Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1276

Dominion General Discussion / Re: New mechanics in Renaissance

« on: December 29, 2018, 12:43:43 am »

Doesn't Stash have the same trigger as Star Chart?
and doesn't Scheme have the same trigger as Improve?
Haunted Woods and Swamp Hag both check if you bought a card, so Exploration isn't the first there.
And Crown is an action that could always be played in the buy phase.

Taking turns after the end of the game with Fleet is a new mechanic.

No, Star Chart lets you choose a card before you start shuffling. The most straight-forward interpretation of Stash is when (after) shuffling.
No, Improve lets you choose a card that would be discarded. You never discard it. Scheme triggers when (after) discarding.
No, HW and SH trigger when (every time) you buy a card. Exploration is more like Treasury or Hermit, but those check your whole turn. Exploration checks just your (most recent) Buy phase.

Good catch about Fleet though.

1277

Dominion General Discussion / New mechanics in Renaissance

« on: December 28, 2018, 05:08:42 pm »

What are the actual new mechanics that we haven't seen before Renaissance? Artifacts are States with a new name, so are not included.

• Villagers
• Projects
• Playing an Action card in the Buy phase (Scepter, Capitalism, Innovation)
• Playing a non-Treasure card in the Buy phase (Scepter, Innovation, and Capitalism indirectly)
• Gaining a card without triggering its when-gain ability (Experiment)
• Checking number of tokens on Coffers mat (Swashbuckler)
• Checking cards that would be discarded this turn (Improve)
• Trigger on when-reveal (Patron)
• Trigger on when-would-shuffle (Star Chart)
• Checking which ability trashed a card (Sewers)
• Checking if cards bought in Buy phase (Exploration)
• New, specific use of Coin token (Sinister Plot)
• Checking card texts (Capitalism, Patron)

Not really? - Changing types of certain cards (Capitalism) - Inheritance also does this, although based on other criteria...

ADDED:

• Changing types of cards that are not in your deck (Capitalism)
• Taking turns after the end of the game (Fleet)

1278

Dominion FAQ / Re: Cards from Dominion and Intrigue 1st edition

« on: December 26, 2018, 10:27:02 pm »

Just played a random game IRL where Throne Room and Feast showed up, and we wanted lots of $5s (Labs and Haunted Woods). Amulet, Remodel and Treasure Trove were there too. Fun game.

1279

Dominion FAQ / Re: Playing with 8P

« on: December 26, 2018, 08:41:29 pm »

Another good one with simultaneous decisions is RoboRally. Newer editions added a timer and rules to make it a chaotic party game. But with the original rules, and a timer only if needed (just when some players are taking too long), it's a surprisingly tactical game where I have seen the good players consistently win. Of course you have to build a course that isn't too short, so that the luck will even out, so it could take a while to play.

1280

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 23, 2018, 11:09:49 am »

Consider the case where there are players A,B,C,D. A and C have bought Fleet, and D triggers game-end. The former statement suggests there is a moment between C's turn ending and the game ending, during which D is passed over before the game ends, opening the spectre of C being able to Donate, Outpost, etc.

I don't think your alternative is an improvement. Terms like "about-to-end state" are not necessary.

The intention was that "After end-game is triggered" only referred to the normal end-game conditions. If it's necessary to clarify that, all we need is to write "After the game would normally end" instead. That's how I'm phrasing it in my rules document actually.

Just to check the corner case on the corner case, am I right that if someone plays Possession during the Fleet round and makes the Possessed player buy Fleet, the Possessed player does then get a Fleet turn

No, this was answered by Donald earlier in this thread.

1281

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 23, 2018, 01:48:29 am »

So here is an updated tentative description:

After end-game is triggered*, the game instead continues for one more round if any player has bought Fleet. Only players who have bought Fleet get a new turn in this round. Any extra turns (from Outpost, Possession or Mission) or abilities like Donate or Mountain Pass - which would otherwise not be resolved - are resolved as normal considering that the game continues. So are any extra turns etc. that are triggered during this round. However, when the last Fleet turn has been played, the game ends immediately. Just like extra turns, Fleet turns don't count for tie-breaking.

*EDIT: Maybe clearer: After the game would normally end...

1282

Rules Questions / Re: Kings court with Distand Land

« on: December 22, 2018, 02:42:51 pm »

It's like the ancient question of playing Throne Room + Goons. You play the card twice. That means you do the stuff above the line twice, but not the stuff below the line. So you only get 1 VP token when you buy a card.

1283

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 22, 2018, 01:00:46 pm »

The Fleet turns proceed around the table like normal turns, which means if anyone has fleet and you play Possession and e.g. empty the Provinces the same turn, the Possession-generated turn happens next like it normally would.

Your turns keep happening as if the game hadn't ended. Answers to weird situations should be the same as for "Keep playing as if the game hadn't ended until everyone with a token on Fleet when the game would have ended has another turn, skipping turns for players who don't have a token on Fleet."

Edit: So. You don't get to order Possession vs. Fleet turns. Fleet turns are this extra round of turns thing.

Does that mean you're changing what you wrote earlier in this thread?

Yes. You don't get to order Fleet turns. Fleet doesn't create extra turns; it creates an extra round of turns, and then only some people participate in it. That's how I read it.

Ok, so this is a kind of a change from the rulebook, where it says "extra turns". Maybe it doesn't have to be read literally.

The good thing is that the turn order now makes sense without the need for extra rules. But do the Fleet turns still not count for tie-breaker?

1284

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 22, 2018, 01:19:39 am »

The Fleet turns proceed around the table like normal turns, which means if anyone has fleet and you play Possession and e.g. empty the Provinces the same turn, the Possession-generated turn happens next like it normally would.

Your turns keep happening as if the game hadn't ended. Answers to weird situations should be the same as for "Keep playing as if the game hadn't ended until everyone with a token on Fleet when the game would have ended has another turn, skipping turns for players who don't have a token on Fleet."

Edit: So. You don't get to order Possession vs. Fleet turns. Fleet turns are this extra round of turns thing.

Does that mean you're changing what you wrote earlier in this thread?

1285

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 21, 2018, 09:05:09 pm »

Even one more question.

In a 2-player game, if Alice plays Possession twice, and Bob being Possessed plays Possession, we have two extra turns in wait, one for Alice and one for Bob. The rules say that Bob is the active player, since he had a turn last (even though Alice is the one who had a regular turn last). This means that Bob plays his extra turn first. (Then Alice plays hers, and then it's Bob's regular turn.)

Now assume both have bought Fleet, and the above happens. But on Bob's turn when he plays Possession, he also ends the game. Now there are two Possession turns in wait, plus the Fleet turns. Per the Fleet rules, since Alice had a regular turn last, Bob plays his Fleet turn first. But when are the two Possession turns played? Following normal rules, Bob had a turn last, so Bob would get his Possession turn first. Or, since Alice is the one who last had a regular turn, is she the one who gets her Possession turn first? It's weird that the order of extra turns would be different in a normal round and in a Fleet round.

If Bob gets his Possession turn first, he can take it before or after his Fleet turn. Whatever he chooses, Bob's Fleet turn goes before Alice's Possession turn, right?

1286

Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns

« on: December 21, 2018, 08:03:55 pm »

Say an extra round starts with player A. Player A has bought Fleet, and player B, to his left, hasn't. If player A, during his Fleet turn, Possesses player B, then has him buy Fleet during the Possession turn, will player B end up getting his Fleet turn, or is it too late for that?

Going by the card wording, I'm calling it too late.

Looking at this headache-inducing thread again, and trying to formulate the rules, I paused at this post. In this scenario we must assume that there is a player C who has bought Fleet, right? Otherwise the game would be over after player A's Fleet turn, and the Possession turn wouldn't happen.

Another question: There are two players, both have bought Fleet. Player A takes theirs first and plays Possession. If this had been a normal round, the Possession turn would happen now, before player B's regular turn. But since it's a Fleet round, player B gets to order the two turns, and could actually choose to take their Fleet turn first, thereby causing the game to end before the Possession turn happens. Is this correct?

1287

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Patron and "reveal"

« on: December 21, 2018, 12:11:43 am »

The card is not hard to understand, and the card is fun, therefore it's not bad card design.

I'm not saying it's bad design or not fun. But I am saying that it's one of the cards that are not totally clear from the card text alone. Make of that what you will.

1288

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Patron and "reveal"

« on: December 21, 2018, 12:07:01 am »

Patron specifically says the word reveal needs to be used.

Yes...? I wrote that it needed to say that.

1289

Dominion General Discussion / Patron and "reveal"

« on: December 20, 2018, 05:58:16 pm »

I found a discussion about this in the fan cards forum (diverting from the original thread topic). But since it has nothing to do with fan cards, I decided to reply in a new thread.

The card doesn't actually even need "using the word 'reveal.'"  Early versions didn't have it -- it was just added for clarity.

I think the issue is that people say and think things like "the top card of your discard pile is always revealed". Heck, it might even say that in the rulebook somewhere.

GendoIkari is right. The Dominion rulebook (2nd ed.) says that you reveal the top card of your discard pile:
"If you discard multiple cards at once, you do not need to reveal them all, just the one you put on top."

So Patron absolutely needs to clarify what it means that it gets revealed.

Actually, reading Patron literally might make you think that Villain causes you to reveal Patron if you discard it. Villain does use the word "reveal", and does cause you to discard the Patron - and thereby revealing it, following the rulebook as quoted above.

Good thing that the Patron explanation in the Renaissance rulebook uses Villain as an example.

1290

Rules Questions / Re: Shepherd draws more Victory Points

« on: December 19, 2018, 01:35:49 pm »

I think Cellar would work much better as an example here than Mining Village. The question with Shepherd (which I've also seen asked in regards to Cellar), deals with wanting to do things on a single card in the wrong order.. going back and forth between the 2 different instructions on a card.

The Mining Village example is a bit more extreme... you're talking about going back to a card that you had completely finished playing and then following an instruction on it later.

From the original post: but my opponent thinks the card is still active (even after playing other actions after the Shepherd)

1291

Rules Questions / Re: Shepherd draws more Victory Points

« on: December 19, 2018, 12:59:45 pm »

This is basic to Dominion. Another example, often misunderstood by new players, is Mining Village.

Let's say you're starting your turn, so you have 1 Action and 1 Buy.

You use your Action to play Mining Village, and resolve it in order, once:
1) Draw a card.
2) Add 2 to your pool of Actions.
3) You now have a choice:
    A) Trash the Mining Village and add $2 to your pool of coins.
    B) Don't do anything

Let's say you choose A. Now you have 2 Actions, 1 Buy and $2.

Let's instead say you choose B. Now you have 2 Actions and 1 Buy. You use 1 Action to play Smithy. You cannot now trash the Mining Village for $2. You made your choice, you can't change your choice, and you can't go back and resolve any part of Mining Village again. You resolve the card in its entirety, and only once.

Complicating this are cards like Merchant. This came up in a game recently with a new player. "The first time you play a Silver this turn, +$1." The player thought this means that he plays a Silver immediately (in his Action phase) - precisely because you're supposed to resolve the whole card before continuing. But this is a case of setting up a future ability. When you resolve this instruction on Merchant, it tells you to do something in the future. If you Throne Roomed this Merchant, you would resolve this instruction again, so it would tell you to do this in the future one more time. If you then in your Buy phase play a Silver (the first time you do so) you would get +$1 twice.

When it comes to Reactions, they are not active or inactive. After you reveal a Moat, it's still in your hand. That's it. This means you can play it for +2 Actions in your turn, simply because you're allowed to play cards from your hand.

You might also want to take a look at the document in my sig if you want more explanations and answers.

1292

Rules Questions / Re: Bureaucrat and Tunnel

« on: December 19, 2018, 11:49:37 am »

Thanks.  Is there a place in the Wiki what covers this clarification about topdecking is not considered Discarding (but Bureaucrat seems to be the only card that has this effect of an attack placing an opponent cards on their deck.  This seems to counteract the 'Reaction' the 'discard' intention of the Tunnel.  Is this an oversight of the rules? Or is this an 'intentional' design of the Tunnel card?

Note that Tunnel doesn't mention Attacks and has nothing to do with an Attack being played. It only reacts to being discarded. That means that it doesn't matter how it was discarded, just that it was discarded (outside of Clean-up of course). So you could play Cellar yourself and discard Tunnel, triggering it.

1293

Rules Questions / Re: Reserve Cards Timing

« on: December 14, 2018, 12:05:28 pm »

However, Ratcatcher says "At the start of your turn..." so it couldn't be called immediately.

If you have a Prince'd Throne Room, and you start your turn by playing Ratcatcher twice with the Throne Room, then you can call the Ratcatcher immediately while it's still the start of your turn. Same with Guide.

Instead of Prince + Throne Room, it also works with Ghost (as LaLight posted), Summon and Piazza. All of these can play a Reserve card like Ratcatcher, Guide, Transmogrify and Teacher at the start of your turn, enabling you to immediately call it.

1294

Rules Questions / Re: Clean-up order of operations

« on: December 13, 2018, 04:58:29 pm »

Encampment potentially also does something at the start of Cleanup, but this rarely interacts with the other effects (you might want to put it on its pile on top of a Plunder before Improving a Poor House, for example).

I think the best order is Encampments, then Improve then Walled Village.

Innovation might mix this up, if the Improved card can be played, but I can't come up with a scenario where this makes Walled Village after Improve/Innovation not topdeckable when it was before.

Duplicate! You have WV and Improve in play. You could now topdeck WV. Let's say you don't. You Improve the Improve into a Monument and play it, then you Duplicate the Monument. You now have 3 Actions in play, so you can't topdeck the WV.
EDIT: or Royal Carriage, to replay the Monument.

1295

Rules Questions / Re: Clean-up order of operations

« on: December 13, 2018, 04:47:11 pm »

Even before Improve, old Scheme was worse because of more options, in a much simpler way: You could choose a Duration that would stay in play.

1296

Rules Questions / Re: Clean-up order of operations

« on: December 13, 2018, 03:28:08 pm »

Scheme makes no difference here, whether with old or new wording. By the time you discard a card, and then optionally topdeck it with Scheme, it's no longer start of Clean-up, so it's too late to do anything with Walled Village.

But the interesting question is the interaction between Walled Village and Improve. The question is, what does "At the start of Clean-up, if you have this and no more than one other Action card in play" mean, timing-wise?

Let's say you have 3 Action cards in play. Both Walled Village and Improve trigger at the start of Clean-up, so you can choose the order. If you choose WV first, there's no question, you can't topdeck it. But if you choose Improve first, and trash a card, you have 2 Actions in play. Can you topdeck WV now? I would say yes, since it's still technically start of clean-up - you're still in the process of doing "start of clean-up" abilities.

After you've resolved every "start of clean-up" ability, you continue with clean-up, which means discarding cards. Scheme triggers now. As I said, it's no longer start of clean-up. (Scheme v.1 also triggered at start of clean-up, but all you did was choose then.)

1297

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card ideas from Jeebus

« on: December 13, 2018, 11:21:54 am »

Thanks for your feedback!

Panniers has me a bit confused.  If you use the reaction effect, do you get +1 card?  I'm also not sure why it returns a card rather than simply trashing it.  That's a valid choice, I'm just not sure what it adds really.  I think the on-play effect could be buffed.

Yes, you get +1 card. Compare with Caravan Guard.
Returning adds a subtle difference to the game, because cursers will continue working.

Law, by contrast seems too weak.  For comparison, consider Catapult.  Catapult not only gives $1, but also provides a benefit upon trashing copper.

You might be right. I think reducing the cost requirements to $2 and $3 could be a nice fix. Now you will draw terminally while trashing estates. After that you need to feed it silvers or something.

Midway seems pretty interesting, although not strong.  The reordering ability seems like a fairly important part of what makes it good.

If you get two right, it's at least a cantrip, or Necro if you need the actions, or Moat if you have enough actions. So at least you get choices. If you get three right, you can choose between Village, Lab, Smithy and +3 Actions. If you get just one right, you're crying. Your deck composition and tracking will both matter.

I have issues with Alderman.  It seems kind of slow to play with, and without good reason.  Most often, you reveal at least one action, and now Alderman is an expensive village, hooray.  Maybe you reveal a victory card and can play your Mill, making Alderman a double village.  But so what?  I'm not sure what Alderman is really for, but honestly it sounds weaker and less interesting than a vanilla card that just says "+1 card, +3 actions".

It rewards decks with several types, that's what's supposed to make it interesting. Also you need actions in your hand and in your deck. Action-Reaction, Action-Victory, Action-Attack, Action-Duration, Action-Reserve, Action-Traveller... It might be too narrow to be good in most kingdoms though. Reserve or Duration heavy kingdoms seem the best.

I also have issues with Prowler.  Mainly it's a glorified woodcutter.  Or if you're buying treasure, and have extra buys, it's a glorified treasure.  I think you could do more with a simpler card, e.g. an action/treasure that only gives +Buy if you play it in your action phase.

Woodcutter is a fine card, and this is certainly different enough. The top part is better than Woodcutter. For the bottom part, maybe it doesn't need to discard itself? If you gain several Treasures, you could play them all. You would be able to buy all the Capitals though, getting +$1 more for each one! (But then you would be in crazy debt, so I doubt that's a good play most times.)
Even without that change, this card is crazy when you buy Fortune (EDIT: not really, you won't usually have any $ left for it to double). Also very good with Idol, Scepter and Crown.

1298

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Why 8 Trade Route player mats for 6 players

« on: December 13, 2018, 09:24:48 am »

While I can see what changed in the rules about the VP player mat, I am curious as to how the changes were 'important', as the only difference I can detect is that putting VP on a mat is not 'required'

With Possession v.2 (not the current version), the Possessing player got all tokens that the Possessed player would take. This did not include tokens that the Possessed players would put on mats/cards/piles (Pirate Ship tokens, Adventures tokens, and VP tokens and Debt tokens that go on cards/piles). Without the rules change about the mats, it wouldn't have included those VP tokens either.

1299

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Why 8 Trade Route player mats for 6 players

« on: December 12, 2018, 06:36:20 pm »

Related question; does second edition Prosperity still have mats? I don't see any mention of it on the Wiki. Empires does not have mats; right? Which would imply that Donald decided that VP tokens don't need mats; and thus why bother having mats in second edition Prosperity?

Actually it was an important rules change that Empires didn't have mats. Or to put it more accurately, it was an important rules change that VP tokens are not put on a mat. Instead, you take VP tokens (and then might put them optionally on something like for instance a VP token mat). That rules change mattered for the version of Possession introduced in Empires.

But then Possession was changed again, so it doesn't matter anymore.

But Prosperity was released in the meantime. I checked now, and yes Prosperity 2E does come with the 8 mats. But the rules for the mats are changed.
Prosperity 1E:
This expansion comes with 8 player mats and VP tokens for use with the Bishop, Goons, and Monument Kingdom cards. [...] A player takes a mat of his choice as soon as he needs one.
"+X VP" - The player takes X VP tokens. [...] When a player first takes VP tokens, he takes a player mat to put them on.
Prosperity 2E:
Prosperity has player mats for tracking VP tokens. You do not have to use one; if you do, take one when you first have VP tokens.
Cards say "+1 VP" (or other amounts) to indicate that a player takes VP tokens.

1300

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card ideas from Jeebus

« on: December 12, 2018, 05:04:14 pm »

Ok, I changed Shaft and Alderman.