to do a -vp card is to have it give each other player vp tokens when it's gained. This also gets rid of the fact the drawback doesn't do anything if it's easy to trash the card.
Rebuild says "gain a Victory Card", not "gain a Victory"I think it's obvious by typical Dominion wording that "Gain a ___" refers to a specific card nameYeah, I love gaining cards named "Victory" with Rebuild.
