Hm, this is surprising to me. So it doesn't matter if the TR or KC is actually doing something next turn, it just matters if it directly played a Duration card? I would think it would make more sense to have the TR or KC stay out as long as it results in setting up multiple effects for a future turn (as the KC is doing in chipperMDW's example).It doesn't need to have set up multiple future effects, but it does need to have set up a future effect. If it hasn't (e.g. Throne Tactician) it doesn't stay out.
Yes, sorry. KC didn't play a duration card and so doesn't stay out.When you play TR on a duration, TR is supposed to stay in play as long as it's still "doing something." How does that work with these new rulings?Throne stays out if it directly played a duration card that's doing stuff on a future turn. It doesn't know about indirectly getting cards played, such as when you Throne Throne. That now includes Throne BoM, for that first play when it's not a duration card quite yet.
For example, if you play TR on BoM, choosing Fishing Village, then the second play will be of Fishing Village. Does TR know that it indirectly "played" Fishing Village twice and needs to stay out? Or does it just know it played a BoM and then played the same card that was somehow a Fishing Village the second time, and doesn't know it "doubled" a duration?
In the case TR and friends can somehow see through the BoM to see what ultimately gets played, what about this: You KC a BoM, choosing Feast for the first play, so it'll be a BoM for the second and third plays. Both those times, you choose it to be Fishing Village. Does KC need to stay in play to mark that it "doubled" a Fishing Village? Or is that just a coincidental doubling (you could have picked Fishing Village and Woodcutter, after all), so it gets discarded?
If you Throne BoM as Fishing Village, the 2nd time, Throne played Fishing Village, and that's doing stuff next turn, so Throne stays out.
If you KC BoM and the 2nd and 3rd times it's Fishing Village, those are doing stuff next turn so KC stays out. The tracking is poor here but the rules don't have a "how poor is the tracking" clause, they just leave out Thrones that directly played duration cards that have stuff left to do.
Doesn't KC in chipperMDWs example, on the 2nd and 3rd play, play BoM? And then BoM played itself as a duration card? So KC didn't directly play a duration card, and therefore doesn't stay out. Or what?
When you play TR on a duration, TR is supposed to stay in play as long as it's still "doing something." How does that work with these new rulings?
For example, if you play TR on BoM, choosing Fishing Village, then the second play will be of Fishing Village. Does TR know that it indirectly "played" Fishing Village twice and needs to stay out? Or does it just know it played a BoM and then played the same card that was somehow a Fishing Village the second time, and doesn't know it "doubled" a duration?
In the case TR and friends can somehow see through the BoM to see what ultimately gets played, what about this: You KC a BoM, choosing Feast for the first play, so it'll be a BoM for the second and third plays. Both those times, you choose it to be Fishing Village. Does KC need to stay in play to mark that it "doubled" a Fishing Village? Or is that just a coincidental doubling (you could have picked Fishing Village and Woodcutter, after all), so it gets discarded?
If I am right, BoM keeps it's cost while assuming the guise of another card.
black market band of misfits trader death despair
And therefore the interaction between TR-BoM and generic CardX should be the same, but without making the choice the second time?So, have we come up with a concrete way that TR-BoM(as Feast) handles Tokens?
TR: Choose BoM
1. BoM(+A): Choose Feast(+B)
2. BoM(+A): Choose Feast(+B)
or
TR: Choose BoM(+A): Choose Feast
1. Feast(+B)
2. Feast(+B)
I'm not sure if this has been specifically resolved. Or whether the primary instruction on BoM is "Play this as..." or "This is..." in a situation involving Tokens.
The former. But you don't have to choose Feast the second time.
TR: Choose BoM
1. BoM(+A): Choose CardX(+B)
2. BoM(+A): Must Choose CardX(+B)
or
TR: Choose BoM(+A): Choose CardX
1. CardX(+B)
2. CardX(+B)
This would imply that BoM is played both times, but the choice cannot be changed as CardX is still in play.
It's good to know that Scout can at least get some love in hypothetical discussions.
Hey, if Scout is the only Action under $5, I might pick one up with Seaway.
I'm sure Scout can be part of some weird concocted Distand Lands megaturn, where you gain them all to end the game of piles, then have to KC them all the same turn, but need Scouts to draw them.
You trash your deck down to KC/University/Scout (there was a Raze in there somewhere). Gain 3 Distant Lands, draw them with Scout, play them. Empty piles.
Finally, Scout has its day in the sun! It's a good thing there are no other $4 cards that can draw 3 cards or else we would have yet another situation in which Scout is outclassed.
You trash your deck down to KC/KC/University/University/Scout. Gain 4 Distant Lands, draw them with Scout, play them. Empty piles.
So do you want to write the combo article or shall I?
It's good to know that Scout can at least get some love in hypothetical discussions.
Hey, if Scout is the only Action under $5, I might pick one up with Seaway.
I'm sure Scout can be part of some weird concocted Distand Lands megaturn, where you gain them all to end the game of piles, then have to KC them all the same turn, but need Scouts to draw them.
You trash your deck down to KC/University/Scout (there was a Raze in there somewhere). Gain 3 Distant Lands, draw them with Scout, play them. Empty piles.
I think this is obvious from the new rulings, but it hasn't been said yet:
If you play TR-BoM as Feast, then you get the token bonuses on BoM twice. Because 2nd time you did play a BoM again.
Right?
I still don't understand how "it's no longer BoM for the second play." We know Throne locks in, based on Feast interaction. We can't have Throne lock in on ONLY the second half of Band's instructions. "This is that card until it leaves play."
We I did type it as "playing the card twice" instead of "doubling the card" so I'm not sure if that was agreement or misunderstand.TR locks in on the played action. In BoM's case it is: TR-BoM(as CardX) meaning the next time you play it, you get BoM(as CardX) which is why there is confusion about which tokens you get.
TR-CardX(+1 Buy) = CardX(+1 Buy) + CardX(+1 Buy)
TR-BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy)) = BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy)) + BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy))
TR-BoM(+1 Action)(as CardX(+1 Buy)) = BoM(+1 Action)(as CardX(+1 Buy)) + BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy))
It just seems counter-intuitive that you lose the BoM token on Throning. It can still lock in as that action card (i.e. BoM(as Feast)) because the action you chose was BoM(as Feast) to play twice.
If you Throne BoM as Feast, you get BoM(as Feast) + BoM(as Feast)
If your BoM has the +1 Action token, and you play it as Feast, you get BoM(+1 Action)(as Feast)
If you Throne your BoM(+1 Action) as Feast, why wouldn't it become BoM(+1 Action)(as Feast) + BoM(+1 Action)(as Feast) ?
This does not violate what Throne does, or what Band does.
I don't see what this has to do with TR-Feast locking in on gaining the same card. BoM literally becomes the copied card (well, "literally" in the context of the game), so it has to be the same on the second play off of TR. It's the only card in the game that works that way. Throne Room doesn't double the effect of playing a card once, it just plays the card twice.
As for this interpretation of the TR-BoM w/ tokens issue, I think it's feasible, but I still don't think it makes the most sense. As I understand the wording on BoM, it sounds like you never actually "play" BoM. You just play the card it's copying. That interpretation is kind of unfortunate in that it would mean putting tokens on BoM is completely worthless (maybe barring a few edge cases, but I don't actually think so), but I also think it makes the most sense. There are a handful of other interpretations that I think could be justified (get the tokens on both piles twice, get the tokens on both piles once, get the tokens on BoM twice, and get the tokens on the copied pile twice could all potentially make sense depending on the precise meaning of the wording on BoM, I think), but I just don't understand the rationale behind getting the BoM tokens once and the copied pile's tokens twice.
For clarity (if anyone wants it), here are the reasons I think those 4 interpretations could be justified:
Tokens on both piles twice: BoM is a card from the BoM pile and an honorary card from the copied pile. Therefore, it gets both tokens on both plays.
Tokens on both piles once: It is BoM on the first play, becomes the copied card halfway through resolving it, and is the copied card on the second play.
Tokens on BoM twice: BoM, as a physical card, is from the BoM pile, so it only gets those tokens.
Tokens on copied pile twice: BoM, for all intents and purposes, becomes the copied card the instant you play it. It is no longer BoM at this point, so it only gets the tokens on the copied pile.
I think it's counter-intuitive to think that BoM is only BoM the first time you play it. It's either never BoM, or it is BoM(as CardX) both times. This doesn't matter for Throne normally, but with tokens caring about piles, I don't see how it can pretend it doesn't exist on the second play.
We know TR-BoM "locks" in on the card.
TR-BoM(as CardX) = BoM(as CardX) + BoM(as CardX) <> BoM(as CardX) + CardX
[These effects are the same, but they are different concepts]
I'm saying, that intuitively, you should get the BoM tokens both times. The BoM is played twice, but it is played both times as BoM(as CardX). If that is not the case, then BoM is never played, and never gets bonuses from tokens.
I don't see how it can work only once.
For the card you copy with BoM, either you should both get the token bonus and count it for Conspirator, or not get the token bonus and not count it for Conspirator. I am leaning towards getting the token bonus and counting the card. If Conspirator didn't count it then maybe there's some window of things a card does that's getting skipped and that could break something.
It's a thought exercise, really.This suddenly has me wondering if TR-Feast should lock in on gaining the same card twice.
It definitely shouldn't. The only reason a Throned BoM has to be the same card both times is because BoM effectively becomes that card once it's played. If you resolve the full text on Feast twice then there's no reason why it should have to be the same card you gain.
TR locks in on the played action. In BoM's case it is: TR-BoM(as CardX) meaning the next time you play it, you get BoM(as CardX) which is why there is confusion about which tokens you get.
TR-CardX(+1 Buy) = CardX(+1 Buy) + CardX(+1 Buy)
TR-BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy)) = BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy)) + BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy))
TR-BoM(+1 Action)(as CardX(+1 Buy)) = BoM(+1 Action)(as CardX(+1 Buy)) + BoM(as CardX(+1 Buy))
It just seems counter-intuitive that you lose the BoM token on Throning. It can still lock in as that action card (i.e. BoM(as Feast)) because the action you chose was BoM(as Feast) to play twice.
If you Throne BoM as Feast, you get BoM(as Feast) + BoM(as Feast)
If your BoM has the +1 Action token, and you play it as Feast, you get BoM(+1 Action)(as Feast)
If you Throne your BoM(+1 Action) as Feast, why wouldn't it become BoM(+1 Action)(as Feast) + BoM(+1 Action)(as Feast) ?
This does not violate what Throne does, or what Band does.
This suddenly has me wondering if TR-Feast should lock in on gaining the same card twice.
It doesn't have anything to do with Conspirator's timing. Conspirator counts Actions played. In your example one card is played, Woodcutter. Since Champion triggers on a card being played, it triggers once. There can be no other interpretation.
